PSYCHOLOGY OF LEARNING

Aims of Differential and Cultural Psychology

Differential psychology and Cultural psychology are both aimed at studying differences
of individuals in terms of behavior, processes, and mechanisms. It’s influenced by:
 Genetic, temperamental and brain functioning.
 Cultural and contextual influences.

Specific aims:

Differential Psychology:
 How and why individuals differ between each other in terms of underlying
psychological characteristics (e.g., personality, intelligence, motivation)
 Consistent patterns of behavior that are characteristic of the person.

Cultural Psychology:
 How cultures shape psychological processes.
 Effects of cultural differences in our cognitive processes (e.g., learning and
memory).

How do we measure individual differences?

It depends, but for example:

 Psychometric tests: focus on personality traits or cognitive ability. Results

are related to overt behaviors (across setting like school, work, sport, etc.)

 Self-ratings on personality quests (using statistical techniques):

 Should be accurate and replicable.
 We need to be careful choosing the scales (e.g., score 4 (0-5) on neuroticism is
not double the neuroticism of someone with score 2).
 Not enough for clinical reasoning.

 Clinical interview: mandatory and the most important tool in clinical settings.
Internal and Situational factors

Individuals not only differ between each other; they also differ within each other! A
person doesn’t always behave the same way:
 Changing mood/affective state
 Situational factors

You suddenly wake up and realize that you didn’t hear the alarm clock…and this is the day of the
job interview! You get ready real fast, get on your car and leave for the job interview…however,
there’s unusual traffic on the way there because of an accident, so you realize that you’ll definitely
be late. Even if you’re typically a calm and relaxed person, it’s very likely that you’ll react in an
aggressive and rude manner with anybody (e.g., another driver or a cyclist) who might be on your
way.

In this case, internal personality traits won’t be enough to predict behavior: situational
factors are also very important.

In this case:

Mood: Grumpy, acting in an aggressive

and rude manner with anybody in your way.

Situational factors: Alarm clock and Traffic

jam.

Motivation: ?

Traits: we don’t know if he’s relaxed or not,

but either way the situation imposes a grumpy
mood.

Brief History of Personality Traits

Personality trait: dynamic organization, inside the person, of psychological systems

that create a person’s characteristic patterns of behavior, thoughts, and feelings”.

In other words, personality is a complex system that helps shaping an individual’s:

 Typical way of thinking (about him or the world).
 Behaving and feeling (emotions).
And…
 Is relatively stable over time.
 Differs across individuals.
 Influences behaviors.

Traits vs. states (+ transitory dispositions).

First Personality Theory

Hippocrates (Greek philosopher, 460-370 BC) + Galen (Greek physician, 130-200 BC):
 The Four Humors Theory (personality or temperament).

The theory associated physiological things like blood levels in the liver (sanguine),
yellow bile in the gall bladder (choleric), etc., with temperament and personality
characteristics.

Phrenology

Franz Joseph Gall (1758 – 1828, German neuroanatomist and physiologist):

 Shape of our skull is related to personality.
 Used cranioscopy to infer human behaviors.

Gall mapped out the location of many regions on the skull, while bumps and
depressions would mean a strength or a weakness on those spots.
 Relevant for the legal system of the U.S. (correlation with criminal and
deviant actions).

Eysenck’s early theory

Hans Eysenck – biologically based

personality theory, influenced by
Hippocrates/Galen:

 Extraversion: choleric + sanguine

 Introversion: phlegmatic +
melancholic
 Neuroticism: melancholic + choleric
 Emotional stability: sanguine +
phlegmatic

Eysenck’s most recent theory – The

Gigantic Three
 1. Neuroticism vs. Emotional stability (continuum of upset and distress).
2. Extraversion vs. Introversion (continuum sociability, liveliness, and dominance).
3. Psychoticism trait (levels of conformity, aggressiveness, and feelings for others).

They still depend on biological causes:

Extraversion: variability in cortical arousal (> in introverts, they want to keep it down)

ARAS (various areas in the brain - image) maintains the balance between excitatory
and inhibitory neural mechanisms.

Cattel’s personality theory (1946)

Disagreement with Eysenck: we need a much larger number of traits (vs. 3).
 Focus on adjectives to trace personality (vs. typical behaviors).

Adjectives with the same meaning  some will be dropped, and a category is formed.
Then, they are put in a questionnaire:
 A big amount of data is factor analyzed to understand which of these ratings
have the tendency to group together, forming the main personality traits
(mathematically driven).
 This theory is also called Lexical Hypothesis (personality is described by
existing words).

Famous Cattel’s test – Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF)

Single adjectives drawn from the dictionary may describe many patterns of behavior:
can we think about any patterns of behavior that are not described by a single word in
our language?
BIG FIVE Model of Personality – Costa and McCrae

Comes to fix Cattel’s complexity and Eysenck’s limitedness. This theory describes the 5
building blocks of personality.

They started by using cluster analysis to study correlations between Cattel’s 16PF
scales. First, they found the 3 lower-level patterns of behavior:

1. Extraversion (sociable vs. retiring, fun-loving vs. gloomy, energetic vs. reserved).
2. Neuroticism (calm vs. anxious, secure vs. insecure, self-satisfied vs. feeling
inadequate).
3. Openness to Experience (imaginative vs. practical, curious vs. routine,
untraditional vs. conforming).

Later, 2 more factors were added, derived from Goldberg’s model (1990):

4. Agreeableness (soft-hearted vs. ruthless, trusting vs. suspicious, helpful vs.

uncooperative).
5. Conscientiousness (organized vs. disorganized, self-disciplined vs. impulsive,
careful vs. careless)

To measure these 5 factors, we usually use the NEO-PI(R) questionnaire, with 240
items defining 30 specific traits that define the 5 factors.

Examples of descriptions of someone scoring HIGH on:

 Openness: imaginative, moved by art,
emotionally sensitive, novelty seeker,
tolerant.
Conscientiousness: Competent,
orderly, dutiful, motivated to
achieve, self-disciplined, thinks
before acting.
Extraversion: Warm, gregarious,
assertive, active, excitement seeker,
positive emotions.
Agreeableness: Trusting,
straightforward, altruistic,
cooperative, modest, tender
minded.
Neuroticism: Anxious, angry, hostile,
depressed, self-conscious, impulsive,
vulnerable.

Hexaco Model of Personality

Even though the Big Five has been largely replicated, in some cross-cultural studies of
the lexical basis of personality 6 factors often emerged.
 The honest-humility factor should be added!

HEXACO Personality Inventory (HEXACO-PI) – Ashton, 2004

6 factors, and within each factor there are 4 facets that define the trait and appear
consistently across cultures.

Honesty – Humility:
 Sincerity
 Fairness
 Greed-avoidance
 Modesty
Emotionality (similar to neuroticism):
 Fearfulness
 Anxiety
 Dependence
 Sentimentality
Extraversion:
 Self-esteem
 Social boldness
 Sociability
 Liveliness
Agreeableness:
  Forgivingness
 Gentleness
 Flexibility
 Patience
Conscientiousness:
 Organization
 Diligence
 Perfectionism
 Prudence
Openness:
 Aesthetic appreciation
 Inquisitiveness
 Creativity
 Unconventionality

My scores:

Measuring Personality Scores

Self-report to assess the Gigantic Three (Eysenck):

 EPI (Eysenck Personality Inventory)
  EPQ-R (Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire).
 Eysenck Personality Profiler (EPP).

There are items to measure each factor (instead of a continuum): an extrovert would
answer yes to “Do other people think of you as very lively?”, while an introvert would
answer yes to “Generally, do you prefer reading to meeting new people?”.

Factor Analysis

It allows to determine which relations among a large number of variables may be

reduced to a relation among fewer underlying factors.
 A big number of respondents need to answer all the questions.

Example of factor analysis:

Typically, V1 – V3 – V5 vary together, while V2 – V4 – V6 also vary together

(extroversion vs. introversion). In this example, there are 2 factors: size and
extraversion.

With this approach we can describe personality, but we can’t find its causes.
  Also, there are too many words to describe personality, different people use
different words!
Differences in personality in people coming from collectivist vs
individualist cultures:

Genetic and environmental (CULTURE) factors  personality

Culture: beliefs, customs, art, and traditions of a particular society.

 Transmitted through language and modeling.
 Behaviors can be culturally acceptable or unacceptable
(reward/punishment).

Are personality traits the same across cultures? Or are there variations? (universal vs.
culturally specific aspects).
 There’s evidence that the strength of personality traits varies across
cultures. For example, looking at the Big Five factors:
 Asian cultures are more collectivist, and therefore people in them are more
introverts.
 People in Central and South America score higher in Openness to Experience.
 Europeans score higher in Neuroticism.
 In the U.S. there are regional differences, in 3 clusters:
o Upper Midwest + Deep South: “friendly and conventional” personality.
o West: people who are more relaxed, emotionally stable, calm and
creative.
o Northeast: stressed, irritable and depressed people.

Why? Selective migration: people choose to move to places that are compatible with
their personalities and needs.

Personality in Individualist vs. Collective Cultures

Individualist: Independence, competition and personal achievement are valued (e.g.,

Western nations such as United States, England and Australia).
 Socially oriented traits.

Collectivist: Social harmony, respectfulness and group needs over individual ones (e.g.,
Asia, Africa and South America).
 Personally oriented traits.

Approaches to Studying Personality in a Cultural Context

3 approaches:

1. Cultural-comparative approach: seeks to test Western ideas about personality

in other cultures: can they be generalized? The Big Five found stability in many
cultures.
2. Indigenous approach: reaction to Western dominance.
 3. Combined approach (both): bridge between Western and Indigenous
psychology.
Psychoanalytic approach – Sigmund Freud
(1856 – 1939)

 Tripartite theory (Id, ego, superego).

Social Learning Theory – Albert Bandura (1925

– 2021)

This theory has its roots in early behaviorism,

but it’s a radical departure from it!

These 3 factors are reciprocally influencing

each other:
 Cognitive factors (knowledge,
expectations, attitudes).
 Behavioral factors (skills, practice,
self-efficacy).
 Environment (social norms).

New problem  Imagine possible outcomes

 set goals and choose strategies!

Instead of rewards/punishments, our behaviors arise from self-regulation (INTERNAL

processes vs. behaviorism).

Observational Learning – Bandura (bobo doll experiment)

This experiment shows the observation and imitation of aggressive behaviors.

 Models: Individuals that are observed. They constitute examples of behaviors to

observe and imitate.

 Motivation: To identify with a particular model, the motivation comes from them
having a quality that we would like to possess.

 Identification (w/ model): Involves adopting observed behaviors, values, beliefs,

and attitudes.

A behavior that comes from imitation can be reinforced by using a reward system.

QUIZ 1
Proponents of the Big Five theory thought that Eysenck's theory was too limited to encompass all
nuances of personality.
Select one:
True
False

Hippocrates and Galen's theory states that:

Select one or more:
1. Psychological differences influences our brain/body functioning
2. Psychological differences are the result of brain/body functioning
3. The shape of our skull determines our actions

What are the aims of Differential psychology?

Select one or more:
1. Explain how and why individuals differ between each other in terms of psychological aspects
2. Study of consistent patterns of behavior, in order to trace similarities among people
3. Explain how different cultures and values shape human behaviors

A person described as competent, orderly, dutiful, motivated to achieve, self-

disciplined is defined as being high in the trait Openness to experience.
Select one:
True
False

The decision that each trait of the Big Five factors should be measured by different facets is the
result of statistical analyses.
Select one:
True
False

 Statistical analysis (clusters, in this case) was only used to find the big 3, but the
decision to measure different facets was arbitrary.

MAIN THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence is an “umbrella term”, as it is object of controversy.

Certain mental or psychological abilities account for differences in performances (i.e.

tests) and these are determined by genetic (i.e. innate abilities) and environmental
(i.e. good educational system) factors.

IQ tests: predict future performance in school, occupational and academic contexts.

Influence of cultural differences: the expression of such abilities and the

conceptualization of intelligence differ across cultures.

CLASSES OF THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence as one unique ability (unitary) vs.

a bunch of abilities (multiple or multi-
component). In the latter, a person can be
good at one and not others.

Cognitive abilities (e.g., working memory) are

also important, and some scholars like Carroll
(1993) defined intelligence as different
abilities hierarchically positioned
(hierarchical).
 On the top, sits one ability: IQ.

UNITARY THEORIES: Intelligence as a Unitary Ability

Charles Spearman (1863-1945): Intelligence is a single general factor referring to the

general intelligence underlying performance.
 Can be statically driven (scores on a battery of ability tests).
 Different mental abilities are significantly correlated, thus performance in
one test is similar to others.
 Factor analysis: If individual scores in different tests are similar, they
measure the same ability.
 Verbal reasoning: vocabulary
comprehension.
Quantitative reasoning: number series
and quantitative tests.
Abstract Visual reasoning: paper folding
and copying.
Short-term memory: memory for
sentences and digits.

Example of test – unitary intelligence

Raven’s Progressive Matrices: the individual is required to complete the matrix (top
panel) choosing one of the give options below.
 Total score estimates g factor ability.

Initially considered “culture-free”, but now this isn’t completely true: Western
cultures are more used to rows and columns representation.

MULTI-COMPONENT THEORIES

A unique g factor can’t fully explain any person’s intelligence and abilities. Most
known scholars supporting this view:
 Thurstone (1941)
 Gardner (1983)
 Sternberg (1985)

We should also include abilities that aren’t typically considered by IQ tests, such as
practical abilities or musical/artistic ones.
THURSTON’S PRIMARY MENTAL ABILITIES

He didn’t reject Spearman’s concept totally: for him, intelligence consists of both
general ability and several more specific abilities.

GARDNER’S MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES

8 types of intelligences: most activities are the result of a combination of these.

 For example, dancing needs the combo of spatial and bodily-kinesthetic
intelligences.

1. Linguistic: Sensitivity to words and structure of language

Vocational end: Poet, novelist, journalist.
2. Logical-Mathematical: operate with abstract symbols and logical thinking.
Vocational end: Mathematician, scientist.
3. Intrapersonal: Sensitivity to one’s own inner states.
Vocational ends: Success in any walk of life
4. Interpersonal: Detecting and responding to other’s mood, motives, and
intentions.
Vocational ends: Therapist, public relations specialist, salesperson.
5. Musical: sensitivity to pitch, melody; combining musical phrases.
Vocational ends: Musician, composer
6. Naturalist: sensitivity to factors influencing organisms in natural environments.
Vocational ends: Biologist, naturalist.
7. Bodily-Kinesthetic: capacity to use the body skillfully to express oneself.
Vocational ends: Dancer, athlete.
8. Spatial: Accurate perception of visual-spatial relations.
Vocational ends: Engineer, sculptor.
STERNBERG’S TRIARCHIC THEORY OF INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence: ability to reach success based on one’s own personal standards and the
sociocultural context.

2 Conceptualizations of Intelligence – Cattel e John Horn (1966)

Fluid intelligence: ability to think and reason

abstractly and to solve problems.
 Independent of previous
practice/knowledge.
 Tends to decline during later
adulthood.

Crystallized intelligence: comes from prior

learning and experiences.
 As we grow old, we gain new
knowledge and strengthen it.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES (ID) IN INTELLIGENCE – Education

Fluid intelligence (typically known as g factor) is the most robust and consistent
predictor of performance in primary and secondary school (but, for example, better
predicts Maths than Arts).
 Why does it diminish after secondary education?
 Restriction of range of intelligence (brighter students go to college)
 Increasing significance of personality traits, interests and motivation.
Conscientiousness (big five, both for academic achievement and continuous
assessment) and Motivation are variables that help predict school performance.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES (ID) IN INTELLIGENCE – Job success

Intelligence is also a good predictor of job performance, depending on job complexity

and particularly when the job is intellectually demanding.

Emotional intelligence is as important as general one: it refers to the ability to

recognize, understand and regulate our own emotions (and reason with them).
Important for (examples):
 How employees interact with workers.
 Helping improving communications and relationships in the workplace.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES (ID) IN INTELLIGENCE – Longevity and Health

Some studies find positive associations between Intelligence (IQ) and Physical fitness,
low-sugar and low-fat diet, and longevity.
 On the contrary, it’s negatively correlated with alcoholism, infant mortality,
smoking, and obesity.

The meaning of these correlations is not clear (better health education  healthier or
better education  better occupational attainment).

It seems that these association is mediated by

the ability to engage in preventive and
treatment behaviors:

CULTURAL DIFFERENCES – INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence is viewed differently on different cultures.

In African communities, practical and academic intelligence can develop

independently or even in conflict with each other.

Can tests be culture-free? Nonverbal or visual tests are the most culture-bound of all,
being less fair than verbal tests.
Intelligence cannot fully or even meaningfully be understood outside its cultural
context. The (direction of) relationships between different aspects of intelligence can
vary across cultures.
 Successful intelligence: motivates our work on the interface between
culture and intelligence.

BEHAVIORAL GENETICS – Nature vs. Nurture debate

Both views are complimentary. Behavioral genetics studies biological and

environmental causes of individual differences in intelligence and personality.

Study designs:

Correlations between biological parents’ and

children’s IQ, living in the same environment, don’t
give information on genetic or environment factors
alone (overlap).
 Solution: adoption studies.
 Problem: a child only shares 50% genes with
each parent.

Another solution: Twin studies (100% genes).

CREATIVITY

Subjective construct: typically, though to include

elements of:
 Novelty and originality.
 Values and usefulness.

For example, a children’s pretend play is original but it’s

not useful for the surrounding community.

3 different perspectives:

1. Creative product.

Outcomes such as works of art and scientific publications (e.g., theories, discoveries,
experiments). Highly subjective and cultural and time dependent.

2. Creative process.

Cognitive abilities underlying the process of creative thinking:

 Convergent thinking: right or wrong solutions to a problem.
 Divergent thinking: generation of multiple and novel responses to a problem.
 3. Creative person.

Is creativity a form of intelligence? Or is intelligence a form of creativity?

 They can also be considered and unrelated or partially overlapping (sharing
some common abilities).

Guilford (70s): model of intelligence including divergent

production, which relies on abilities like flexibility, originality,
and fluency.
 These were ancestors of the abilities commonly
measure for creativity tests.

Likewise, Gardner also considered creativity as a form of

intelligence.

INTELLIGENCE AS A FORM OF CREATIVITY – Sternberg & Lubart (1995)

Investment theory: creative people have exceptional abilities to invest in new ideas,
thus creativity is a precondition for intelligence.
 Creativity enables intellectual thinking and ability to solve problems.

Creativity comprises:
 Knowledge.
 Thinking styles.
 Personality attributes.
 Motivation, and especially intrinsic motivation.
 Environment.

A person’s potential creativity may be undermined if she lacks willingness (motivation,

personality traits) to take risks.

CREATIVITY AND INTELLIGENCE AS OVERLAPPING CONSTRUCTS – Barron (1963)

Divergent thinking + cognitive ability tests were administered to students, army

officers, writers, artists, and businessmen. Experts within each field rated the creativity
level of other members.
Results: Correlation of r = .40 between IQ and creativity. However, when IQ was
higher than 120, the correlation decreased.

With these findings, Guilford (1967) proposes the Threshold

Theory of Creativity and Intelligence: minimum level of
intelligence is required in order to be creative, but intelligence
doesn’t itself determine creative thinking.

Evidence shows that divergent thinking is significantly related to

crystallized intelligence (prior knowledge).

HOW DO WE MEASURE CREATIVITY?

Alternate Uses Test (Guilford): name all the things that you
can do with ____ (e.g. hammer, brick, chair). Scored in
terms of:

 Fluency (number of responses)

 Flexibility (number of different categories)
 Originality (statistical frequency of the answers
compared to other participants)
 Elaboration (amounts of details given).

Remote Association Test (RAT): psychometric test of convergent thinking.

 participants identify the correct association between groups of words.

Unusual associations: indicative of individual’s ability to generate novel concepts and

ideas (thus creative!). Some examples:

 Broken-clear-eye: GLASS.
 Time-heir-stretch: LONG.
 Home-sea-bed: SICK.

Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) – divergent production of:

 Semantic units (name all the things you can think of that are red and edible)
 Alternative relations (in what different ways are dogs and cats related)
 Production of systems (write as many sentences using the words rain, station,
and summer)
 In the figural version, participants are asked to, for
example, produce a final picture with simple shapes,
or to combine more than a shape into a picture.
 Judgement on picture’s creativity.

CREATIVITY AND PERSONALITY

The Big Five can be positive or negatively correlated with creativity:

 Openness (most related)

 Conscientiousness
 Extraversion
 Agreeableness
 Neuroticism: mediated by extraversion

Quiz 2

Raven's progressive matrices is an example of test that measures:

Select one or more:
1. Intelligence as multiple abilities
2. Intelligence as a form of creativity
3. Intelligence as a unitary ability
4. Creativity as a form of intelligence
Fluid intelligence is the most robust and consistent predictor of performance in primary and
secondary school
Select one:
True
False

Openness to experience is the best predictor of school performance

Select one:
True
False

Research shows that the IQ of MZ twins remains the same or highly correlated with that of the
other twin, even when they have been adopted and have lived in different environments.
Select one:
True
False

Conscentiousness is negatively related to creativity, that is the less conscientious a person is (being
unconventional, unstructured), the more creative.
Select one:
True
False

The Remote Association Test is a psychometric test of

Select one or more:
1. Convergent thinking
2. Fluency
3. Uniqueness of creative ideas
4. Divergent thinking

MAIN THEORIES OF LEARNING

CLASSICAL CONDITIONING (Pavlov)

 Extinction: the CR diminishes if the UCS
(meat) is repeatedly omitted.

Spontaneous recovery: occurs after 24h

of relaxation.

CLASSICAL CONDITIONING IN PHOBIAS – Watson (little Albert)

OPERANT OR INSTRUMENTAL CONDITIONING - Skinner

Contrary to CC where initial behaviors were biological responses, OC applies to

voluntary responses that we produce to obtain a desired result (instrumental).

Law Effect (Thorndike, 1898): a behavior that is followed by a positive or pleasant

consequence is likely to be repeated, whereas a behavior that is followed by negative
or unpleasant consequences is less likely to be repeated.

SKINNER BOX

Behavior: pressing the lever

Positive consequence: food
Negative consequence: electric shock
 TYPES OF REINFORCEMENTS AND PUNISHMENTS

LEARNING AND COGNITIVE STYLES

Cognitive Styles: Individual differences in cognition that help the individual to adapt
to physical and sociocultural contexts and circumstances.
 Environmentally sensitive.
 Arise from interacting processes.

Early studies (50s)

G. S. Klein’s: Participants were presented with projected squares that constantly

changes in size. Different performances  different cognitive styles

 Sharpeners: Tended to notice contrasts and were able to maintain high degree
of stimulus differentiation.
Personality: Manipulative and active.
 Levelers: tended to notice the similarities among stimuli and ignore
differences.
Personality: Self-inwardness pattern.

Each pole is a way for people to achieve an equilibrium between their needs and
outside requests (linked to the use of previous memories).

STERNBERG’S THEORY OF THINKING STYLES (1988, 1997)

New multidimensional system of intellectual/thinking styles.

Theory of Self-Government: relating individual’s thinking styles to the types of

governments found in the real world.

3 functions:

1. Legislative: likes to decide what to do and how to do it.

2. Executive: likes to be told what to do and will then give his best shot.
3. Judicial: tends to be evaluative of others.

4 forms:

1. Monarchic: single-minded, likes to finish one thing before moving to the next.
2. Hierarchic: likes to do multiple things at a time, with different priorities.
3. Oligarchic: likes to do multiple things at a time but has difficulty setting
priorities.
4. Anarchic: assystematic individual, takes a random approach to problems,
difficult to understand, flexible approaches.

2 levels:

1. Local: predilection for tasks where they keep track of details and focus on
concrete specifics of a situation.
2. Global: predilection for tasks that require engagement with large, abstract
ideas, but lose touch with the details.

2 scopes:

1. Internal: independent work

2. External: working in groups and interacting with others.

2 leanings:
 1. Liberal: unfamiliar tasks, maximization of change, new challenges, and
ambiguity.
2. Conservative: tasks with existing rules and procedures, minimization of change.

KOLB’S LEARNING CYCLE (1984), drawing from the ideas of Jean Piaget and Bandura

Importance of “constructivist” aspect of knowledge: acquired through active

participation and discovery.
 knowledge is acquired through interactions with the government.

Reflective Observation:
review on the experience
(important to share own
vs. other’s ideas).

Abstract
Conceptualization:
learning from the
experience.

Active Experimentation:
planning/trying out what
you have learned.

Result of 4 stages: direct

experiences  new knowledge.
(influenced by learning styles of the learners).

Differences in learning styles  engaging in one stage of the cycle more easily than
others.
Diverging style (concrete  reflective): Novel approach to new experiences. Assess
the experience from various perspectives. Enjoy working in groups.

Assimilating style (reflective  conceptualization): Preference for reasoning, find it

easy to review experience as a whole. Enjoy working on projects from start to finish.

Converging style (conceptualization  experimentation): Reason and problem solving,

good at making decisions and apply ideas to new experiences. Tend to avoid people,
find solutions on their own.

Accommodation style (experimentation  concrete): Using trial and error to guide

experiences, discover answer for themselves. They alter their path depending on
circumstance (adaptable and intuitive) and have good interpersonal skills.

SUPPORT FOR AND CRITICISM AGAINST KOLB’S THEORY

Learning styles are preferences (not fixed traits) that learners apply to learning
situations. Learners should be flexible, choosing according to situation.

CRITICISM

Kolb’s learning theory has been widely used in the context of education  improve
their learning and academic achievement. Correlation between learning styles and
chosen major (university).

Major aligned with learning styles  more success.

Criticism: too restrictive and not supported by many scientific studies.

EVIDENCE FOR STYLES AS DIFFERENT PATTERNS OF COGNITIVE AND NEURAL
ACTIVITIES

Is there a neural substrate linked to the different cognitive styles? 2 hypotheses:

1. That group A and group B have the same behavioral performance at a given
cognitive task (for example, a memory task) but different patterns of neural
activity (different cognitive styles) while performing it.
2. That a group of people would show higher brain activation for a task that
requires a nonpreferred cognitive style (due to increased attentional
resources).