The attached PDF discusses various cognitive styles as an extension of today's topic. Read the information and summarize the cognitive styles. This can be done in point form.

How can several people look at one common object and describe it correctly, yet in so many

different ways? Why is it that people exhibit the same variability when experiencing identical

events? Psychologists believe that individual biological and psychological differences affect the

ways in which people perceive events, objects, sights, sounds, and feelings. Thus, when several

people encounter an identical object or event, each might experience a different perception of

that object or event. There is no question that the exposure of infants and children to different

experiences shapes their personalities and influences who they are and how they interpret

things. And many educators and researchers are now focusing their attention on these

differences to further understand how individuals in the classroom perceive information and

learn in different ways.

Cognitive style is the manner by which individuals perceive information in the environment and

the patterns of thought that they use to develop a knowledge base about the world around them.

The concept of styles of cognition, an area under continuing investigation, has been discussed

and researched in the psychological community as early as the late 1930s. Knowledge gained

concerning cognitive styles provides the opportunity to learn more about individual differences.

This knowledge can then be applied to assist teachers, counselors, and all professionals who are

involved in children's learning experiences.

There are three very important cognitive styles: leveling-sharpening, field-dependence/field-

independence, and reflectivity-impulsivity. Cognitive styles are distinct from individual

intelligence, but they may affect personality development and how individuals learn and apply

information. And while research has shown that these differences precede environmental

shaping, the effects of cognitive styles can be accented or mitigated by many outside factors,

such as classroom setting, social experiences, and vocational choices. It is for this reason that

research in this area is so important and that it is critical to train educational professionals in

methods to address these differences in the classroom.

Leveling and Sharpening

Leveling and sharpening is a cognitive style that represents the way in which an individual uses

previous memories when attempting to assimilate new information with prior knowledge. This

cognitive style was described in the mid-1950s and was studied by Philip Holzman and George

Klein, among others. Prior to the 1990s, the Squares Test, which was developed by the Menninger

Foundation, was one of the methods of identifying levelers and sharpeners.

People who are levelers tend to select many memories from the past in an attempt to clarify and

categorize newly acquired information. Sharpeners, on the other hand, seem to select fewer

memories when processing new knowledge. In his 1997 book Cognitive Styles and Classroom

Learning, Harry Morgan contended that, overall, sharpeners tend to have more accurate

identifications of new knowledge and can relate recently acquired material to old material with

more specificity. This may be due to an ability to selectively sort and store pieces of memories

and to carefully differentiate associations between past experiences. By contrast, levelers

inaccurately blend features of memories together and then oversimplify the new material or

miscategorise it altogether. They can miss distinguishing features among similar, yet not

identical, objects. This could result in definitions of later knowledge that are ambiguous.

Field-Dependence and Field-Independence

Another area where individuals show differences in their abilities to discriminate events or visual,

auditory, or tactile cues from their surrounding environments is known as field-

dependence/field-independence. Herman Witkin conducted much of the original research in this

area in the 1950s. A field-dependent person has difficulty finding a geometric shape that is

embedded or "hidden" in a background with similar (but not identical) lines and shapes. The

conflicting patterns distract the person from identifying the given figure. A person who is field-

independent can readily identify the geometric shape, regardless of the background in which it

is set. This manner of interpretation, however, is not limited to visual cues. Many researchers are

studying auditory and other sensory perception abilities that may vary from person to person.

There is also a strong connection between this cognitive style and social interactions. People who

are field-dependent are frequently described as being very interpersonal and having a well-

developed ability to read social cues and to openly convey their own feelings. Others describe

them as being very warm, friendly, and personable. Interestingly, Witkin and Donald

Goodenough, in their 1981 book Cognitive Styles, explained that this may be due to a lack of

separation between the self and the environment (or "field") on some level. Field-dependent

people notice a lack of structure in the environment (if it exists) and are more affected by it than

other people.

By contrast, individuals who are field-independent use an "internal" frame of reference and can

easily impose their own sense of order in a situation that is lacking structure. They are also

observed to function autonomously in social settings. They are sometimes described as

impersonal and task-oriented. These people, however, do have the ability to discern their own

identity of self from the field. In addition, a strong correlation has been discovered between

gender and field orientation. Women are more likely to be field-dependent, whereas men are

frequently field-independent. Career tasks and job descriptions are also closely aligned with field-

dependence/field-independence.

Specifically of concern to educators is the discovery that field-dependent children do not do as

well in large group settings or class activities where the lessons are not highly structured. There

are also indications that these same individuals do not perform as well on open-ended questions

as compared to students who are field-independent.

Reflectivity and Impulsivity

Reflectivity and impulsivity are polar ends of a spectrum in a third and very substantial cognitive

style. Studies in this domain began in the early 1960s with several researchers, such as Jerome

Kagan. One of the methods for testing this cognitive style involves administration of the Matching

Familiar Figures Test, which requires subjects to view a picture of an object and then attempt to

match the object when presented with the same object in a group of similar objects. The test is

then scored according to the time required to identify the objects and the accuracy of

identification.

Neil Salkind and John Wright have studied scoring measures for this cognitive style. People who

are slower than the median, but score more accurately than the median, are considered to be

"reflective." In a classroom, these would typically be the students who take extended time on a

task and produce very accurate work. Those who test faster than the median but score below

the median of accuracy are "impulsive." These individuals are frequently described as students

who rush through assignments, frequently missing the correct answers. In addition, impulsive

students do not consider as many alternative answers when presented with open-ended

questions as compared to reflective students. These same students also have a more global

approach to information processing and do not identify the parts of a whole as readily as their

peers. They also have difficulty with delayed gratification on tasks. Reflective students are more

analytical in their problem-solving approach and do not have the same level of difficulty with

delayed gratification.