Skip to main content
Log in

The Perry Scheme: Across Cultures, Across Approaches to the Study of Human Psychology

  • Published:
Journal of Adult Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a series of five studies conducted between the year 1994 and the year 2000. A common goal shared by all five studies is to validate the Perry scheme as measured by the Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory. Involved in the studies were 2,269 (937 males, 1321 females, and 11 did not indicate gender) students from 12 universities in three cultures. All research participants responded to the Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory. Participants from one of the studies also responded to the Study Process Questionnaire. Still, participants from another one of the studies also responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory. Three of the major findings are: (1) the Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory has reasonably good reliability and good internal and external validity, (2) the cognitive-developmental pattern of the mainland Chinese students was opposite to that described by Perry, and (3) the cognitive-developmental pattern described by Perry was not identified in either of the two U.S. samples. Recommendations were made as they relate to future studies using the Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Albaili M. A. (1995). An Arabic version of the Study Process Questionnaire: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 77(3), 1083-1089.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong S. J. (2000). The influence of individual cognitive style on performance in management education. Educational Psychology, 20(3), 323-339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter-Magolda M. B. (1987). Comparing open-ended interviews and standardized measures of intellectual development. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28, 443-448.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baxter-Magolda M. B., & Porterfield W. D. (1985). A new approach to assess intellectual development on the Perry Scheme. Journal of College Student Personnel, 26, 343-350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beishuizen J., Stoutjesdijk E., & Van-Putten K. (1994). Studying textbooks: Effects of learning styles, study tasks, and instructions. Learning and Instruction, 4(2), 151-174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belenky M. F., Clinchy B. M., Goldberger N. R., & Tarule J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs J. B. (1992). Why and how do Hong Kong students learn? Using the Learning and Study Process Questionnaires, Education Paper No. 14. The University of Hong Kong, Faculty of Education.

  • Biggs J. B. (1993). What do inventories of students' learning process really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Ribaupierre A. (1989). Cognitive style and operational development: A review of French literature and a neo-Piagetian reintepretation. In T. Globerson & T. Zelniker (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (Human Development, Vol. 3, pp. 86-115). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durham R. L., Hays J., & Martinez R. (1994). Socio-cognitive development among Chicano and Anglo American college students. Journal of College Student Development, 35, 178-182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle N. (1981). Styles of teaching and learning: An integrated outline of educational psychology for students, teachers, and lecturers. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entwistle N., & Ramsden P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London: Croom Helm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofer B. K., & Pintrich P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relations to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88-140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs G. (1981). Teaching students to learn: A student-centered approach. Milton Keynes, England: The Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Globerson T., & Zelniker T. (1989a). Introduction. In T. Globerson & T. Zelniker (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (Human Development, Vol. 3, pp. 1-9). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Globerson T., & Zelniker T. (1989b). Cognitive style and cognitive development In T. Globerson & T. Zelniker (Eds.), (Human Development, Vol. 3). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford J. (1970). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halford G. S. (1990). Children's understanding: The development of mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson E. L. (1996). The call of wisdom: Adult development within Christian community—Part I: The crisis of modern theories of post-formal development. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 24(2) 83-92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kagan J. (1965). Matching familiar figures test. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kember D., & Gow D. (1990). Cultural specificity of approaches to study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 356-363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knefelkamp L. L. (1974). Developmental instruction: Fostering intellectual and personal growth in college students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 1271A. (UMI No. 75–21, 059)

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogan N. (1989). A stylistic perspective on metaphor and aesthetic sensitivity in children. In T. Globerson & T. Zelniker (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (Human Development, Vol. 3, pp. 192-213). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton F., & Säljö, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning, I—Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marton F., & Säljö, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning, II—Outcome as a function of the learner's conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 115-127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niles F. S. (1995). Cultural differences in learning motivation and learning strategies: A comparison of overseas and Australian students at an Australian university. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 19(3), 369-385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pascarella E. T., & Terenzini P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pask G. (1976). Styles and strategies of learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 128-148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry W. G. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 76-116). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson J. T. E. (1987). Research in education and cognitive psychology. In J. T. E. Richardson, M. W. Eysenck, & D. W. Piper (Eds.), Student learning: Research in education and cognitive psychology (pp. 3-12). Milton Keynes, England: SRHE and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Säljö, R. (1979). Learning in the learner's perspective II—differences in awareness. Reports from the Institute of Education. (University of Goteborg, No. 77)

  • Sternberg R. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197-224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg R. J., & Wagner R. K. (1992). Thinking Styles Inventory. Unpublished test, Yale University.

  • Touchton J. G., Wertheimer L. C., Cornfield J. L., & Harrison K. H. (1977). Career planning and decision-making: A developmental approach to the classroom. The Counseling Psychologist, 6(4), 42-47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins D. (1998). Assessing approaches to learning: A cross-cultural perspective on the Study Process Questionnaire. In B. Dart & G. Boulton-Lewis (Eds.), Teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 124-144). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins D., & Regmi M. (1990). An investigation of the approach to learning of Nepalese tertiary students. Higher Education, 20, 459-469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westreich A. H., Ritzler B., & Duncan J. (1997). Relationship between cognitive style and defensive style. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 1011-1023.

    Google Scholar 

  • Widick C. C., Knefelkamp L. L., & Parker C. A. (1975). The counselor as a developmental instructor. Counselor Education and Supervision, 14, 286-296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Witkin H. A. (1962). Psychological Differentiation; Studies of development. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong N. Y., Lin W. Y., & Watkins D. (1996). Cross-cultural validation of models of student learning. Educational Psychology, 16, 317-327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (1995a). The construction of a Chinese language cognitive development inventory and its use in a cross-cultural study of the Perry Scheme. Dissertation Abstracts International A, 56, 2122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (1995b). The Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory. Unpublished test, University of Iowa.

  • Zhang L. F. (1997). The Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory. Unpublished test, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (1999). A comparison of U.S. and Chinese university students' cognitive development: The cross-cultural applicability of Perry's theory. The Journal of Psychology, 133(4), 425-439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (2000a). Are thinking styles and personality types related? Educational Psychology, 20(3), 271-283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (2000b). University students' learning approaches in three cultures: An investigation of Biggs's 3P model. The Journal of Psychology, 134(1), 37-55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F. (2002). Thinking styles and cognitive development. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2) 179-195.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F., & Hood A. B. (1998). Cognitive development of students in China and USA: opposite directions? Psychological Reports, 82, 1251-1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F., & Sachs J. (1997). Assessing thinking styles in the theory of mental self-government: A Hong Kong validity study. Psychological Reports, 81, 915-928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F., & Sternberg R. J. (2001). Thinking styles across cultures: Their relationship with student learning. In R. J. Sternberg & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 197-226). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang L. F., & Watkins D. (2001). Cognitive development and student approaches to learning: An investigation of Perry's theory with Chinese and U.S. university students. Higher Education, 41, 239-261.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Li-fang Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhang, Lf. The Perry Scheme: Across Cultures, Across Approaches to the Study of Human Psychology. Journal of Adult Development 11, 123–138 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JADE.0000024545.11904.81

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JADE.0000024545.11904.81

Navigation