File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Are learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations.

TitleAre learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations.
Authors
Issue Date2000
PublisherHeldref Publications. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.heldref.org/jp.php
Citation
The Journal Of Psychology, 2000, v. 134 n. 5, p. 469-489 How to Cite?
AbstractThis article presents the results of an investigation of the construct validity of J. B. Biggs's (1987) theory of learning approaches and of R. J. Sternberg's (1988) theory of thinking styles in two Chinese populations. The study is also an examination of the nature of the relations between the two theories. University students from Hong Kong (n = 854) and from Nanjing, mainland China (n = 215), completed the Study Process Questionnaire (J. B. Biggs, 1992) and the Thinking Styles Inventory (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992). Results indicated that both inventories were reliable and valid for assessing the constructs underlying their respective theories among both Hong Kong and Nanjing university students. Results also showed that the learning approaches and thinking styles are related in the hypothesized ways: The surface approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with less complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the legislative, judicial, liberal, and hierarchical styles. The deep approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with more complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the executive, conservative, local, and monarchic styles. Implications of these relations are discussed.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/175361
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.25
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.482
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorZhang, LFen_US
dc.contributor.authorSternberg, RJen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-11-26T08:58:32Z-
dc.date.available2012-11-26T08:58:32Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_US
dc.identifier.citationThe Journal Of Psychology, 2000, v. 134 n. 5, p. 469-489en_US
dc.identifier.issn0022-3980en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/175361-
dc.description.abstractThis article presents the results of an investigation of the construct validity of J. B. Biggs's (1987) theory of learning approaches and of R. J. Sternberg's (1988) theory of thinking styles in two Chinese populations. The study is also an examination of the nature of the relations between the two theories. University students from Hong Kong (n = 854) and from Nanjing, mainland China (n = 215), completed the Study Process Questionnaire (J. B. Biggs, 1992) and the Thinking Styles Inventory (R. J. Sternberg & R. K. Wagner, 1992). Results indicated that both inventories were reliable and valid for assessing the constructs underlying their respective theories among both Hong Kong and Nanjing university students. Results also showed that the learning approaches and thinking styles are related in the hypothesized ways: The surface approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with less complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the legislative, judicial, liberal, and hierarchical styles. The deep approach was hypothesized to be positively and significantly correlated with styles associated with more complexity, and negatively and significantly correlated with the executive, conservative, local, and monarchic styles. Implications of these relations are discussed.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherHeldref Publications. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.heldref.org/jp.phpen_US
dc.relation.ispartofThe Journal of psychologyen_US
dc.rightsThe Journal of Psychology: interdisciplinary and applied. Copyright © Heldref Publications.-
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshChinaen_US
dc.subject.meshCognition - Physiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshCultureen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshLearning - Physiologyen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshPsychological Theoryen_US
dc.subject.meshQuestionnairesen_US
dc.subject.meshReproducibility Of Resultsen_US
dc.subject.meshThinking - Physiologyen_US
dc.titleAre learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailZhang, LF: lfzhang@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityZhang, LF=rp00988en_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/00223980009598230-
dc.identifier.pmid11034129en_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0039923156en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros59199-
dc.identifier.volume134en_US
dc.identifier.issue5en_US
dc.identifier.spage469en_US
dc.identifier.epage489en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000089704800001-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridZhang, LF=15039838600en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSternberg, RJ=7102020106en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats