Meta‐analysis of cognitive preferences and learning

Abstract

Most of the articles and dissertations dealing with cognitive preferences which were written since the invention of the construct in the early 1960s have been reviewed. Fifty‐four of them were found suitable for meta‐analysis. The meta‐analysis presents means and standard deviations of reliabilities, correlations, standard scores, and effect sizes. The effects and relationships of cognitive preferences and important school and learning related variables were studied. The results provide base line data for comparative purposes and offer empirical evidence which support the construct validity of cognitive preferences.

Cognitive preference and learning mode as determinants of meaningful learning through concept mapping

“…The cognitive framework of the subject with preference for P predisposes him, therefore, to achieve well in concept mapping and hence subsequent meaningful learning. The superiority of students with preference for P over others appears to be in agreement with the results of the impressive review by Tamir (1985) on the subject of cognitive preference and achievement. That review of 54 studies indicates that P has the greatest effect size (0.33) associated with achievement and R the least Another interesting insight gained from the findings of this study is that engaging in concept mapping alone or in collaboration with others makes a difference.…”

“…Cognitive preference is an individual's stable mode of perceptual organization and conceptual categorization of the external environment (Heath, 1964;Tamir, 1985). It is an information-processing strategy that characterizes a person's usual way of perceiving, remembering, thinking and problem solving.…”

Gender, complexity, and science for all: Systemizing and its impact on motivation to learn science for different science subjects

“…Another, promising line of argumentation comes from the cognitive preferences theory. As described above, in biology, the cognitive preferences Principles (P) and Questioning (Q) were very high, and they are very low in physics (Tamir, ). Thus, a P&Q guided cognition type could well be another candidate for a driver toward complex systems.…”

Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers

“…Given that learners have been shown to hold qualitatively different conceptions of learning (Salj6 1979), to have different styles of thinking (Tamir 1984) and to conceptualise phenomena they study in different ways (e.g., Dahlgren 1978;Champagne, Gunstone and Klopfer 1985), it can be postulated that academic teachers, too, will conceptualise teaching in different ways. It can be further postulated that they will base their teaching practices on the explicit or implicit theories they hold about teaching and learning.…”