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

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 t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andy D Mealor, Julia Simner, Nicolas Rothen, Duncan A Carmichael, Jamie Ward
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155483&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850189057966997504
author Andy D Mealor
Julia Simner
Nicolas Rothen
Duncan A Carmichael
Jamie Ward
author_facet Andy D Mealor
Julia Simner
Nicolas Rothen
Duncan A Carmichael
Jamie Ward
author_sort Andy D Mealor
collection DOAJ
description 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.
format Article
id doaj-art-5e5a6b6a42bb49f99717a5058bcc13d2
institution OA Journals
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2016-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-5e5a6b6a42bb49f99717a5058bcc13d22025-08-20T02:15:42ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-01115e015548310.1371/journal.pone.0155483Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.Andy D MealorJulia SimnerNicolas RothenDuncan A CarmichaelJamie WardWe 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.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155483&type=printable
spellingShingle Andy D Mealor
Julia Simner
Nicolas Rothen
Duncan A Carmichael
Jamie Ward
Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
PLoS ONE
title Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
title_full Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
title_fullStr Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
title_full_unstemmed Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
title_short Different Dimensions of Cognitive Style in Typical and Atypical Cognition: New Evidence and a New Measurement Tool.
title_sort different dimensions of cognitive style in typical and atypical cognition new evidence and a new measurement tool
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0155483&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT andydmealor differentdimensionsofcognitivestyleintypicalandatypicalcognitionnewevidenceandanewmeasurementtool
AT juliasimner differentdimensionsofcognitivestyleintypicalandatypicalcognitionnewevidenceandanewmeasurementtool
AT nicolasrothen differentdimensionsofcognitivestyleintypicalandatypicalcognitionnewevidenceandanewmeasurementtool
AT duncanacarmichael differentdimensionsofcognitivestyleintypicalandatypicalcognitionnewevidenceandanewmeasurementtool
AT jamieward differentdimensionsofcognitivestyleintypicalandatypicalcognitionnewevidenceandanewmeasurementtool