Methodological practices in cognitive style research: Insights and recommendations from the field of business and psychology

Cools, Eva; Armstrong, Stephen; Verbrigghe, Jasmijn

doi:10.1080/1359432x.2013.788245

Cited by 20 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Figure 3.1 illustrates the scheme used to code our sample. Following previous methodological studies (e.g., Aguinis, Pierce, Bosco, & Muslin, 2009;Ketchen Jr. et al, 2008;Scandura & Williams, 2000;Cools, Armstrong, & Verbrigghe, 2014), our coding schema contained three dimensions: research design, construct measurement, and analytic approach. First, in terms of research design, we coded six aspects: the overall design, research strategy, sample size, time frame, number of data sources, and data source.…”

Section: Methodological Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Methodological Differences Between Brazilian Journals and Top Journals in Strategy

Leonel

Picheth

Silva

et al. 2018

RAM, Rev. Adm. Mackenzie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Our study compares methodological procedures of Brazilian papers with those of papers published in AMJ, OS, ASQ, JMS and SMJ in field of strategy from 2006 to 2015. Originality/value: Our study 1. identifies and describes methodological differences, offering a benchmark to improve future studies; 2. starts a discussion about the reasons those differences exist and their implications towards advancing the field of strategy; and 3. suggests forms of overcoming the current constraints and improving the quality of our research. Design/methodology/approach: Based on a systematic review, we analyzed ten Brazilian journals with the highest impact factor and five top journals. The search yielded a final sample of 1294 empirical papers. The data was analyzed through content analysis, for which our coding schema contained three dimensions: research design, measurement, and analytic approach. Findings: We found some methodological differences that may characterize Brazilian papers as testers and top journals as expanders, reinforcing results found by other studies, concerning the necessity of developing the Brazilian strategy field to be more competitive with the international field at large. Therefore, we concluded that it is desirable to improve our research methods as a field and possibly to overcome methodological differences, helping not only to develop theories but also to consider the Brazilian reality.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Methodological Differences Between Brazilian Journals and Top Journals in Strategy

Leonel

Picheth

Silva

et al. 2018

RAM, Rev. Adm. Mackenzie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In recent years the validity of measuring cognitive styles as a single analytical-intuitive dimension has been put to question [32], e.g., for studies of technology adoption and use [33]. Nevertheless, CSI as a construct remains as one of the most widely used measures of academic research in management and education [34,35]. In response to critiques, Alison and Hayes [36] have demonstrated the validity of their scale through independent tests.…”

Section: Culture and Cognitive Stylesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning HCI Across Institutions, Disciplines and Countries: A Field Study of Cognitive Styles in Analytical and Creative Tasks

Abdelnour-Nocera

Clemmensen

Guimarães

2017

Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-computer interaction (HCI) is increasingly becoming a subject taught in universities around the world. However, little is known of the interactions of the HCI curriculum with students in different types of institutions and disciplines internationally. In order to explore these interactions, we studied the performance of HCI students in design, technology and business faculties in universities in UK, India, Namibia, Mexico and China who participated in a common set of design and evaluation tasks. We obtained participants' cognitive style profiles based on Allinson and Hayes scale in order to gain further insights into their learning styles and explore any relation between these and performance. We found participants' cognitive style preferences to be predominantly in the adaptive range, i.e. with combined analytical and intuitive traits, compared to normative data for software engineering, psychology and design professionals. We further identified significant relations between students' cognitive styles and performance in analytical and creative tasks of a HCI professional individual. We discuss the findings in the context of the distinct backgrounds of the students and universities that participated in this study and the value of research that explores and promotes diversity in HCI education.

show abstract

“…Whether focussing on one or the other way, one challenge concerns them alike: the measurement. Cognitive styles are commonly assessed using (1) maximum performance tests (first-generation cognitive styles tests) or (2) self-report questionnaires (second-generation cognitive styles tests, mostly used today) [ 5 , 17 , 18 ]. In maximum performance tests, a performer aims to achieve the highest possible accuracy, often as quickly as possible [ 19 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unkept promises of cognitive styles: A new look at old measurements

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive style is thought to be a stable marker of one’s way to approach mental operations. While of wide interest over the last decades, its operationalization remains a challenge. The literature indicates that cognitive styles assessed via i) questionnaires are predicted by personality and ii) performance tests (e.g., Group Embedded Figures Test; GEFT) are related to general intelligence. In the first study, we tested the psychometric relationship between the Cognitive Style Index questionnaire (CSI) and personality inventories (NEO Five Factor Inventory; NEO-FFI, HEXACO Personality Inventory Revised; HEXACO-PI-R). In the second study, we assessed the CSI, NEO-FFI, GEFT and a general intelligence test (Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices Test; RSMT). We found that CSI scores were largely predicted by personality and that CSI was uncorrelated with GEFT performance. Instead, better performance on the GEFT was associated with better performance on the RSMT. We conclude that i) cognitive style questionnaires overlap with personality inventories, ii) cognitive style performance tests do not measure cognitive styles and should not be used as such and iii) the cognitive style concept needs to be assessed with alternative measurement types. We discuss possible future directions.

show abstract

Methodological practices in cognitive style research: Insights and recommendations from the field of business and psychology

Cited by 20 publications

References 72 publications

Assessing the Methodological Differences Between Brazilian Journals and Top Journals in Strategy

Assessing the Methodological Differences Between Brazilian Journals and Top Journals in Strategy

Learning HCI Across Institutions, Disciplines and Countries: A Field Study of Cognitive Styles in Analytical and Creative Tasks

Unkept promises of cognitive styles: A new look at old measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About