Led On Line
Presentazione - About us
Novita' - What's new
E-Journals
E-books
Lededizioni Home Page Ricerca - Search
Catalogo - Catalogue
Per contattarci - Contacts
Per gli Autori - For the Authors
Statistiche - Statistics
Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy

The Relationship between Reflective Disposition and Persistence in Education

Peter Michael Robinson

Abstract


Getting students to engage in reflective thought is a «wicked» problem in teaching. Students may demonstrate a resistance to any form of reflection, analysis or critical thought and instead automatically default to surface approaches which are non-productive in academic contexts. This resistance may involve an aversion which leads to students not persisting to higher levels of education and dropping out. The present study investigates the relationship between the resistance to reflective processing and persistence in education using the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) and some additional survey items aimed at testing surface processing tendencies in non-academic contexts. It provides support for the hypothesis that a general aversion to reflective processing appears to inhibit academic progression and correlates with drop-out from courses midstream. It closes by suggesting that aversion to analytical thinking may be a threshold issue that needs to be addressed separately before students can progress to any challenging content.


Keywords


surface processing; deep processing; reflection; intuition; CRT

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ashcraft, M. H., & Faust, M. W. (1994). Mathematics anxiety and mental arithmetic performance: An exploratory investigation. Cognition and Emotion, 8(2), 97-125.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939408408931

Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. A. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 238-248.

https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194059

PMid:17694908

Bahçekapili, H. G., & Yilmaz, O. (2017). The relation between different types of religiosity and analytic cognitive style. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 267-272.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.013

Barroso, C., Ganley, C. M., McGraw, A. L., Geer, E. A., Hart, S. A., & Daucourt, M. C. (2021). A meta-analysis of the relation between math anxiety and math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 147(2), 134-168.

https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000307

PMid:33119346 PMCid:PMC8300863

Bialek, M., & Pennycook, G. (2018). The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures. Behavior Research Methods, 50(5), 1953-1959. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0963-x

PMid:28849403

Campitelli, G., & Gerrans, P. (2013). Does the cognitive reflection test measure cognitive reflection? A mathematical modeling approach. Memory & Cognition, 42(3), 434-447.

https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-013-0367-9

PMid:24132723

Cheyne, J. A., & Pennycook, G. (2013). Sleep paralysis post-episode distress: Modeling potential effects of episode characteristics, general psychological distress, beliefs, and cognitive style. Clinical Psychological Science, 1, 135-148. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2167702612466656

https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702612466656

Faust, M. W. (1996). Mathematics anxiety effects in simple and complex addition. Mathematical Cognition, 2(1), 25-62.

https://doi.org/10.1080/135467996387534

Foley, A. E., Herts, J. B., Borgonovi, F., Guerriero, S., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2017). The math anxiety-performance link: A global phenomenon. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(1), 52-58.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416672463

Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25-42.

https://doi.org/10.1257/089533005775196732

Gervais, W. M., & Norenzayan, A. (2012). Analytic thinking promotes religious disbelief. Science, 336, 493-496.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215647

PMid:22539725

Ghaith, G. M. (2020). Foreign language reading anxiety and metacognitive strategies in undergraduates' reading comprehension. Issues in Educational Research, 30(4), 1310-1328. http://www.iier.org.au/iier30/ghaith.pdf

Houdé, O. (2010). Beyond IQ comparisons: Intra-individual training differences. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(5), 370. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2793-c1

PMid:20404841

Houdé, O., & Borst, G. (2015). Evidence for an inhibitory-control theory of the reasoning brain. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, Article 148. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00148

https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00148

PMid:25852528 PMCid:PMC4369641

Jolles, D. D., & Crone, E. A. (2012). Training the developing brain: A neurocognitive perspective. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, Article 76.

https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00076

PMid:22509161 PMCid:PMC3321411

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. London: Allen Lane.

Karbach, J., & Unger, K. (2014). Executive control training from middle childhood to adolescence. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00390

Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2014). The role of analytic thinking in moral judgements and values. Thinking & Reasoning, 20, 188-214.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2013.865000

Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10, 549-563. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-54494-003

Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Is the cognitive reflection test a measure of both reflection and intuition? Behavior Research Methods, 48, 341-348. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0576-1

PMid:25740762

Pennycook, G., Cheyne, J. A., Seli, P., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2012). Analytic cognitive style predicts religious and paranormal belief. Cognition, 123, 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.003

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.003

PMid:22481051

Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2018). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011

PMid:29935897

Pennycook, G., Ross, R. M., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2016). Atheists and agnostics are more reflective than religious believers: Four empirical studies and a meta-analysis. PLOS One, 11(4), e0153039. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153039

PMid:27054566 PMCid:PMC4824409

Primi, C., Morsanyi, K., Chiesi, F., Donati, M. A., & Hamilton, J. (2016). The development and testing of a new version of the Cognitive Reflection Test applying Item Response Theory (IRT). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 453-469.

https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1883

Robinson, P. M. (2018). Affective underpinnings of surface approaches to learning and their relationship with sensation seeking. Issues in Educational Research, 28(2), 453-469. http://www.iier.org.au/iier28/robinson.pdf

Shenhav, A., Rand, D. G., & Greene, J. (2012). Divine intuition: Cognitive style influences belief in God. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(3), 423-428.

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025391

PMid:21928924

Stupple, E. J. N., Pitchford, M., Ball, L. J., Hunt, T. E., & Steel, R. (2017). Slower is not always better: Response-time evidence clarifies the limited role of miserly information processing in the Cognitive Reflection Test. PLOS One, 12(11), e0186404.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0186404

PMid:29099840 PMCid:PMC5669478

Szaszi, B., Szollosi, A., Palfi, B., & Aczel, B. (2017). The cognitive reflection test revisited: Exploring the ways individuals solve the test. Thinking & Reasoning, 23(3), 207-234.

https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2017.1292954

Welsh, M. B., Burns, N. R., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2013). The Cognitive Reflection Test: How much more than numerical ability? Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 35, 1587-1592. https://cogsci.mindmodeling.org/2013/papers/0296/paper0296.pdf




DOI: https://doi.org/10.7358/ecps-2022-025-robi

Copyright (©) 2022 Peter Michael Robinson – Editorial format and Graphical layout: copyright (©) LED Edizioni Universitarie

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

 

Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS)
Registered by Tribunale di Milano (19/05/2010 n. 278)
Online ISSN 2037-7924 - Print ISSN 2037-7932

Research Laboratory on Didactics and Evaluation - Department of Education - "Roma Tre" University

Executive Editor: Gaetano Domenici - Associate Executive Editor & Managing  Editor: Valeria Biasci
Editorial Board: Eleftheria Argyropoulou - Massimo Baldacci - Joao Barroso - Richard Bates - Christofer Bezzina - Paolo Bonaiuto - Lucia Boncori - Pietro Boscolo - Sara Bubb  - Carlo Felice Casula - Jean-Émile Charlier - Lucia Chiappetta Cajola - Carmela Covato - Jean-Louis Derouet - Peter Early - Franco Frabboni - Constance Katz - James Levin - Pietro Lucisano  - Roberto Maragliano - Romuald Normand - Michael Osborne - Donatella Palomba - Michele Pellerey - Clotilde Pontecorvo - Vitaly V. Rubtzov - Jaap Scheerens - Noah W. Sobe - Francesco Susi - Giuseppe Spadafora - Pat Thomson
Editorial Staff: Fabio Alivernini - Guido Benvenuto - Anna Maria Ciraci - Massimiliano Fiorucci - Luca Mallia - Massimo Margottini - Giovanni Moretti - Carla Roverselli 
Editorial Secretary:Nazarena Patrizi 

Referee List

© 2001 LED Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere Economia Diritto