Handbook of intellectual styles: preferences in cognition, learning and thinking

Pearson, Frank

doi:10.1080/02667363.2013.786580

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intellectual fluency or idea generation and tolerance of ambiguity are other intellectual characteristics conductive for creativity. Creative people also tend to be more self-confident, driven, hostile, impulsive and ambitious than less creative individuals (Zhang, Sternberg and Rayner, 2012;Feist, 1998). Knowledge and domain expertise are also important prerequisites of the creative process as they allow individuals to build on and diverge from the existing state of the art (Christiaans and Venselaar, 2005;Weisberg, 2006).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Likewise, conscientiousness, especially some of its facets such as rule following, risk aversion and dutifulness, are found to be negatively correlated with creativity (Barron and Harrington, 1981;Reiter-Palmon, Illies and Kobe-Cross, 2009). Creative individuals are also often found to be more impulsive, hostile and less agreeable that less creative people (Zhang, Sternberg and Rayner, 2012;Feist, 1998). Likewise, excessive self-control can lead to less spontaneity, flatter emotions and in, some cases, even to serious psychological problems (Halse, Honey and Boughtwood, 2007;Weinberger and Schwartz, 1990;Dickman, 1990;Block, Gjerde and Block, 1991).…”

Section: Personality Characteristics: Choosing What and How To Measurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personality matters

Kankaraš¹

2017

OECD Education Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OECD EDUCATION WORKING PAPERS SERIES OECD Working Papers should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein are those of the author(s). Working Papers describe preliminary results or research in progress by the author(s) and are published to stimulate discussion on a broad range of issues on which the OECD works. Comments on Working Papers are welcome, and may be sent to the Directorate for Education and Skills, OECD,

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Personality Characteristics: Choosing What and How To Measurementioning

confidence: 99%

Personality matters

Kankaraš¹

2017

OECD Education Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A Case in Point: Style Differences, Educational Diversity and Learning Differences Peterson (2012) points out in a recent book review that parents, practitioners and academics new to the area of style differences in the individual will find a very messy and incomplete theory. She comments that a search for journal articles with the terms 'learning style' and 'cognitive style' in their titles typically results in a hit rate of over 1,000 articles, with more than 25 and 26 different conceptualisations of those terms.…”

Section: Paradigms and Praxis: Knowledge Growth Research Theory Andmentioning

confidence: 97%

Problematising Style Differences Theory and Professional Learning in Educational Psychology

Rayner

2013

The Australian Educational and Developmental Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The conceptual basis for a model of professional learning in educational psychology is presented in this article. The approach is one aimed at an integration and application of theories of knowledge management with educational and organisational psychology in a pragmatic research methodology underpinning professional learning. The model focuses upon the idea of praxis and the working ideal of a 'thinking practitioner'. This is in turn applied to the development of individual differences theory as part of a critical revision problematising theory associated with researching style differences in cognition, learning and management. A need for critical revisionism, new directions in researching style differences and professional education is identified as part of an example illustrating a way to establish valid epistemic change and paradigm shift necessary for this development. The argument underpinning this approach, finally, concludes that the future is very much part of the past, as a knowledge source for informing contemporary professional learning thereby ensuring practice is not stuck in the present. The Psychology of Education and Educational PsychologyIn a conversation at the beginning of my PhD study, Richard Riding, my supervisor, commented that his interests lay in the psychology of education, and his work was most certainly not educational psychology. The distinction drawn might at first seem spurious, but on reflection, it inferred a great deal about the direction and focus of Riding's research (see Riding & Rayner, 1998). My subsequent understanding of his statement, moreover, is that it posits a view in which educational psychology requires a separate, distinctive and pragmatic perspective as well as a concern for utility and relevance not always pertinent in pure research or a theory of psychology. I do not agree. While it is crucial that disciplinary knowledge underpinning researchinformed practice and intervention should be valid, reliable and meaningful, its fit or co-relationship with the work of theory as a 'balanced and balancing consideration' in explaining both why and how to design 'learning instruction' is just as crucial.

show abstract

“…Traditionally, there has been a preference for predictive validity over concurrent validity. This may be related to the specific capabilities of predictive validity, including its potential to predict outcomes such as individual behavior and performance, thereby adding value to a measure's utility, especially in situations where economic returns are sought (Zhang et al, 2012). Predictive validity is also crucial to organizations to identify and predict future performance.…”

Section: The Traditional Dominance Of Predictive Validity Over Concur...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Considerations in the use of concurrent or predictive validity in clinical measurement

Chiari

Thapa

Biroš

et al. 2023

Nursing & Health Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An important issue when conducting psychometric evaluation studies is selecting the best method to assess the validity of measurement instruments. It can be challenging for the researcher to select the most appropriate method, even though the relative value of one method compared with another is highlighted in the literature. To support novice and early career researchers seeking clarification about the conceptualization of criterion validity, in this editorial we provide an overview of some essential considerations when selecting and using concurrent and predictive validity.

show abstract

Handbook of intellectual styles: preferences in cognition, learning and thinking

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Personality matters

Personality matters

Problematising Style Differences Theory and Professional Learning in Educational Psychology

Considerations in the use of concurrent or predictive validity in clinical measurement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About