Without scaffolding, field-independent students outperform field-dependent students in learning achievement¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i3 In the control group without scaffolding, cognitive style significantly affected learning achievement, favoring field-independent students, with significant differences between field-independent and field-dependent subjects and between field-dependent and intermediate subjects. → Valencia-Vallejo et al. 2017
Evidence¶
Valencia-Vallejo et al. 2017¶
Nilson Valencia-Vallejo, Omar López-Vargas, Luis Sanabria-Rodríguez. (2017). Effect of Motivational Scaffolding on E-Learning Environments: Self-Efficacy, Learning Achievement, and Cognitive Style. Journal of Educators Online. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1168944
q3 · i3 · causal · r2
A complementary ANOVA within the no-scaffolding group (n = 34) found a significant cognitive-style effect with "η2 = .19"; multiple comparisons showed field-independent vs field-dependent differences (t (31) = 2.559, p = 0.016) and field-dependent vs intermediate differences (t (31) = 2.204, p = 0.035).
"The results indicate that in the control group, different cognitive styles have a significant effect o n l e a r n i n g a c h i e v e m e n t ( F ( 2 , 3 1 ) = 3 . 8 1 8 , p = 0.03, η2 = .19), favoring field-independent students."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- With motivational scaffolding, students of different FDI cognitive styles achieve equivalent learning — related
- Cognitive style in the FDI dimension shows no significant main effect on self-efficacy or achievement when the scaffolding condition is pooled — related
- Field-dependent and field-independent pupils differed significantly in numeracy performance, with cognitive style accounting for 12% of variation — related
- Under dynamic task-type instruction, field-dependent learners significantly outperform field-independent learners, while within the static group FI learners significantly outperform FD learners — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.