• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

学习方法与思维方式有关联吗?对两组中国人群的一项研究。

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

作者信息

Zhang L F, Sternberg R J

机构信息

Department of Education, The University of Hong Kong.

出版信息

J Psychol. 2000 Sep;134(5):469-89. doi: 10.1080/00223980009598230.

DOI:10.1080/00223980009598230
PMID:11034129
Abstract

This 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.

摘要

本文呈现了对J. B. 比格斯(1987)的学习方法理论和R. J. 斯滕伯格(1988)的思维风格理论在两组中国人群中的结构效度进行调查的结果。该研究还考察了这两种理论之间关系的本质。来自香港的大学生(n = 854)和中国大陆南京的大学生(n = 215)完成了学习过程问卷(J. B. 比格斯,1992)和思维风格量表(R. J. 斯滕伯格和R. K. 瓦格纳,1992)。结果表明,这两份量表在评估香港和南京大学生各自理论所依据的结构方面都是可靠且有效的。结果还表明,学习方法和思维风格以假设的方式相关:表面学习法被假设与复杂度较低的风格呈显著正相关,与立法型、司法型、自由型和层级型风格呈显著负相关。深层学习法被假设与复杂度较高的风格呈显著正相关,与执行型、保守型、局部型和君主型风格呈显著负相关。文中讨论了这些关系的意义。

相似文献

1
Are learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations.学习方法与思维方式有关联吗?对两组中国人群的一项研究。
J Psychol. 2000 Sep;134(5):469-89. doi: 10.1080/00223980009598230.
2
Gelotophobia and thinking styles in Sternberg's theory'.“恐笑症与斯滕伯格理论中的思维方式”
Psychol Rep. 2012 Feb;110(1):25-34. doi: 10.2466/04.09.20.PR0.110.1.25-34.
3
Mental health and thinking styles in Sternberg's theory: an exploratory study.斯滕伯格理论中的心理健康与思维方式:一项探索性研究。
Psychol Rep. 2010 Dec;107(3):784-94. doi: 10.2466/02.04.09.PR0.107.6.784-794.
4
Thinking styles and cognitive development.思维方式与认知发展。
J Genet Psychol. 2002 Jun;163(2):179-95. doi: 10.1080/00221320209598676.
5
Do thinking styles contribute to academic achievement beyond self-rated abilities?思维方式对学业成绩的贡献是否超出了自我评估的能力?
J Psychol. 2001 Nov;135(6):621-37. doi: 10.1080/00223980109603724.
6
Contributions of thinking styles to critical thinking dispositions.思维方式对批判性思维倾向的影响。
J Psychol. 2003 Nov;137(6):517-44. doi: 10.1080/00223980309600633.
7
Revisiting the concept of 'style match'.重新审视“风格匹配”的概念。
Br J Educ Psychol. 2013 Jun;83(Pt 2):225-37. doi: 10.1111/bjep.12011. Epub 2013 Feb 21.
8
Are parents' and children's thinking styles related?父母与孩子的思维方式有关联吗?
Psychol Rep. 2003 Oct;93(2):617-30. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2003.93.2.617.
9
University students' learning approaches in three cultures: an investigation of Biggs's 3P model.三种文化背景下大学生的学习方法:对比格斯3P模型的调查
J Psychol. 2000 Jan;134(1):37-55. doi: 10.1080/00223980009600847.
10
Revisiting the predictive power of thinking styles for academic performance.重新审视思维方式对学业成绩的预测能力。
J Psychol. 2004 Jul;138(4):351-70. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.138.4.351-370.

引用本文的文献

1
Computerized continuous scoring of the cognitive style figure test: Embedded figure test as an example.认知风格图形测试的计算机化连续评分:以镶嵌图形测试为例。
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Feb 3;57(3):84. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02559-1.
2
A comparative study of learners' conceptions of and approaches to learning English between high school students in urban and rural areas of China.中国城乡高中生英语学习观念与学习方法的比较研究
Front Psychol. 2024 Aug 23;15:1324366. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1324366. eCollection 2024.
3
Beware the myth: learning styles affect parents', children's, and teachers' thinking about children's academic potential.
警惕这个误区:学习风格影响着家长、孩子和教师对孩子学业潜力的看法。
NPJ Sci Learn. 2023 Oct 17;8(1):46. doi: 10.1038/s41539-023-00190-x.
4
Thinking styles and their relationship with self-efficacy among deaf and hard-of-hearing adolescent students.聋哑及重听青少年学生的思维方式及其与自我效能感的关系。
Curr Psychol. 2022 Sep 8:1-14. doi: 10.1007/s12144-022-03597-8.
5
Presenting the Students' Academic Achievement Causal Model based on Goal Orientation.呈现基于目标导向的学生学业成就因果模型。
J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2017 Oct;5(4):195-202.