The relationship between intellectual styles, intelligence and learning strategies

TRASSI, Angélica Polvani; OLIVEIRA, Katya Luciane de; SANTOS, Acácia Aparecida Angeli dos

doi:10.1590/1982-0275202037e170046

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas)

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Educational Psychology • Estud. psicol. 37 • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0275202037e170046 copy

The relationship between intellectual styles, intelligence and learning strategies

A relação entre estilos intelectuais, inteligência e estratégias de aprendizagem

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Intellectual styles comprise a preference of people to use their cognitive abilities to solve problems. In this sense, the objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between thinking styles, verbal reasoning, and learning strategies in basic education. A total of 470 students from the 2^nd to the 9^th gradein a city in the state of Paraná participated in the study. We used the Thinking Styles Inventory - Revised II, the Learning Strategies Assessment Scale, and the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence. The Wechsler Scale was administered individually and to a restricted sample of 45 students. Positive relations were obtained between the intellectual styles inventory score and the learning strategies. The data pointed towards the need for further national studies to assess these correlations due to the early stage of these studies within the Brazilian population.

Keywords
Basic education; Cognitive psychology; Intelligence; Learning

Item	Affirmation	Thinking style
1	I prefer to deal with problems that require paying attention to many details.	Local
2	When I write or discuss ideas, I prefer to focus on one idea at a time.	Monarchic
3	When I start a task, I like discussing it with my friends or colleagues.	External
4	I like listing the most important things I need to do before doing them.	Hierarchical
5	When I face a problem, I use my own ideas and strategies to solve it.	Legislative
7	I tend to pay little attention to details.	Global
8	I like to find out how to solve a problem by following certain rules.	Executive
9	I like controlling all the stages of a task without consulting other people.	Internal
13	I prefer to follow existing rules or procedures to perform tasks.	Conservative
16	I can easily change from one task to another because they all seem to be as important.	Anarchic
20	I like situations that allow me to compare and assess different ways of doing tasks.	Judicial
27	When discussing or writing, I accept the point of view of my colleagues.	Oligarchic
53	When I face a problem, I prefer to try new strategies or methods to solve it.	Liberal

Subscales	Verbal IQ
Legislative	0.217
Executive	-0.121^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Judicial	0.222
Global	-0.154^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Local	-0.142^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Liberal	0.038
Conservative	-0.333^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Hierarchical	0.077
Monarchic	0.137
Oligarchic	0.204
Anarchic	-0.006^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Internal	0.051
External	-0.032^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.

Subscales	Absence of dysfunctional metacognitive strategies		Cognitive strategies		Metacognitive strategies		General score
Subscales	r	r partial	r	r partial	r	r partial	r	r partial
Legislative	0.131^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.109^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.242^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.036	0.142^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.124^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.254^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.063
Executive	0.298**	0.121^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.279^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.100**	0.022	-0.074	0.347**	0.163^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Judicial	0.311**	0.181^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.344**	0.073	0.133^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.109^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.419**	0.198^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Global	0.170^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.029	0.188^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.030	0.080	0.045	0.238^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.151^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Local	0.248^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.028	0.343**	0.149	0.077	0.049	0.369**	0.115^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Liberal	0.193^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.040	0.243^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.122^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.027	-0.080	0.261^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.037
Conservative	0.198^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.036	0.229^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.183^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.039	0.011	0.258^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.157^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Hierarchical	0.333**	0.144^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.404**	0.235**	0.031^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.013	0.432**	0.218^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Monarchic	0.265^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.105	0.228^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.118^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.110^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.082	0.331**	0.111^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
Oligarchic	0.071	0.016	0.194^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.058	0.093	0.062	0.187^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.078
Anarchic	0.169^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.053	0.200^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.109^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.017	-0.095	0.203^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.127
Internal	0.209^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.044	0.226^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.112	-0.019	0.007	0.241^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	-0.055
External	0.100	-0.073	0.165^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.080	0.088	0.045	0.179^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.	0.051

	Verbal IQ
Absence of dysfunctional metacognitive strategies	0.063
Cognitive strategies	0.025
Metacognitive strategies	0.347^* * Statistically significant results at p ≤ 0.050.
General score	0.130

Programa de Pós-Graduação em Psicologia, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas Núcleo de Editoração SBI - Campus II, Av. John Boyd Dunlop, s/n. Prédio de Odontologia, 13060-900 Campinas - São Paulo Brasil, Tel./Fax: +55 19 3343-7223 - Campinas - SP - Brazil
E-mail: psychologicalstudies@puc-campinas.edu.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence to: E-mail: angelica.polvani@hotmail.com.