(Ne)závislosť na poli: kognitívny štýl či schopnosť?
č.10(2018)
Predkladaný krátky článok pojednáva o testovaní kognitívneho štýlu závislosti/nezávislosti na poli podľa Witkina. Tento kognitívny štýl popísaný v 50. rokoch bol v niekoľkých posledných dekádach vystavený kritike, ktorá sa na jednej strane týka samotnej definície kognitívneho štýlu, na strane druhej i metód, ktoré sú k testovaniu tohto štýlu používané. V práci sa čitateľ dozvie ako o metódach testovania závislosti/nezávislosti na poli tak o kritike tohto konceptu. Hlavným zámerom článku je poskytnúť historický exkurz do testovania kognitívneho štýlu závislosti/nezávislosti na poli pomocou testu k tomu pôvodne určenému (Embedded Figures Test). Čitateľ sa dozvie o nejednoznačnosti použitia testu EFT a pochybnostiach o tom, že skutočne testuje spomínaný kognitívny štýl. Test samotný bude predstavený v novom svetle potenciálne zaujímavého nástoja na testovanie priestorovej kognitívnej schopnosti či všeobecnej inteligencie, čo je však nutné ďalším výskumom objasniť.
Presented short paper deals with testing of cognitive style of field dependence/independence by Herman Witkin. This cognitive style described in fifties was wildly criticized in last couple of decades. The criticism was aimed towards the definition of a cognitive style and also towards methods evaluating and testing this so called cognitive style. The paper describes various methods of testing this style and provides brief overview of a criticism of the concept. The main goal of this paper is to provide a historical overview of testing cognitive style of field dependence/independence and to evaluate test created for that purpose (Embedded Figures Test). The reader will find out that EFT is not a completely valid method of testing cognitive style mentioned above and there are some doubts about what this test is really measuring. EFT will be introduced from a slightly different angle, as an interesting method of testing spatial cognitive ability or general intelligence, but these new options of use of EFT require further research.
závislosť na poli; kognitívny štýl; kognitívna schopnosť; psychometrika; field dependence; cognitive style; cognitive ability; psychometrics
Lenka Krajčíková
Masarykova univerzita
Masarykova univerzita, student doktorandského studia
Cummings, A.L., & Murray, H.G. (1987). Psychometric data on the Group Embedded figures test for a sample of adult learners. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 583-586.
Čeněk, J. (2016). Interkulturní rozdíly ve zrakovém vnímání. (Doctoral Dissertation). Brno: Filozofická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity. Retrieved from: https://is.muni.cz/vyhledavani/.
Fitzgibbons, D., Goldberger, L., & Eagle, M. (1965).Field dependence and memory for incidental material. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 21, 743-749.
Goldstein, A.G., & Chance, J.E. (1965). Effect of practice on sex-related differences in performance on Embedded Figures. Psychon. Sci., 3, 361-362.
Guisande, M.A., Páramo, M.F., Tinajero, C., & Almeida L.S. (2007). Field dependenc independence (FDI) cognitive style: An analysis of attentional functioning. Psicothema, 19(4), 572-577.
Goodenough D.R. (1976). The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 83(4), 675-694.
Hao, X., Wang, K., Li, W., Yang, W., Wei, D., Qiu, J., & Zhang, Q. (2013). Individual differences in brain structure and resting brain function underlie cognitive styles: Evidence from the Embedded Figures Test. PLoS ONE, 8(12), 1-9.
Humpolíček, P. (2001a.) Závislost na poli (Field In/Dependency). Uvedení do české psychodiagnostiky. (Diploma thesis). Brno: Filozofická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity.
Humpolíček, P. (2001b). Závislost na poli - osobnost. (Dissertation). Brno: Filozofická fakulta Masarykovy univerzity, 2001b. 105 s.
Jackson, D.N. (1956). A short form of Witkin´s Embedded-Figures Test. Journal of abnormal and social psychology, 53, 254-255.
Jackson, D.N., Messick, S., & Myers, C.T. (1964). Evaluation of group and individual forms of embedded figures measures of field-independence. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24, 177-192.
Khatip, M., & Hosseinpur, R.M. (2011). On the validity of the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT). Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 640-648).
Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psychology: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological bulletin, 133(3), 464-481.
Krajčíková, L. (2014). Field independence as a spatial cognitive ability: Correlation study of verbal and spatial short term memory. (Diploma Thesis). Retrieved from: https://is.muni.cz/vyhledavani/.
Lis, D.J., & Powers, J.E. (1979). Reliability and validity of the Group Embedded figures test for a grade school sample. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 48, 660-662.
Ludwig, I., & Lachnit, H. (2004). Effects of practice and transfer in the detection of embedded figures. Psychological Research, 68, 277-288.
MacLeod, C.M., Jackson, R.A. & Palmer J. (1986). On the relation between spatial ability and field dependence. Intelligence, 10, 141-151.
Miyake, A., Witzki, A.H., & Emerson, M.J. (2001). Field dependence-independence from a working memory perspective: A dual-task investigation of the Hidden Figures Test. Memory, 9(4/5/6), 445–457.
Poirel, N., Pineau, A., Jobard, G., & Mellet, E. (2008). Seeing the forest before the trees depends on individual field-dependency characteristics. Experimental Psychology, 55(5), 328–333.
Rittschof, K.A. (2010). Field dependence–independence as visuospatial and executive functioning in working memory: implications for instructional systems design and research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(1), 99-114.
Svoboda, M. (2010). Psychologická diagnostika dospělých. Praha: Portál. ISBN: 978-80-262-0363-6, s. 488.
Tinajero, C., & Páramo, M.F. (1997). Field dependence-independence and academic achievement: a re-examination of their relationship. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 199-212.
Wagemans, J., Elder, J. H., Kubovy, M., Palmer, S. E., Peterson, M. A., Singh, M., & von der Heydt, R. (2012). A century of gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure–ground organization. Psychological Bulletin. 138(6), 1172-1217.
Witkin, H.A. (1950). Individual differences in ease of perception of embedded figures. Journal of Personality, 19(1), 1-15.
Witkin, H.A. (1965). Psychological differentiation and forms of pathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 70(5), 317-336.
Witkin, H.A., Goodenough, D.R., & Oltman, P.K. (1979). Psychological differentiation: Current status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(7), 1127-1145.
Zhang, L., (2004). Field-dependence/independence: cognitive style or perceptual ability?–validating against thinking styles and academic achievement. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1295-1311.
