Skip to main content

Evaluating cognitive tempo in the digital age

Educational Technology Research and Development volume 57, pages 45–60 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

In recent years, considerable attention has been paid to the alleged changes in the ways the so-called digital generation communicates and learns. Most of the commentary has been based on anecdotes, observations and opinions. The lack of empirical evidence in this matter suggests that it may be time to begin the process of gathering data to confirm these views. At the forefront is the issue of which learner characteristics have changed, if any, and, accordingly, which evaluation tools are best suited to evaluate them. One mechanism found to be valid and reliable is the matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT). Developed over thirty years ago to measure cognitive tempo on an impulsive-reflective axis, this instrument was subsequently adapted into a twenty-question version. Cairns and Cammock, the researchers who modified the original into the MFFT-20, published the results of several reliability studies to demonstrate its overall effectiveness. This preliminary study is an attempt to begin the empirical verification process of using cognitive tempo as a relevant assessment tool. Two groups of K-12 students from different eras were investigated to determine if comparing cognitive tempos between subjects who took the original MFFT-20 to those who live in the current media-centric society provides any insights as to possible differences in the visual cognitive processing skills and preferences. The results of the comparative analysis, along with possible implications for teachers and instructional designers are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  • Arizmendi, T., Paulsen, K., & Domino, G. (1981). The Matching Familiar Figures Test: A primary, secondary, and tertiary evaluation. Journal of Psychology, 812–818.

  • Ault, R. L., Mitchell, C., & Hartmann, D. P. (1967). Some methodological problems in reflective-impulsivity. Child Development, 47, 227–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biederman, I., Rabinowitz, J. C., Glass, A. L., & Stacy, E. W. (1974). On the information extracted from a glance at a scene. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 597–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boon, R. (2006). Audio visual entrainment. Retrieved August 12, 2006, from http://www.home.iprimus.com/au/rboon/AudioVisualeEntrainment_AVE.htm.

  • Bridgeman, B. (1980). Generality of a “Fast” or “Slow” test-taking style across a variety of cognitive tasks. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17, 211–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, C. J., & Gordon, L. L. (1994). Development of verbatim and gist memory for numbers. Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (1990). Grist of the gist: Fuzzy-trace theory as the new intuitionism. Developmental Review, 10, 3–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brumby, M. N. (1982). Consistent differences in cognitive styles shown for qualitative biological problem-solving. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 244–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buela-Casal, G., Carretero-Dios, H., del os Santos-Roig, Bermúdez, M. P. (2003). Psychometric properties of a Spanish adaptation of the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT-20). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19(2), 151–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, J., & Cammock, T. (1978). The development of a more reliable version of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Developmental Psychology, 5, 555–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, J., & Cammock, T. (1984). The 20-Item Matching Familiar Figures Test. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. 015681-4).

  • Campbell, D. S., & Davis, R. B. (1982). On the validity of reflection-impulsivity as a construct in classroom research. Annual Meeting of the Am(an Educational Research Association, New York. ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 222 502).

  • Cennamo, K. S., Saveneye, W. C., Smith, P. L. (1988). Mental effort and video-based learning: The relationship between preconceptions and the effects of interactive and covert practice. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39, 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, L. A. (1982). Strategies for visual comparison and representation: Individual differences. In R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). Advances in the psychology of human performance Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran, F. (1981). Processing information from screen media: A psycholinguistic approach. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 29, 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cowan, N. (1998). Children’s memories according to fuzzy-trace theory: An endorsement of the theories purpose and some suggestions to improve its application. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71(2), 144–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, M. (1988). Enriching heredity: The impact of the environment on the autonomy of the brain. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doman, J. R. (1984). Learning problems and attention deficits. Journal of the National Academy for Child Development, 4(6).

  • ERIC (1960). Teaching Foreign Languages by Means of the Tachistoscope: French, Spanish, and Latin. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED033 626).

  • Fiore, Q. (1997). War and peace in the global village. Hardwired.

  • Fletcher, J. E. (1993). Assessment of the Visual Image in Film, Television and the New Visual Media: Research Design. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 393 408).

  • Frederick, J. (2006). Brainwave entrainment to external rhythmic stimuli: Interdisciplinary research and clinical perspectives. Retrieved August 20, 2006, from http://sica.stanford.edu/events/brainwaves/frederickabstract.html.

  • Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: Theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwell, M, (2000). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. New York: Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, K. E. (1985). Cognitive style: A review of the literature. Chicago, IL: Johnson O’Connor Research Foundation, Human Engineering Lab. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 289 902), 38.

  • Greenwald, M. A. (1972). A Survey of Reading Instrument Usage in New Jersey Public School Reading Programs, Grades K-12. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 056 844).

  • Healy, J. M. (1998). Failure to connect: How computers affect our children’s minds and what we can do about it. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedberg, J. G., & McNamara, S. E (1985). Matching feedback and cognitive style in visual CAI tasks. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 260 105), Chicago, IL.

  • Heinich, R., Molenda, M., Russell, J. D., & Smaldino, S. (2002). Instructional media and technologies for learning (7th edn.). Columbus: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikegulu, P. R. & Ikegulu, T. N. (1999). The effectiveness of window presentation strategy and cognitive style of field dependence status on learning from mediated instructions. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 428 758).

  • Kagan, J. (1965). Impulsive and reflective children: Significance of cognitive tempo. Learning and the Educational Process. J. D. Krumboltz. Chicago, Rand McNally.

  • Kagan, J. (1966). Reflection-impulsivity: The generality and dynamics of conceptual tempo. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 71, 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J. & Phillips, W. (1964). Information processing in the child: Significance of analytical and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs, 78(1).

  • Keller, J. M., & Kopp, T. W. (1987). Application of the ARCS model to motivational design. In Charles. M. Reigeluth (Eds.), Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories (pp. 289–320). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383–434). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, R. (2002). The effects of cognitive style and gender on verbatim and gist memory for rapidly-presented montage video. Dissertation: University of Florida.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, R. F. (2004). Teaching television in a digital world: Integrating media literacy (2nd edn.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogan, N. (1971). Educational implication of cognitive styles. Psychology and Educational Practice. G. S. Lesser. Glenview, IL, Scott Foresman.

  • Lang, A. (1994). Measuring psychological responses to television. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, A., & Basil, M. (1998). Attention, resource allocation, and communication research: What do secondary task reaction times measure anyway? In M. Roloff (Eds.), Mass Communication Yearbook (pp. 21). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

  • Lang, A., Bolls, P., Potter, R., Kawahara, K. (1999). The effects of production pacing and arousing content on the information processing of television messages. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(4), 451–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, A., Zhou, S., Schwartz, N. Bolis, P., & Potter, R. (2000). The effects of edits on arousal, attention, and memory for television messages: When an edit is an edit, can an edit be too much. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(1), 94–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luria, A. R. (1966). The human brain and psychological processes. New York: Harper and Rowe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luria, A. R. (1973). Cognitive development, its cultural and social foundations. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messer, S. B. (1970). Reflection-impulsivity: Stability and school failure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 467–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyakawa, J. (2001). Performance on Matching Familiar Figures Test, classroom behaviors, and school achievements of elementary school children in Japan. Japanese Journal of Psychology, 72.

  • Morgan, H. (1996) An analysis of Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligence. Roeper Review, 18, 263–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, P. (1997). Current schooling techniques retard learning. Inferential Focus Briefing, September 30.

  • Neiderman, M., Kenny, R., Sanchez, A., and Croft, M. (2005). A changing narrative paradigm. Presentation made at Broadcast Education Association Annual Conference. Las Vegas, NV.

  • Okun, M. A., Callistus, W. M., & Knoblock, L. B. (1979). Adult age differences in cognitive tempo. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Association, San Francisco, CA, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. 174 632).

  • Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technology of the word. London: Routledge.

  • Papper, R., Holmes, M. & Popovich, M. (2004). Middletown Media Studies. IDMAA Journal, 1(1), Spring.

  • Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001) Digital games-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Restak, R. M. (2003). The new brain: How the modern age is rewiring your mind. New York: Rodale St. Martins Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyna, V. F., & Kiernan, B. (1994). Development of gist versus verbatim memory in sentence recognition: Effects of lexical familiarity, semantic content, encoding instructions, and retention interval. Developmental Psychology, 20(2), 178–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridberg, E. H., Parke, R. D., & Hetherington, E. M. (1970). Modification of impulsive and reflective cognitive styles through observation of film-mediated models. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 5(3), 369–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mead A. D., & Drasgow, F. (1993). Equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 3, 449–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salkind , N. J., & Nelson, C. F. (1980). A note on the developmental nature of impulsivity-reflectivity. Developmental Psychology, 16, 237–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salkind, N. J., & Wright, J. C (1977). The development of reflection-impulsivity and cognitive efficiency. Human Development, 20, 377–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siever, D. (2006). Audio-visual entrainment: Applying audio-visual entrainment technology for attention and learning. Retrieved August 31, 2006, from http://www.mindalive.com.

  • Shaffer R. J., Jacokes, L.E., Cassily, J.F., Greenspan, S. I., Tuchman, R.F., & Stemmer, P.J. (2001). Effect of interactive metronome training on children with ADHD. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55(2), 155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shichida, M. (1994). Science of intelligence and creativity. Emigrant, MT: Oatmeal Angels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens, M. (1996). The rise of the image the fall of the word. New York, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallal, P. (2000). Newsweek, January 1.

  • Tapscott, D. (1997). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (1998). The digital economy: Promise and peril in the age of networked intelligence. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. T., & Gunter, G. A (2006). The K-12 literacy leadership fieldbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Kingdom Department for Transport. (2006). Children’s knowledge of danger. Test 7- Distraction Test. Retrieved February 11, 2006 from http://www.transport.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_504593–12.hcsp.

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1990). Instructional strategies for teaching computer programming: Interactions with the cognitive style reflection-impulsivity. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(1).

  • van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J. F., Tyler, S. W., & Bisanz, G. L. (1982). Prose comprehension and memory. In C. R. Puff (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in human memory and cognition (pp. 349–392). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring, D. A ., Farthing, C. B., & Kidder-Ashley, P. (1999). Impulsive Response Style Affects Computer-Administered Multiple-Choice Test Performance. Journal of Instructional Psychology, June.

  • Watkins, J. M., Lee, H. B., & Erlich, O. (1978). The generalizability of the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (ERIC Document Reproduction Service: No. ED 175 882), Toronto, CA.

  • Weiner, B. (1974). Achievement motivation and attribution theory. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, B. (1986). An attributional theory of motivation and emotion. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. C., & Vliestra, A. G. (1977). Reflection-impulsivity and information-processing from three to nine years of age. In M. Fine (Eds.), Intervention with hyperactivity Springfield, IL: Thomas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, J. C. (1979). Changes in conceptual tempo over time: Developmental versus logical familiarization. Bicentennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, San Francisco, CA.

  • Zillman, D. (1991). Television viewing and psychological arousal. In J. Z. Bryant (Eds), Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes (pp. 103–133). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zillman, D., & Brosius, H. (2000). Exemplification in communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Film and Digital Media, University of Central Florida, 12461 Research Parkway, Ste 500, Orlando, FL, 32826, USA

    Robert Kenny

Authors
  1. Robert Kenny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Kenny.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kenny, R. Evaluating cognitive tempo in the digital age. Education Tech Research Dev 57, 45–60 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9035-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9035-8

Keywords

  • Cognitive tempo
  • Cognitive style
  • Cognitive load
  • Cognitive processing
  • Impulsive-reflective
  • Games generation
  • Media-centric youths
  • Matching Familiar Figures Test