Field Dependence Revisited

Abstract

Results of the large number of studies stimulated by the theory of psychological differentiation now make revision of the theory necessary. The model that is proposed seeks to accommodate, the recently accumulated findings on interpersonal behavior, cognitive restructuring skills and localization of neurophysiological functions. Central components of this model are the field‐dependent and field‐independent cognitive styles. These styles are conceived as tendencies to rely on internal or external referents in information processing, stemming from differences in extent of self‐nonself segregation. Reflecting these contrasting tendencies, field‐independent people do well in cognitive restructuring tasks and are limited in social sensitivity and social skills; field‐dependent people have greater social sensitivity and social skills but are not as competent in cognitive restructuring. The field‐dependence‐independence cognitive‐style dimension is thus bipolar with regard to level, having no clear “high” or “low” ends; and it is neutral with regard to value, each pole having qualities adaptive in particular circumstances. A distinction is drawn between people who are fixed in their use of a field‐dependent or field‐independent style and those who are mobile, having access to both.

Choice of Handedness Measures in Studies of Hemispheric Specialization

“…Many other factors contribute to the ultimate predominance (or relatively greater activation) of one hemisphere or the other. These other factors may be related to the construct "cognitive style" (Bogen et al, 1972;Thompson & Bogen, 1976;Witkin & Goodenough, 1976;Cohen et al, 1973;Zelniker & Jeffery, 1976;Galin & Ornstein, 1974). Figure 2 shows several individuals who report preference for one hand and perform better with the other.…”

The Interaction of Field Independence with Small-Group Instruction in Mathematics

“…The difficulty of distinguishing between field independence and general ability has been noted by a numbcr of authors (e.g., 4), and Witkin and his colleagues are also concerned about this problem (15). They hope to develop new instruments that will make it easier to separate field indepm1flenee fwm general ability, as well !Ill from fluid and general visual abiliLy (ll).…”

“…Field-dependent students, on the otherhand, are more adept in social situations where they seem to exhibit greater interpersonal skills. However, they have more difficulty with tasks that require restructuring ability (15,16). These differences between field-independent and fielddependent students seem to he related to performancc in discovery-oriented instruction.…”

On kinetic filtering in associative monologue

“…In the Embedded Figures test (Witkin et al 1971), the subject is asked to select a figure which has been embedded in an entire matrix of peripheral figures. As recently stated by Witkin and Goodenough (1976), performance on these tests calls for the individual to continually restructure the field and create a disembedding context. A field-dependent person would have relatively greater difficulty in overcoming such an embedding context.…”