Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes

Five studies are presented—all related to the de velopment and application of a self-report inventory for measuring individual differences in learning processes. Factor analysis of items derived by trans lating laboratory learning processes into the context of academic study yielded four scales: Synthesis- Analysis, Study Methods, Fact Retention, and Elab orative Processing. There were no sex differences, and the scales demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. The Synthesis-Analysis and Elaborative Processing scales both assess aspects of information processing (including depth of processing), but Synthesis- Analysis assesses organizational processes, while Elaborative Processing deals with active, elaborative approaches to encoding. These two scales were positively related to performance under incidental learning instructions in both a lecture-learning and traditional verbal-learning study. Study Methods assessed adherence to systematic, traditional study techniques. This scale was positively related to per formance in the intentional condition of the verbal learning study. The Fact Retention scale assessed the propensity to retain detailed, factual informa tion. It was positively related to performance in the incidental condition of the verbal-learning but not the lecture-learning study. Future research and ap plications are discussed.

[1]  Julian C. Stanley,et al.  Differential Weighting: A Review of Methods and Empirical Studies1 , 1970 .

[2]  Ruth B. Ekstrom,et al.  MANUAL FOR KIT OF REFERENCE TESTS FOR COGNITIVE FACTORS (REVISED 1963) , 1963 .

[3]  H. Kaiser The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis , 1958 .

[4]  A Ehrenfeucht,et al.  Organization of memory. , 1973, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  A. W. Melton,et al.  Coding Processes in Human Memory. , 1973 .

[6]  F. Craik,et al.  Depth of processing and the retention of words , 1975 .

[7]  E. Tulving,et al.  Organization of memory. , 1973 .

[8]  C. Thompson,et al.  A Comment on the Role of Clustering in Free Recall. , 1972 .

[9]  R. Cattell The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors. , 1966, Multivariate behavioral research.

[10]  D. Whitla,et al.  Handbook of Measurement and Assessment in Behavioral Sciences. , 1970 .

[11]  Richard C. Anderson,et al.  Imagery and prose learning , 1972 .

[12]  B. Bloom,et al.  Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain , 1966 .

[13]  L. Postman,et al.  Individual differences in intentional and incidental learning. , 1957, British journal of psychology.

[14]  John Biggs,et al.  Faculty patterns in study behaviour , 1970 .

[15]  T. Pettigrew The measurement and correlates of category width as a cognitive variable1 , 1958 .

[16]  A. Paivio,et al.  Picture superiority in free recall: Imagery or dual coding? , 1973 .

[17]  L. Cronbach The two disciplines of scientific psychology. , 1957 .

[18]  Lawrence T. Frase,et al.  Paragraph Organization of Written Materials: The Influence of Conceptual Clustering Upon the Level and Organization of Recall. , 1969 .

[19]  John Brown,et al.  Recall and Recognition , 1976 .

[20]  G. Kasten Tallmadge,et al.  Relationships among learning styles, instructional methods, and the nature of learning experiences. , 1969 .

[21]  A. Cropley,et al.  Achievement in science and intellectual style. , 1969, The Journal of applied psychology.

[22]  W A Bousfield,et al.  Measurement of Clustering and of Sequential Constancies in Repeated Free Recall , 1966, Psychological reports.

[23]  Paul F. Merrill,et al.  The Effects of Behavioral Objectives on Learning: A Review of Empirical Studies1 , 1973 .

[24]  Roy D. Goldman,et al.  Discriminant Analysis of Study Strategies Connected with College Grade Success in Different Major Fields. , 1973 .

[25]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[26]  F. Boersma,et al.  Test-Retest Reliability of the Cf-1 Hidden Figures Test1 , 1968 .

[27]  Robert Glaser,et al.  Individuals and Learning: The New Aptitudes , 1972 .

[28]  Allan Paivio,et al.  Imagery in recall and recognition. , 1976 .

[29]  Francis J. Di Vesta,et al.  Effects of Passage Organization and Note Taking on the Selection of Clustering Strategies and on Recall of Textual Materials. , 1972 .

[30]  Benton J. Underwood,et al.  Individual differences as a crucible in theory construction. , 1975 .

[31]  Free Recall Transfer and Individual Differences in Subjective Organization. , 1974 .

[32]  S. Schwartz,et al.  Individual differences in cognition: Some relationships between personality and memory , 1975 .

[33]  G K Tallmadge,et al.  Study of Training Equipment and Individual Differences: Research on Interactive Relationships Among Learner Characteristics, Types of Learning, Instructional Methods, and Subject Matter Variables , 1970 .

[34]  L. G. Rorer,et al.  Acquiescence in the MMPI? , 1965 .

[35]  A. W. Bendig The Pittsburgh Scales of Social Extraversion-Introversion and Emotionality , 1962 .

[36]  Extraversion, verbal learning, and memory. , 1976 .

[37]  Michael W. Eysenck,et al.  Individual differences in speed of retrieval from semantic memory , 1974 .

[38]  E. Tulving Subjective organization in free recall of "unrelated" words. , 1962, Psychological review.

[39]  R. Cattell How Good is the Modern Questionnaire? General Principles for Evaluation , 1974 .