Assessment Approaches and Cognitive Styles

Lu, Chin-Hsieh; Suen, Hoi K.

doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.1995.tb00453.x

Cited by 20 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, an examination of the nature of FD and FI cognitive styles as reflected by GEFT scores is necessary to gain a deeper understanding of the results and implications of the current study. In taking the GEFT, a subject is required to direct his or her selective attention to specific and relevant cues while controlling for more salient irrelevant features of the context ( Lu & Suen, 1995 ). As pointed out by Zelinker (1989) , the difference between FD and FI cognitive styles rest with a person’s capability for selective attention, attention control, and stimulus organization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development

Rassaei

2015

Language Teaching Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While previous research has indicated that learners with field-dependence (FD) and fieldindependence (FI) cognitive styles benefit differentially from different instructional modes, previous corrective feedback studies have ignored the issue of matching error correction strategies to learners' cognitive style. To shed some light on this issue, the current study examined the hypothesis that learners with FI and FD cognitive styles benefit differently from recasts. Seventy-six intermediate level EFL learners in four intact classes constituted the experimental and control groups, which differed from each other in terms of the presence or absence of recasts for their errors during classroom interactions. The participants were also classified as FD or FI based on their scores on the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT). Thus, four groups were formed: recasts-FD, recasts-FI, control-FD, and control-FI. The results of a writing task and a picture description task administered as pretest, posttest and delayed posttest indicated that the recasts-FI group significantly outperformed the other three groups in both posttests and delayed posttests, while no statistical difference was observed among the other three groups. In other words, as the results showed, only FI learners benefited from recasts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development

Rassaei

2015

Language Teaching Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other studies have shown that provision of contextual support can eliminate performance differences between FDs and FIs, or even produce a performance advantage for FDs. Lu and Suen (1995) found that FD university students obtained lower grades than FI students on "performance-based" course assessments (i.e., take-home projects), but scored as well as FI students on multiplechoice tests covering the same content. Rickards, Fajen, Sullivan, and Gillespie (1997) had university students read two structurally similar passages in either a notetaking or no-notetaking condition.…”

Section: Fdi: Style or Ability?mentioning

confidence: 94%

Field Dependence as a Factor in Second Language Communicative Production

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the hypothesis that a more field-dependent cognitive style may be adaptive for certain components of second language proficiency. Native English speakers (n = 28) or students of English as a second language (ESL; n = 29) completed measures of language proficiency (formal and communicative) and field dependence-independence (FDI). Native English speakers performed better than ESL students on language measures, but not on FDI measures. As predicted, measures of FDI correlated negatively with measures of communicative production in the ESL group: A more fielddependent style was associated with better performance on second language communicative measures. FDI scores were not related to native English speakers' language. Results support a bipolar cognitive-style conception of FDI. Theoretical models of the FDI construct are discussed.

show abstract

“…A substantial number of studies have been conducted that provide normative data for a wide range of American samples at various grades, from elementary school to undergraduate training (Carter & Loo, 1980;Lu & Suen, 1995;Murphy, Casey, Day, & Young, 1997;Onwuegbuzie & Daley, 1997;Cakan, 2000). The test has also been translated into other languages and administered to various samples from German, Russian, Malaysian, Canadlan, Pakistani, Nigerian, Egyptian, Austrahan , and Mexican-American cultures (Firth & Fitzgerald, 1985;Alvi, Khan, & Vegeris, 1986;McRae & Young, 1988;Mshelia & Lapidus, 1990;Kush, 1996;Elwan, 1997;Kuhnen, Hannover, Roeder, Shah, Schubert, Upmeyer, & Zakaria, 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Data on the Group Embedded Figures Test for Turkish Undergraduate Students

Çakan

2003

Percept Mot Skills

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Normative data of the Group Embedded Figures Test for a sample of Turkish undergraduate students was provided. Participants were 534 undergraduates from the Departments of Education of two universities in Turkey. Effects of sex and socioeconomic status on the students' cognitive style performance were investigated. Performance and distribution characteristics of the Turkish sample and American adults as reported in the manual of the original test were compared. A Turkish version was developed. Item analyses, reliability, and practice effects were assessed. No sex difference, except in Section 2, was found. Socioeconomic status also was not significantly related to cognitive style performance. Norms reported for American adults in the manual were significantly different from those of the present Turkish adults. These findings suggest that use in different cultures, especially in those other than western cultures, requires caution. Scores obtained from these cultures should be carefully interpreted.

show abstract

Assessment Approaches and Cognitive Styles

Cited by 20 publications

References 27 publications

Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development

Recasts, field dependence/independence cognitive style, and L2 development

Field Dependence as a Factor in Second Language Communicative Production

Psychometric Data on the Group Embedded Figures Test for Turkish Undergraduate Students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About