Thinking Styles Inventory: Psychometric features in college students from Buenos Aires
Abstract
Background: Thinking styles lead to describe how people use their abilities when they have to deal with problem solving situations. The Thinking Styles Inventory –TSI- is one of the most worldwide employed scales, developed to assess 13 thinking styles posed in the Theory of Mental Self-government -Legislative, Executive, Judicial, Monarchic, Hierarchic, Oligarchic, Anarchic, Global, Local, Internal, External, Liberal, Conservative. Method: Aiming at the adaptation of the scale to local college students’ population, linguistic aspects were reviewed as well as the response scale. After a pilot study, a sample composed of 361 college students from Buenos Aires responded the inventory in order to perform exploratory and confirmatory factorial analyzes on the one hand, and an internal consistency on the other. Result: A 7-factor structure -Judicial/Liberal, Executive/Conservative, External, Monarchic, Global, Hierarchic, Legislative-, was obtained. Conclusion: Such a version maintained 45 of the 104 tested items. Internal consistency of the extracted dimensions reached adequate values. Results are examined considering the theoretical model and further research lines.
Downloads
References
Abalo-Piñeiro, J., Lévi-Mangin, J.P., Rial-Boubeta, A., & Varela-Mallou, J. (2006). Invarianza factorial con muestras múltiples. En: J.P. Lévy Mangin y J. Varela Mallou (Eds.), Modelización con estructuras de covacianzas en ciencias sociales (pp. 259-278). Coruña: Netbiblo.
Aljojo, N. (2017). Differences in styles of thinking “in light of Sternberg´s theory”: A case study of different educational levels in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 7(3), 333-346. doi: 10.3926/jotse.291
Babakus, E., & Mangold, W. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL scale to hospital services: An empirical investigation. Health Services Research, 26(6), 767-786.
Baysal-Berkup, S. (2014). Working with generations X and Y in generation Z period: Management of different generations in business life. Mediterranean Journal os Social Sciences, 5(19), 218-229. doi: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n19p218
Black, A., & McCoach, D. (2008). Validity study of the Thinking Styles Inventory. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 32(2), 180-210.
Byrne, B. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Comrey, A., & Lee, H. (2013). A first course in factor analysis. New York: Erlbaum.
Erkan-Yazici, Y. (2017). The relationship between cognitive style and visual-spatial intelligence of first year architectual students. Kastamonu Eǧitim Dergisi, 25(2), 805-820.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.4.3.272
Flaskerud, J. (1988). Is de Likert scale format culturally biased? Nursing Research, 37(3), 185-186. doi: 10.1097/00006199-198805000-00013
Flaskerud, J. (2012). Cultural bias and Likert-type scales revisited. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 33, 130-132. doi: 10.3109/01612840.2011.600510
Fraser, W., Van-Ede, D., Hislop-Esterhuysen, N., & Owen, R. (2004). Robert Sternberg's mental self-government theory and its contribution to our understanding of first-year distance learners' multiple thinking style preferences. South African Journal of higher Education, 18(2), 206-232.
Gadermann, A.M., Guhn, M., & Zumbo, B.D. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(3), 1-13.
González-Pienda, J., Núñez, J., González-Pumariega, S., Álvarez, L., Roces, C., González, P., Bernardo, A., Valle, A., Cabanach, R., Rodríguez, S., & Sales, P. (2004). Estilos de pensamiento: análisis de su validez estructural a través de las respuestas de adolescentes al Thinking Styles Inventory. Psicothema, 16(1), 139-148.
Gutierrez, M., & Krumm, G. (2012). Adaptación y validación del Inventario de Estilos de Pensamiento de Sternberg (TSI) en la provincia de Entre Ríos-Argentina. Interdisciplinaria, 29(1), 43-62. doi: 10.16888/interd.2012.29.1.3
Gutierrez-Braojos, C., Salmeron-Vilchez, P., Martin Romera, A., & Salmerón, H. (2013). Efectos directos e indirectos entre estilos de pensamiento, estrategias metacognitivas y creatividad en estudiantes universitarios. Anales de Psicología, 29(1), 159-170. doi: 10.6018/analesps.29.1.124651
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., & Anderson, R. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Edinburgh: Pearson.
Herrmann, N. (1996). The whole brain business book: Unlocking the power of whole brain thinking in organizations and individuals. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Holgado-Tello, F., Chacón-Moscoso, S., Barbero-García, I., & Vila-Abad, E. (2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity, 44(1), 153-166. doi: 10.1007/s11135-008-9190-y
Irmscher, M. (2019). The Interface Function of Thinking Styles between Personality and Intelligence. World Journal of Education, 9(1), 79. doi: 10.5430/wje.v9n1p79
Ji-pin, L., & Xiu-li, L. (2014). Creative self-efficacy, thinking styles and artistic creativity of art students. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psychology, 4, 672-675.
Ledesma, R. & Valero-Mora, P. (2007). Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: an easy-to-use computer program for carrying out Parallel Analysis. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 12(2). Recuperado de http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=12&n=2
Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada. Anales de Psicología, 30(3), 1151-1169. doi: 10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
López-Martínez, O., & Martín-Brufau, R. (2010). Estilos de pensamiento y creatividad. Anales de Psicología, 26(2), 254-258.
Lozano, L., García-Cueto, E., & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology, 4(2), 73-79. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73
Maricuţoiu, L., & Paloş, R. (2014). Adaptation of the Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI) within a Romanian students´ sample. Romanian Journal of Applied Psychology, 16(1), 20-24.
Merino-Soto, C., & Domínguez-Lara, S. (2015). Sobre la elección del número de factores en estudios psicométricos en la Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 13(2), 1320-1322.
Mindrila, D. (2010). Maximum likelihood (ML) and diagonally weighted least squares (DWLS) estimation procedures: A comparison of estimation bias with ordinal and multivariate non-normal data. International Journal of Digital Society, 1(1), 60-66. doi: 10.20533/ijds.2040.2570.2010.0010
Ministerio de Educación Nacional (2013). Anuario 2013. Estadísticas Universitarias. Recuperado de http://informacionpresupuestaria.siu.edu.ar/DocumentosSPU/Anuario_2013.pdf
Monaco, M., & Martin, M. (2007). The millennial student: A new generation of learners. Athletic Training Education Journal, 2, 42-46.
Montero, I. & León, O.G. (2007). A guide for naming research studies in psychology. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 7, 847- 862.
Morchio, I., & Fresquet, A. (2014). Aprender en la universidad: análisis de aspectos que lo condicionan desde la perspectiva de profesores y alumnos de la Universidad Nacional de Cuyo (UNCuyo/Argentina) y de la Universidad Federal do Río de Janeiro (UFRJ/Brasil). Revista Brasileira de Educacão, 19(58), 691-712. doi: 10.1590/s1413-24782014000800009
Najafian, B., & Sedighi, A. (2016). The relationship between translation trainees´ thinking styles and their translations quality. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(5), 1096-1104. doi: 10.17507/tpls.0605.25
Richaud de Minzi, M. C. (2005). Desarrollos del análisis factorial para el estudio de ítem dicotómicos y ordinales. Revista Interdisciplinaria, 22(2), 237-251.
Schumacker, R., & Lomax, R. (2016). A beginner´s guide to structural equation modeling. New York: Routledge.
Sofo, F. (2008). Differences of degree or differences in kind? A comparative analysis of thinking styles. The international Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 3(1), 293-301. doi: 10.18848/1833-1882/cgp/v03i01/52375
Sternberg, R. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Valderrey-Sanz, P. (2010). SPSS 17. Extracción del conocimiento a partir del análisis de datos. Madrid: RA-MA.
Vallejo-Seco, G. (1992). Análisis Multivariantes Aplicados a las Ciencias del Comportamiento. Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo.
Yun-Dai, D., & Feldhusen, J. (1999). A validation study of the Thinking Styles Inventory: implications for gifted education. Roeper Review, 21(4), 302-307. doi: 10.1080/02783199909553981
Zhang, L. (2000). Relationship between Thinking Styles Inventory and Study Process Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 841-856. doi: 10.1016/s0191-8869(99)00236-6
Zhang, L. (2002). Thinking styles and cognitive development. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2), 179-195. doi: 10.1080/00221320209598676
Zhang, L. (2004). Do university students´thinking styles matter in their preferred teaching approaches? Personality and Individual Differences, 37(8), 1915-1925. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.023
Zhang, L. (2017). The value of intelectual styles. New York: Cambridge.
Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. (2005). A threefold model of intellectual styles. Educational Psychology Review, 17(1), 1-53. doi: 10.1007/s10648-005-1635-4
Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. (2006). The nature of intelectual styles. New Jersey: LEA.
Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. (2009). Revisiting the value issue in intelectual styles. In L. Zhang & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Perspectives on the nature of intelectual styles (63-86). New York: Springer.
Copyright (c) 2019 Interacciones
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The authors retain the copyright and give the journal the right of the first publication and that they can edit it, reproduce it, distribute it, exhibit it and communicate it in the country and abroad through printed and digital media.
The digital version of the journal is registered under a Creative Commons license (Under Creative Commons License): Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Therefore, this work can be reproduced, distributed and publicly communicated in digital format, provided that the names of the authors and Interacciones.
Therefore, it is established that authors can make other independent and additional behavioural agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (eg, include it in institutional repositories or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly indicated that the work was published for the first time in this journal.
