An information processing view of field dependence‐independence∗

Davis, J. K.; Cochran, Kathryn F.

doi:10.1080/0300443890430110

Cited by 26 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The alphabetical order provides users with a means to locate particular information without going through a fixed path, which matches with FI users' active strategies. Conversely, FD users tend to take a passive approach by relying on salient cues (Davis & Cochran, 1989) and have more difficulties in separating the individual parts within a whole (Witkin et al, 1977). The level of relevance of the categories is an additional guide to help them in finding out the meaningful information.…”

Section: Main Categories: Level Of Detail and Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A flexible interface design for Web directories to accommodate different cognitive styles

Chen

Magoulas

Dimakopoulos

2004

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Search engines are very popular tools for collecting information from distributed resources. They provide not only search facilities, but they also offer directories for users to browse content divided into groups. In this paper, we've adopted an individual differences approach to explore user's attitudes towards various interface features provided by existing Web directories. Among a variety of individual differences, cognitive style is a particularly important characteristic that influences the effectiveness of information seeking. Empirical results indicate that users' cognitive styles influence their reactions to the organization of subject categories, presentation of the results, and screen layout. We developed a set of design guidelines on the basis of these results, and propose a flexible interface that adopts these guidelines to accommodate the preferences of different cognitive style groups.

show abstract

Section: Main Categories: Level Of Detail and Organizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A flexible interface design for Web directories to accommodate different cognitive styles

Chen

Magoulas

Dimakopoulos

2004

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, other authors consider that field dependence--independence makes a contribution which is separate from any dimension of ability (Ismail & Kong, 1985;Satterly, 1976Satterly, , 1979van Blerkom, 1988). What is found at the base of these positions is the long-smoldering debate as to whether any distinction should be drawn between styles and abilities which has been fueled by studies of the relationships between cognitive style and cognitive development (Huteau, 1980;Kalyan Maskih & Curry, 1987;Ohlmann & Mendelsohn, 1982) and, more recently, by studies of the information processing strategies of field-dependent and field-independent subjects (Tourrette, 1990;Zelnicker, 1989;Davis & Cochran, 1990). Though the debate remains open, the way is clear for a conciliatory interpretation generated at the confluence of these two lines of research: subjects with different cognitive styles show consistently different tendencies in their cognitive function, these tendencies being more or less adaptive for specific intellectual tasks.…”

Section: Fdi and Overall Achievementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

Tinajero

Páramo

1998

Eur J Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field dependence-independence was originally conceived as a neutral style dimension, in that field-dependent subjects were considered to be as well-adapted to their environment as field--independent subjects. Subsequent authors, however, questioned this assumption ofneutrality, on the grounds thatfield-independent subjects generally perform better in certain intellectual tasks. Such findings provoked interest in the possible repercussions offield dependenceindependencefor education. Here, we review research into the possible effects of FDI on achievement at school. In general, field-independent subjects perform better than field-dependent subjects, whether assessment is of specific disciplines or across the board. We discuss possible explanationsfor this difference in performance.The earliest research into cognitive styles was carried out by members of the "New Look" movement, a group of psychologists who were concerned that traditional models of perception placed insufficient emphasis on the individual. In the course of research into the contribution o:fvisual and postural cues to perception of the vertical, Asch (1948a, 1948b) found that some subjects consistently tended to use only one or another type of cue. Subjects who used visual cues were designated "field-dependent", while those who used postural (i.e., vestibular, tactile and kinesthetic) cues were designated "field-independent". In its earliest formulation, field dependence-independence (FDI) was conceived as a visual--postural dimension specifically relating to perception of the vertical.More general interpretations were soon to follow. The task developed by Witkin began to be viewed as a measure of the subject's ability to perceive individual elements within an organized perceptual field: according to this point of view, field-independent subjects are those with a greater capacity to break perceptual information down into its component parts and to focus attention on those parts which are relevant, without being distracted by the context. In contrast, field-dependent subjects are those with a greater difficulty to disembed parts from This review was supported by a grant from the Xunta de Galicia, XUGA 21106A91.

show abstract

“…As Davey &Menke (1989) and Cochran &Davis, (1987) asserted Field Independent readers might have better comprehension abilities because of their higher cognitive skills in areas such as organization of knowledge recall, use of context cues, use of imagery, and active hypotheses-test behaviors. In line with Jones, (1993) Field Independent focus their attention on task-relevant information and ignore distractions better than Field Dependent individuals (Davis &Cochran, 1990). Field Independents who approach a field in an analytical way and extract elements from its complex background have greater disembedding ability in perceptual functioning and better cognitive restructuring than Field dependents.…”

Section: Theory and Practice In Language Studiesmentioning

confidence: 51%

The Relationship between Field Independence/ Dependence Styles and Reading Comprehension Abilities of EFL Readers

Sabet¹,

Mohammadi²

2013

TPLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The present study intends to investigate the relationship between Field Independence/Dependence styles and reading comprehension abilities of intermediate EFL readers as well as to explore their attitude toward reading in a foreign language with respect to their cognitive style. To these aims, ninety university students took part in the study. First, for the purpose of ensuring the homogeneity of the participants they were exposed to Oxford Placement Test (

show abstract

An information processing view of field dependence‐independence∗

Cited by 26 publications

References 76 publications

A flexible interface design for Web directories to accommodate different cognitive styles

A flexible interface design for Web directories to accommodate different cognitive styles

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

The Relationship between Field Independence/ Dependence Styles and Reading Comprehension Abilities of EFL Readers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About