OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
PloS one
2016;11 (5): e0155483.

Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.

Andy D Mealor, Julia Simner, Nicolas Rothen, Duncan A Carmichael, Jamie Ward
Author Information
  1. Andy D Mealor: School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
  2. Julia Simner: School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
  3. Nicolas Rothen: School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
  4. Duncan A Carmichael: School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
  5. Jamie Ward: School of Psychology, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9QH, United Kingdom.
PMID: 27191169 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0155483

Abstract

We developed the Sussex Cognitive Styles Questionnaire (SCSQ) to investigate visual and verbal processing preferences and incorporate global/local processing orientations and systemising into a single, comprehensive measure. In Study 1 (N = 1542), factor analysis revealed six reliable subscales to the final 60 item questionnaire: Imagery Ability (relating to the use of visual mental imagery in everyday life); Technical/Spatial (relating to spatial mental imagery, and numerical and technical cognition); Language & Word Forms; Need for Organisation; Global Bias; and Systemising Tendency. Thus, we replicate previous findings that visual and verbal styles are separable, and that types of imagery can be subdivided. We extend previous research by showing that spatial imagery clusters with other abstract cognitive skills, and demonstrate that global/local bias can be separated from systemising. Study 2 validated the Technical/Spatial and Language & Word Forms factors by showing that they affect performance on memory tasks. In Study 3, we validated Imagery Ability, Technical/Spatial, Language & Word Forms, Global Bias, and Systemising Tendency by issuing the SCSQ to a sample of synaesthetes (N = 121) who report atypical cognitive profiles on these subscales. Thus, the SCSQ consolidates research from traditionally disparate areas of cognitive science into a comprehensive cognitive style measure, which can be used in the general population, and special populations.

References

  1. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 03;8:433 [PMID: 25071498]
  2. Psychol Sci. 2002 Mar;13(2):194-6 [PMID: 11934008]
  3. Mem Cognit. 2005 Jun;33(4):710-26 [PMID: 16248335]
  4. Cogn Process. 2013 Nov;14(4):429-34 [PMID: 23553317]
  5. Psychol Bull. 2007 May;133(3):464-81 [PMID: 17469987]
  6. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2008 Oct;32(8):1361-72 [PMID: 18584868]
  7. Conscious Cogn. 2015 May;33:375-85 [PMID: 25734257]
  8. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Jan;61(1):64-75 [PMID: 18038339]
  9. Br J Psychol. 2009 Aug;100(Pt 3):539-52 [PMID: 19026108]
  10. Cortex. 2009 Nov-Dec;45(10):1261-5 [PMID: 19631317]
  11. Psychol Bull. 1992 Jul;112(1):155-9 [PMID: 19565683]
  12. Front Psychol. 2013 Oct 24;4:762 [PMID: 24187542]
  13. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 May 27;364(1522):1377-83 [PMID: 19528020]
  14. Conscious Cogn. 2008 Sep;17(3):1032-9 [PMID: 17627844]
  15. J Autism Dev Disord. 2010 Jan;40(1):1-7 [PMID: 19633942]
  16. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2013 Apr;75(3):394-406 [PMID: 23354593]
  17. Cortex. 2009 Nov-Dec;45(10):1138-47 [PMID: 19664765]
  18. Cortex. 2009 Nov-Dec;45(10):1246-60 [PMID: 19665699]
  19. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1978 Apr;46(2):223-30 [PMID: 649798]
  20. Neuropsychologia. 2008 Jan 31;46(2):511-20 [PMID: 17963797]
  21. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Mar;1156:68-80 [PMID: 19338503]
  22. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2003 Feb 28;358(1430):361-74 [PMID: 12639333]
  23. J Neurosci Methods. 2013 Apr 30;215(1):156-60 [PMID: 23458658]
  24. Cogn Process. 2012 Aug;13 Suppl 1:S299-303 [PMID: 22802032]
  25. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Sep;23(9):2544-57 [PMID: 21265605]
  26. Cortex. 2009 Nov-Dec;45(10):1229-45 [PMID: 19665116]
  27. Conscious Cogn. 2009 Sep;18(3):619-27 [PMID: 19632133]
  28. Cognition. 2008 Oct;109(1):143-51 [PMID: 18834583]
  29. Neuroimage. 2012 Jan 2;59(1):83-93 [PMID: 21651986]
  30. Trends Cogn Sci. 2001 Jan 1;5(1):36-41 [PMID: 11164734]
  31. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2004 Feb;26(1):24-30 [PMID: 14972691]
  32. J Neurosci Methods. 2007 Jan 15;159(1):139-45 [PMID: 16919755]
  33. J Autism Dev Disord. 2001 Feb;31(1):5-17 [PMID: 11439754]
  34. Brain Res. 2006 Mar 24;1079(1):47-56 [PMID: 16473340]
  35. Trends Cogn Sci. 2007 Jan;11(1):23-9 [PMID: 17137829]
  36. Front Psychol. 2013 Sep 19;4:632 [PMID: 24065938]
  37. Br J Psychol. 2012 Nov;103(4):472-96 [PMID: 23034108]
  38. Perception. 2006;35(8):1024-33 [PMID: 17076063]
  39. J Neurosci. 2009 Mar 25;29(12):3792-8 [PMID: 19321775]
  40. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2011 Oct;138(2):329-35 [PMID: 21943833]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cognition
Female
Humans
Male
Memory
Middle Aged
Reproducibility of Results
Sex Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
Task Performance and Analysis
Young Adult
Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Article has an altmetric score of 2

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0imagerycognitiveSCSQvisualStudyTechnical/SpatialLanguage&WordFormscanCognitiveverbalprocessingglobal/localsystemisingcomprehensivemeasureN=subscalesImageryAbilityrelatingmentalspatialGlobalBiasSystemisingTendencyThuspreviousresearchshowingvalidatedNewdevelopedSussexStylesQuestionnaireinvestigatepreferencesincorporateorientationssingle11542factoranalysisrevealedsixreliablefinal60itemquestionnaire:useeverydaylifenumericaltechnicalcognitionNeedOrganisationreplicatefindingsstylesseparabletypessubdividedextendclustersabstractskillsdemonstratebiasseparated2factorsaffectperformancememorytasks3issuingsamplesynaesthetes121reportatypicalprofilesconsolidatestraditionallydisparateareassciencestyleusedgeneralpopulationspecialpopulationsDifferentDimensionsStyleTypicalAtypicalCognition:EvidenceMeasurementTool

Similar Articles

Cited By