Advertisement

Active Perceiving and the Reflection-Impulsivity Dimension

  • Nancy Rader
  • Shall-Way Cheng
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 14)

Abstract

Zelniker and Jeffrey (1976, 1979) have proposed that performance differences on the MFFT, used to index reflection-impul-sivity, stem from preferences for either detail or global information processing. Our studies, however, indicate that differences in performance reflect the tendency to make use of active perceptual search.

Keywords

Exposure Condition Cognitive Style Accuracy Score Prefer Strategy Active Perceiving 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ault, R. L., Crawford, D. E., and Jeffrey, W. E. Visual scanning strategies of reflective, impulsive, fast-accurate, and slow-inaccurate Children on the Matching Familiar Figures test. Child Development, 1972, 43, 1412–1417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrett, D. W. Reflection-impulsivity as a predictor of children’s academic achievement. Child Development, 1977, 48, 1443–1447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Broadbent, D. E. The hidden preattentive processes. American Psychologist, 1977, 32, 109–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drake, D. M. Perceptual correlates of impulsive and reflective behavior. Developmental Psychology, 1970, 2, 202–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hartley, D. G. The effect of perceptual salience on reflective-impulsive performance differences. Developmental Psychology, 1976, 12, 218–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Julesz, B. Experiments in the visual perception of texture. Scientific American, 1975, 232, 4, 34–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kagan, J. Impulsive and reflective Children: Significance of conceptual tempo. In J. D. Krumboltz (Ed.), Learning and the educational process. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965.Google Scholar
  8. Kagan, J., Rosman, B. L., Day, D., Albert, J., and Phillips, W. Information processing in the Child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs, 1964, (1, whole no. 578).Google Scholar
  9. Messer, S. B. Reflection-impulsivity: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 1976, 83, 1026–1053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Weiner, A. S. and Bergonsky, M. D. Development of selective attention in reflective and impulsive Children. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Washington, D. C., 1975.Google Scholar
  11. Wright, J. C., and Vliestra, A. G. Reflection-impulsivity and information processing from three to nine years of age. In M. Fine (Ed.), Intervention with hyperactivity. Springfield, Ill.: Charles C Thomas, 1977.Google Scholar
  12. Zelniker, T. and Jeffrey, W. E. Reflective and impulsive Children: Strategies of information processing underlying differences in problem solving. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 1976, 41 (5, Serial No. 168).Google Scholar
  13. Zelniker, T. and Jeffrey, E. Attention and cognitive style in Children. In G. Hale and M. Lewis (Eds.), Attention and the development of attentional skills. New York: Plenum Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  14. Zelniker, T., Jeffrey, W. E., Ault, R., and Parson, J. Analysis and modification of search strategies of impulsive and reflective Children on the Matching Familiar Figures Test. Child Development, 1972, 43, 321–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nancy Rader
    • 1
  • Shall-Way Cheng
    • 1
  1. 1.University of California, Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations