The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory.

Goodenough, Donald R.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.83.4.675

Cited by 307 publications

(183 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

171

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, researchers have investigated dream content and dominant personality types (Foulkes, 1970), field-dependence (Goodenough, 1976;Witkin, 1969), type A-B personality (Nesca & Koulack, 1991), self-regulation (Busby & De Koninck, 1980); and more. Reviews of the relationship between dreaming and personality traits have indicated mixed results (Blagrove, 2007;Blagrove & Pace-Schott, 2010;Domhoff, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dreaming and personality: Wake-dream continuity, thought suppression, and the Big Five Inventory

Malinowski

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies have found relationships between dream content and personality traits, but there are still many traits that have been underexplored or have had questionable conclusions drawn about them. Experimental work has found a 'rebound' effect in dreams when thoughts are suppressed prior to sleep, but the effect of trait thought suppression on dream content has not yet been researched. In the present study participants (N=106) reported their Most Recent Dream, answered questions about the content of the dream, and completed questionnaires measuring trait thought suppression and the 'Big Five' personality traits. Of these, 83 were suitably recent for analyses. A significant positive correlation was found between trait thought suppression and participants' ratings of dreaming of waking-life emotions, and high suppressors reported dreaming more of their waking-life emotions than low suppressors did. The results may lend support to the compensation theory of dreams, and/or the ironic process theory of mental control.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dreaming and personality: Wake-dream continuity, thought suppression, and the Big Five Inventory

Malinowski

2015

Consciousness and Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous research has led to the conclusion that field independence may not affect the amount recalled as much as it affects organizational strategies (Goodenough, 1976). For example, Fleming (cited by Goodenough, 1976) compared field-dependent and -independent subjects on a word list that could be hierarchically structured.…”

Section: University Of Missouri Columbia Missouri 65211mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Fleming (cited by Goodenough, 1976) compared field-dependent and -independent subjects on a word list that could be hierarchically structured. Field-dependent subjects did worse than field-independent subjects when the words were presented in a subordinate-to-superordinate sequence (e.g., man, vertebrate, animal), but there was no difference with the reverse order.…”

Section: University Of Missouri Columbia Missouri 65211mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Field dependence is generally accompanied by a more global, passive, and intuitive approach to learning, with particular attention to social cues. In contrast, field-independent people tend to be more active participants in a learning task, restructuring the external frame of reference and generating organization when it is not readily apparent.Previous research has led to the conclusion that field independence may not affect the amount recalled as much as it affects organizational strategies (Goodenough, 1976). For example, Fleming (cited by Goodenough, 1976) compared field-dependent and -independent subjects on a word list that could be hierarchically structured.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Davis & Frank, 1979;Goodenough, 1976). In contrast, field dependence occurs when the organization of the external field is accepted as a given and used without modification.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Field independence and input grouping in free recall

Mueller

Fisher

1980

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High and low scorers on the Hidden Figures Test were compared on a free recall task that involved word triads having both an associative and a rhyming relationship. The words were presented either one at a time or in a simultaneous rlisplay, with the triad members either blocked or randomly arranged in the input sequence. Field independence had little effect on total recall, and any effect on organization seemed to favor field-dependent subjects.Field independence has been characterized as the ability to overcome perceptual context effects by using an internal frame of reference rather than the external context (cf. Davis & Frank, 1979;Goodenough, 1976). In contrast, field dependence occurs when the organization of the external field is accepted as a given and used without modification. Field dependence is generally accompanied by a more global, passive, and intuitive approach to learning, with particular attention to social cues. In contrast, field-independent people tend to be more active participants in a learning task, restructuring the external frame of reference and generating organization when it is not readily apparent.Previous research has led to the conclusion that field independence may not affect the amount recalled as much as it affects organizational strategies (Goodenough, 1976). For example, Fleming (cited by Goodenough, 1976) compared field-dependent and -independent subjects on a word list that could be hierarchically structured. Field-dependent subjects did worse than field-independent subjects when the words were presented in a subordinate-to-superordinate sequence (e.g., man, vertebrate, animal), but there was no difference with the reverse order. Presumably, early presentation of a subordinate provided no initial external structure, so field-dependent subjects suffered relative to the fieldindependent subjects, who generate their own internal structure, whereas early presentation of the superordinate provided organization for the items to follow for both field-dependent and -independent subjects alike.The present experiment examined how grouping related items in input affected recall of field-dependent and field-independent subjects. Generally speaking, recall and clustering are enhanced when related items are presented together, compared with random presentation. If field-independent subjects ignore external Requests for reprints should be sent to John Mueller, Psychology Department, 210 McAlester Hall, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211. Helpful comments on an earlier draft were provided by Carl Bennink and Ronald Schmeck. field constraints, they should be less affected by the blocked-random manipulation than are field-dependent subjects, whereas field-dependent subjects would presumably be more reliant on spatial-temporal contiguity as a basis for grouping items.The blocking aspect was our major interest, but we examined this factor for two modes of presentation and two types of intralist relationships. First, single-item presentation was compared with whole-list (simultane...

show abstract

Field dependence and extraversion neuroticism on an inpatient psychiatric service

1979

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared relationship between field dependence (FD) and the scales of Neuroticism (N) and Extraversion (E) using paraprofessionals ( N = 22), grofessionals ( N = 42) and psychiatric inpatients (Ar = 35) to elucidate the igh FD found among the psychiatric inpatients. Recent evidence contradicts Witkins' (1965) early view that as a group, psychiatric inpatients would show psychopathology a t the extremes of the FD continuum. The N scale was chosen because it taps a narrow behavioral band, the individual's vulnerability to break down under stress. The major hypothesis that FD and N would be functionally related was based on previous empirical findings (Cattell, 1955) and Seligman's (1975) theory of "learned helplessness.

show abstract

The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory.

Cited by 307 publications

References 78 publications

Dreaming and personality: Wake-dream continuity, thought suppression, and the Big Five Inventory

Dreaming and personality: Wake-dream continuity, thought suppression, and the Big Five Inventory

Field independence and input grouping in free recall

Field dependence and extraversion neuroticism on an inpatient psychiatric service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About