The Malleability Of Intellectual Styles

Intellectual styles are individuals' preferred ways of using the abilities that they possess. The extent to which one can change his or her intellectual style is a question of interest to both researchers and the general public. This book presents the first comprehensive and systematic review of existing research on the malleability of intellectual styles. By critically analyzing research findings derived from both cross-sectional and longitudinal investigations performed over the past seven decades, Li-fang Zhang demonstrates that intellectual styles can be modified through both socialization and purposeful training. Professor Zhang elucidates the heuristic value of these findings for the development of adaptive intellectual styles in both academic and non-academic settings. She proposes further avenues of research that might advance scholarly understanding of the nature of and the potential for modifying intellectual styles.

[B]ecause of the thoroughness of the literature reviews and the comprehensive coverage of the chapter topics, [this book] should be required reading for any scholar working in related areas of personality or intelligence."--PsycCRITIQUES "This book is a masterly attempt to bring order and cohesion to a field that for many years has been riven with claims and counterclaims. The editors and authors are to be congratulated for addressing a very complex task so helpfully." John Biggs, PhD Honorary Professor of Psychology University of Hong Kong "If you are interested in intellectual stylesópeople's preferred ways of processing informationóthen this book belongs on your bookshelf." Richard E. Mayer, PhD Professor of Psychology University of California, Santa Barbara "For more than half a century, the construct of styleówhether designated as cognitive, thinking or learningóhas been in or out of fashion in the history of psychology and education. The editors of the present Handbook have invigorated the style construct in the form of intellectual styles, and have brought together a distinguished international panel of chapter authors who offer up-to-date surveys of the assessment, development, correlates, and educational and organizational applications of intellectual styles. For those seeking to familiarize themselves with current theory and research in an intellectually exciting field, the present Handbook is essential." Nathan Kogan, PhD Professor Emeritus, Department of Psychology New School for Social Research, New York, NY The concept of intellectual styles has had a controversial history based on diverse philosophical and theoretical foundations. Most recently, the idea of intellectual stylesóan umbrella term that covers such closely related constructs as "cognitive styles," "learning styles," "teaching styles," and "thinking styles"óhas gained momentum as an explanation for why different people succeed in different professional and organizational settings. Previously, it was thought that high-achievers simply had more innate abilities than their less successful peers, but research has shown that individuals have different intellectual styles that are better suited for varying types of contexts and problems. Based on the most current and expansive research, this handbook is the first to provide a comprehensive review of research on the construct of intellectual style, from its foundations and development, to its relations to allied constructs, its roles in school and job performance, its applications in various populations, and its future.. This understanding of intellectual styles as a valid concept for both individuals and groups has far-reaching implications for researchers in cross-cultural psychology, multicultural education, organizational behavior and work performance, and many other academic disciplines, as well as practitioners in education and beyond. Key Features: Provides a comprehensive review of intellectual styles from multiple perspectives Written for students and scholars in diverse academic arenas, as well as practitioners in education and other fields Includes contributions from researchers from diverse disciplines, such as psychology, business, education, and health sciences

Intellectual styles are an individual's preferred ways of using the cognitive abilities that they possess. This book presents the first comprehensive and systematic review of existing research on style malleability. Analyzing research findings derived from both cross-sectional and longitudinal investigations, Professor Li-fang Zhang demonstrates that intellectual styles can be modified, through both socialization and purposeful training.

This dissertation, "Intellectual Styles: Their Malleability, Their Associations, and Their Relationships to Ability and Personality Traits" by Qiuzhi, Xie, 謝秋芝, was obtained from The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong) and is being sold pursuant to Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License. The content of this dissertation has not been altered in any way. We have altered the formatting in order to facilitate the ease of printing and reading of the dissertation. All rights not granted by the above license are retained by the author. Abstract: "Intellectual style," a term that encompasses all the existing style concepts, refers to one's preferred ways of processing information and approaching tasks. The present research has three purposes. First, it investigates the associations among styles in the three traditions: cognition-centered, personality-centered, and activity-centered traditions. Second, it looks into the relationships between intellectual styles and ability as well as between intellectual styles and personality traits. Third, it explores the changeability of intellectual styles. Field-dependence/independence (FDI), psychological types, and learning approaches were respectively selected as the representatives of cognition-centered, personality-centered, and activity-centered styles. This research includes three studies. The first one is a pilot study that investigates the reliability and validity of the instruments used in this research. It also preliminarily investigates the relationships among intellectual styles, abilities, and personality traits. Two hundred and ninety-eight students in a Chinese university participated in this study. Five instruments were used. The modified Chinese version of Group Embedded Test examined FDI. The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator measured psychological types. The revised Two Factor Version of Study Process Questionnaire tested learning approaches. The Sternberg Triarchic Ability Test examined abilities. The NEO Five-Factor Inventory-3 measured personality traits. Study Two is a longitudinal investigation. It explores (1) the associations among FDI, psychological types, and learning approaches; (2) the relationships between the three style constructs, ability, and personality traits; (3) the changeability of intellectual styles; and (4) the effects of students' background factors on intellectual styles, ability, personality, and the changes on styles. Five hundred and ten students in a Chinese university (the same as the one involved in the pilot study) participated in the pre-test, and 430 of these students participated in the post-test. The interval time was one academic year. Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices replaced Sternberg's Triarchic Ability Test that showed poor internal consistency reliability in the pilot study. The other instruments were the same as those used in the pilot study. Study Three explores why students sustain or change their intellectual styles. Twenty-six students who participated in Study Two were selected for this study. The researcher conducted focus group discussions. The findings show that FDI, psychological types, and learning approaches did not share statistically significant common variance, indicating that styles in the three approaches represent different style constructs. FDI was most closely associated with ability, whereas psychological types and learning approaches were strongly associated with personality traits. This suggests that styles in the three traditions are related to ability and personality traits to different extents: cognition-centered styles are most closely related to ability, whereas personality-centered styles are highly related to personality traits. Activity-centered styles are more strongly related to personality traits than to ability. Learning approaches and FDI are comparatively changeable, whereas psychological types are comparatively stable. The qualit

Intellectual styles are individuals' preferred ways of using their abilities. This book provides the first comprehensive and systematic review of existing research on the value and desirability of different intellectual styles. By critically analyzing findings from hundreds of international studies undertaken over eight decades, Li-fang Zhang demonstrates that the creativity-generating Type I styles are generally superior to the norm-conforming Type II styles in relation to a wide range of learning processes and developmental outcomes, work performance, physical and mental health, and many other domains of people's lives. She further demonstrates that people explicitly and implicitly express their preference for Type I styles over Type II styles. Professor Zhang elucidates the practical value of cultivating diverse intellectual styles, especially Type I styles, in both academic and nonacademic settings, and lays the groundwork for future research to advance the field of intellectual styles and to inform scholarly work in other academic disciplines.

This book presents a panoramic, current picture of the field of intellectual styles through portraying, analyzing, and integrating major theoretical and research works on the topics. The audience is researchers and students in the fields of education, ps

Thinking styles, defined as one’s preferred way of using abilities, have been considered as an important factor in explaining human performance. However, is it worthwhile to pay attention to thinking styles in addition to traditional constructs in individual differences, such as personality? Are there good styles or bad styles? Can thinking style be cultivated? Which thinking styles should we aim to cultivate? And how to cultivate these styles? This book answers these questions and more by addressing three major controversial issues in the field of styles: namely, whether thinking styles are distinct from, or are part of, personality traits; whether or not thinking styles can be changed; and whether or not thinking styles are value-laden. Based on a comprehensive review of previous literature and the analyses of results from a mixed-method, longitudinal study, the book provides solid and intriguing research evidence to the discussion of the above issues. Both academics and graduate students who wish to do research in the field of styles will find the book useful for its insights into the nature of thinking styles.

This book is the first on the implications of intellectual styles for higher education of students with hearing impairment. It provides a systematic delineation for intellectual styles of students with hearing impairment in comparison with students without hearing impairment. It takes an initial step to present the analysis concerning the mediating role of intellectual styles in the relationships between personal factors and student developmental outcomes.

This dissertation, "The Association of Intellectual Styles, Personality Traits, and Learning Environment With Academic Achievement and Career Satisfaction Among Adult Learners" by Man, Penny, Ng, 吳敏, was obtained from The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong) and is being sold pursuant to Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License. The content of this dissertation has not been altered in any way. We have altered the formatting in order to facilitate the ease of printing and reading of the dissertation. All rights not granted by the above license are retained by the author. Abstract: The purpose of the present research was to determine the association of intellectual styles, personality traits, and learning environment with academic achievement and career satisfaction among Chinese adult learners. The two main objectives of the research were 1) to determine the predictive relationships of intellectual styles, personality traits, and learning environment to academic achievement and career satisfaction, and 2) to investigate the mediating effects of intellectual styles in the predictive relationships of learning environment and personality traits to academic achievement and career satisfaction. To achieve the above objectives, two studies were carried out. A pilot study was conducted to test the instruments and explore various relationships. The study was conducted among 304 part-time adult learners taking evening continuing education courses in a Hong Kong institution. Acceptable reliability and validity data were obtained for most of the instruments. Most of the demographic variables were found to be significantly related to intellectual styles and career satisfaction. Personality traits were stronger in predicting career satisfaction than were intellectual styles. It was also found that personality traits had statistically significant predictive power with respect to different types of intellectual styles. The main study was a longitudinal experimental study in which a revised questionnaire, based on the results of the pilot study, was administered to a sample of 459 part-time adult learners in both control and experimental groups in the first (pre-test) and the last (post-test) lessons. A student-centered teaching style, which has been shown to facilitate creativity-generating learning styles, was adopted in the experimental group as an intervention. Data analyses focused on comparing the differences and associations between the afore-mentioned variables in the pre-test and the post-test, the differences between the control group and the experimental group, and the mediating function of styles in the predictive relationships of personality traits and perceived teaching styles to career satisfaction and academic achievement. Follow-up interviews with 15 students who showed greatest changes in intellectual styles provided qualitative data. Results of the present research generally supported the research hypotheses. First, intellectual styles (thinking styles and career personality types) were malleable and were shaped by both personality traits and environmental factors to various degrees. Second, all three types of intellectual styles (particularly Type I styles) were positively associated with higher Type I academic achievement scores and greater career satisfaction. Third, the two style constructs, thinking styles and career personality types, overlapped to some extent, although each possessed its own unique features. Fourth, both thinking styles and career personality types mediated the relationships between personality traits and career satisfaction, and between perceived teaching styles and career satisfaction. In other words, personality traits and perceived teaching styles influenced learners'' career satisfaction, mainly through the influence of learners'' Type I and Type III styles. This is the first research to measure perceived teaching styles and to investigate the in