View in EDS

Scores from Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis have poor test-retest reliability.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Scores from Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis have poor test-retest reliability.
Authors: Cook DA (AUTHOR)
Source: Teaching & Learning in Medicine. Jul2008, Vol. 20 Issue 3, p225-229. 5p.
Abstract: Background: The Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) purports to assess two cognitive style dimensions, wholist-analytic (WA) and verbalizer-imager (VI). CSA score reliability has not been studied in medical education. Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate test-retest reliability and learner-perceived accuracy of CSA scores. Method: CSA scores were measured twice and perceived accuracy of classifications once among 89 family medicine residents, internal medicine residents, and medical students. Results: Mean +/- standard deviation interval between tests was 564 +/- 136 days. Test-retest correlation for WA scores was 0.30, and for VI scores was 0.12. Upon retesting 44 learners (49%) were classified under a different WA style, and 56 learners (63%) were classified under a different VI style. There were 58 of 73 learners (79%) who agreed or strongly agreed with their WA classification, whereas 51 of 76 (67%) agreed with their VI classification. Conclusions: CSA scores have poor test-retest reliability. Educators may wish to avoid using the CSA and should exercise caution when interpreting CSA scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Teaching & Learning in Medicine is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
URL: 33015694
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 105683669
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Scores from Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis have poor test-retest reliability.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cook+DA%22">Cook DA</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Teaching+%26+Learning+in+Medicine%22">Teaching & Learning in Medicine</searchLink>. Jul2008, Vol. 20 Issue 3, p225-229. 5p.
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Background: The Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) purports to assess two cognitive style dimensions, wholist-analytic (WA) and verbalizer-imager (VI). CSA score reliability has not been studied in medical education. Purpose: The objective of this study was to evaluate test-retest reliability and learner-perceived accuracy of CSA scores. Method: CSA scores were measured twice and perceived accuracy of classifications once among 89 family medicine residents, internal medicine residents, and medical students. Results: Mean +/- standard deviation interval between tests was 564 +/- 136 days. Test-retest correlation for WA scores was 0.30, and for VI scores was 0.12. Upon retesting 44 learners (49%) were classified under a different WA style, and 56 learners (63%) were classified under a different VI style. There were 58 of 73 learners (79%) who agreed or strongly agreed with their WA classification, whereas 51 of 76 (67%) agreed with their VI classification. Conclusions: CSA scores have poor test-retest reliability. Educators may wish to avoid using the CSA and should exercise caution when interpreting CSA scores. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Teaching & Learning in Medicine is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
– Name: URL
  Label: URL
  Group: URL
  Data: <link linkTarget="URL" linkTerm="33015694" linkWindow="_blank">33015694</link>
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=105683669
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/10401330802199492
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 5
        StartPage: 225
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Scores from Riding's Cognitive Styles Analysis have poor test-retest reliability.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cook DA
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 07
              Text: Jul2008
              Type: published
              Y: 2008
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 10401334
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 20
            – Type: issue
              Value: 3
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Teaching & Learning in Medicine
              Type: main
ResultId 1