Skip to main content
Log in

Lack of interaction between sensing–intuitive learning styles and problem-first versus information-first instruction: a randomized crossover trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Advances in Health Sciences Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Adaptation to learning styles has been proposed to enhance learning.

Objective

We hypothesized that learners with sensing learning style would perform better using a problem-first instructional method while intuitive learners would do better using an information-first method.

Design

Randomized, controlled, crossover trial.

Setting

Resident ambulatory clinics.

Participants

123 internal medicine residents.

Interventions

Four Web-based modules in ambulatory internal medicine were developed in both “didactic” (information first, followed by patient problem and questions) and “problem” (case and questions first, followed by information) format.

Measurements

Knowledge posttest, format preference, learning style (Index of Learning Styles).

Results

Knowledge scores were similar between the didactic (mean ± standard error, 83.0 ± 0.8) and problem (82.3 ± 0.8) formats (p = .42; 95% confidence interval [CI] for difference, −2.3 to 0.9). There was no difference between formats in regression slopes of knowledge scores on sensing-intuitive scores (p = .63) or in analysis of knowledge scores by styles classification (sensing 82.5 ± 1.0, intermediate 83.7 ± 1.2, intuitive 81.0 ± 1.5; p = .37 for main effect, p = .59 for interaction with format). Format preference was neutral (3.2 ± 0.2 [1 strongly prefers didactic, 6 strongly prefers problem], p = .12), and there was no association between learning styles and preference (p = .44). Formats were similar in time to complete modules (43.7 ± 2.2 vs 43.2 ± 2.2 minutes, p = .72).

Conclusions

Starting instruction with a problem (versus employing problems later on) may not improve learning outcomes. Sensing and intuitive learners perform similarly following problem-first and didactic-first instruction. Results may apply to other instructional media.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We intentionally avoided the use of a pretest because of the weaknesses the pretest introduces to education research (Fraenkel and Wallen 2003). In a randomized study, individual differences (including knowledge assessed on pretest) should be distributed equally among groups, obviating the need for a pretest.

  2. In the mixed linear model, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a special case of linear regression. Thus the mixed linear model can be used for both regression and analysis of variance.

References

  • Boshuizen, H. P. A., Machiels-Bongaerts, M., van de Wiel, M. W. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (1998). Learning from multiple cases: A new paradigm for investigating the effects of clinical experience on knowledge restructuring and knowledge acquisition. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, April 1998.

  • Bostrum, R. P., Olfman, L., & Sein, M. K. (1990). The importance of learning style in end-user training. MIS Quarterly, 14, 101–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., & for the Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning and the Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education of the National Research Council (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated learning and the culture of learning. Education Researcher, 18, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Case, S. M., & Swanson, D. B. (2001). Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: National Board of Medical Examiners.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E. (2005). Five common but questionable principles of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 97–115). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A. (2005a). Learning and cognitive styles in Web-based learning: Theory, evidence, and application. Academic Medicine, 80, 266–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A. (2005b). Reliability and validity of scores from the Index of Learning Styles. Academic Medicine, 80(10 suppl), S97–S101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A. (2005c). The research we still are not doing: An agenda for the study of computer-based learning. Academic Medicine, 80, 541–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., Dupras, D. M., Thompson, W. G., & Pankratz, V. S. (2005). Web-based learning in residents’ continuity clinics: A randomized, controlled trial. Academic Medicine, 80, 90–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., Gelula, M. H., Dupras, D. M., & Schwartz, A. (2007). Instructional methods and cognitive and learning styles in web-based learning: Report of two randomised trials. Medical Education, 41, 897–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., & Smith, A. J. (2006). Validity of Index of Learning Styles scores: Multitrait–multimethod comparison with three cognitive/learning style instruments. Medical Education, 40, 900–907.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, D. A., Thompson, W. G., Thomas, K. G., Thomas, M. R., & Pankratz, V. S. (2006). Impact of self-assessment questions and learning styles in web-based learning: A randomized, controlled, crossover trial. Academic Medicine, 81, 231–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for research on interactions. New York: Irvington Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curry, L. (2000). Review of learning style, studying approach, and instructional preference research in medical education. In R. J. Riding & S. G. Rayner (Eds.), International perspectives on individual differences, volume 1: Cognitive styles (pp. 239–276). Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M. (1993). Reaching the second tier: Learning and teaching styles in college science education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 23, 286–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 78(7), 674–681.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felder, R. M., & Soloman, B. A. (2007). Index of learning styles. Retrieved July 17, 2007, from http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html.

  • Fleming, D. E., Mauriello, S. M., McKaig, R. G., & Ludlow, J. B. (2003). A comparison of slide/audiotape and web-based instructional formats for teaching normal intraoral radiographic anatomy. Journal of Dental Hygiene, 77, 27–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, G. (1995). Learning styles and hypertext: Exploring user attitudes. Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Melbourne.

  • Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowdermilk, D. L., & Hopkins Fishel, A. (1991). Computer simulations as a measure of nursing students’ decision-making skills. Journal of Nursing Education, 30, 34–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, T. G., Steele, D. J., Johnson Palensky, J. E., Lacy, N. L., & Duffy, S. W. (2001). Learning preferences, computer attitudes, and test performance with computer-aided instruction. American Journal of Surgery, 181, 368–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melara, G. E. (1996). Investigating learning styles on different hypertext environments: Hierarchical-like and network-like structures. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14, 313–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M. D. (2002). Instructional strategies and learning styles: Which takes precedence? In R. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 99–106). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norman, G. (2005). Research in clinical reasoning: Past history and current trends. Medical Education, 39, 418–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, V. L., Groen, G. J., & Norman, G. R. (1991). Effects of conventional and problem-based medical curricula on problem solving. Academic Medicine, 66, 380–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, W. M., Oughton, J. M., Ayersman, D. J., Ervin, J. R., Jr., & Giessler, S. F. (2000). Computer experience, learning style, and hypermedia navigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 609–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, B. H. (1987). This is like that: The use of earlier problems and the separation of similarity effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 629–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., & Lysynchuk, L. (2000). The influence of learning style on achievement in hypertext. Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April 24–28, 2000.

Download references

Acknowledgement

Funding source: Mayo Clinic Department of Medicine.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David A. Cook.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cook, D.A., Thompson, W.G., Thomas, K.G. et al. Lack of interaction between sensing–intuitive learning styles and problem-first versus information-first instruction: a randomized crossover trial. Adv in Health Sci Educ 14, 79–90 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-007-9089-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-007-9089-8

Keywords

Navigation