Field independence, task ambiguity, and performance on a proportional reasoning task

Abstract

This study investigated the proportional reasoning abilities of 35 college science students. Using a projection of shadows problem, proportional reasoning was assessed under one of two experimental conditions corresponding to the type of information presented: (a) relevant only, or (b) relevant and irrelevant. Subjects were also measured on the cognitive style of field independence. Results showed that subjects in the relevant only condition performed significantly better than those in the relevant-irrelevant condition. Degree of field independence was related to performance only in the relevant-irrelevant condition. These results indicated an interaction between type of information presented in a task and cognitive style.

Student Performance in Water Pouring and Balance Beam Tasks: effect of manipulation of perceptual field factor

“…This finding suggests that different degrees of field activated 'facilitating' situations can be developed by the manipulation of the perceptual field factor. In contrast to Nummedal & Collea (1981), where the extent of correlation varied according to the type of information (relevant-irrelevant), this study found that the manipulation of the perceptual field factor can lead to various types of misleading situations, that may all correlate significantly with the GEFT.…”

“…Finally, Table VIII shows that the Pearson correlation coefficients between the GEFT and the proportional reasoning tasks (except Balance Beam Task II, which decreased, but remained significant) remained significant and increased in Study II as compared to Study I. It is interesting to note that Nummedal and Collea (1981) have reported a significant correlation (r=0-41; p<0-05) between the GEFT and performance in proportional reasoning, when relevant-irrelevant information was presented, and no significant correlation (r=0-02; p>0-05) when only relevant information was presented.…”

“…Inhelder & Piaget (1985) have identified the following critical components of proportional reasoning: (a) considering the effects of two variables simultaneously, and (b) making ratio comparisons between the two variables. According to Nummedal & Collea (1981), however, the development of these two components still may not produce the correct response, if the subject does not know which two variables are relevant. Thus there seems to be a third component to proportional reasoning: extracting relevant information from a problem situation while at the same time ignoring the irrelevant information, which has been referred to as the field-dependence-independence cognitive style (Witkin et al, 1962).…”

The relationship between M-demand, algorithms, and problem solving: A neo-Piagetian analysis

“…On the other hand 60 (52.2%) students responded incorrectly (0% score) in both items A and B. It can be further observed that 19 (16.5%) students improved their score in item B as compared to item A, whereas 25 (21.7%) students scored lower in item B as compared to item A. It is interesting to note that the constant group of students has a better mean score than the positive, negative, and the zero groups, in all the predictor variables (formal operational reasoning, disembedding ability, and Mf).…”

“…The importance of Witkin's cognitive style (field-dependence/independence) has been emphasized in problem solving (15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20). Most science courses involve the resolution of problems that require separation of a critical piece of information, that is, disembedding of information from the context in which it is presented and used in another context (21).…”