Field Dependence/Independence Cognitive Styles: Are They Significant At Different Levels Of Vocabulary Knowledge?

Mohammad Rostampour,Seyyedeh Mitra Niroomand

doi:10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.2n.1p.52

Mohammad Rostampour, Seyyedeh Mitra Niroomand

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.2n.1p.52

Copy DOI

Abstract

Cognitive styles influence the performance of language learners and can predict their success in the process of language learning. Considering field dependence/independence cognitive styles, this study aims at determining if they are significant in English vocabulary knowledge. A number of EFL university students took part in the study. The investigation was done through using Vocabulary Size Test (VST) (Nation, 2007) and the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) (Witkin, Oltman, Raskin, and Karp, 1971). Using the Vocabulary Size Test (VST), the participants were divided into three groups of high, mid, and low. Moreover, with respect to the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT), they were divided into two groups, field dependents and field independents. Mean score comparison revealed there was a credible and meaningful relationship between field dependence/independence cognitive styles and total vocabulary knowledge. It was also indicated there was a significant relationship between field dependence/independence cognitive styles and vocabulary knowledge in the high and mid groups. Finally, based on the findings, teachers should take learners’ individual differences into consideration so that they could adopt and apply teaching methods in line with the learners’ various cognitive styles.

Highlights

In the earlier views, cognitive styles were conceived of as the self-consistent models of functioning that an individual shows through his perceptual and intellectual activities. Messick (1984) defined cognitive styles as consistent individual differences in organizing and processing information and experience
Though one type of cognitive style can be dominant in an individual, it does not mean that the other type does not exist in him
According to Brown (1994), in learning a foreign or second language, it may not be true to assume that learners should be either Field Independent (FI) or field dependent (FD)

Summary

Introduction

Cognitive styles were conceived of as the self-consistent models of functioning that an individual shows through his perceptual and intellectual activities. Messick (1984) defined cognitive styles as consistent individual differences in organizing and processing information and experience. Messick (1984) defined cognitive styles as consistent individual differences in organizing and processing information and experience In this regard, Brown (1994) asserts, “ the way we learn things in general, and the particular attacks we make on a problem seems to hinge on a rather amorphous link between personality and cognition; this link is referred to as cognitive style” We know that cognitive styles are manifestations of the cognitive domain in broader dimensions of functioning which include other psychological domains such as personality and personal behaviors. To put it into simple words, cognitive styles are broad personal styles which show typical ways in which we process information. Some examples of cognitive styles include reflectivity/impulsivity, field dependence/independence, and ambiguity tolerance/intolerance (Bertini, 1986)

Objectives

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion