Cognitive Style

Elisabeth Ponce-Garcia and Shelia M. Kennison

Oklahoma State University

Cognitive style is a person’s habitual, prevalent or preferred way of thinking (Riding,

1997). Thinking may involve perceiving information, processing information, and
applying information. The term cognitive style is used to refer to a person’s habitual
way of learning or teaching (Sternberg, 1997). The term cognitive style is synonymous
thinking style as are the terms decision-making style, problem-solving style, learning
style, mind style, perceptual style, and conceptual tempo (Zhang and Sternberg, 2005).
Cognitive style differs from intellectual ability. Cognitive style refers to one’s manner of
performing. In contrast, intellectual ability refers to one’s level of performance.
Researchers believe that an individual’s cognitive style is consistent over time; however,
it may vary across situational contexts. For example, an individual may use one
cognitive style the majority of the time, but use a different cognitive style to solve a
problem or to handle a social situation.

Since the 1990’s, researchers have recognized three cognitive styles: holistic-analytic,
verbal-imagery, and reflection-impulsivity (Riding, 1997). The holistic-analytic style
refers to one’s tendency to process information using the whole picture (or general
ideas) versus using the individual components (or details) of the problem. The verbal-
imagery style refers to one’s tendency to represent information using verbal thought
versus mental images (Sternberg & Zhang, 2001). The reflection-impulsivity style refers
to one’s tendency to either consider more than one possible solution before responding
versus acting upon one’s first inclination in favor of a quick response (Das, 1983).
Some researchers believe that there are more than three categories of cognitive styles.
For example, Sternberg and Gigorenko (1997) identified 13 distinct thinking styles.

The extent to which cognitive styles vary across cultures has intrigued researchers
since the 1950s (Allport & Pettigrew, 1957). Generally, it is believed that cultures that
are more interdependent, less industrially developed, and have political authority
concentrated in a small group of political elite tend to be more holistic and less analytic.
In contrast, cultures that are more independent, industrially developed, and democratic
tend to be more analytic and less holistic (Chiu, 1972; Monga & John, 2007; 2009). The
results of several studies have supported this view, showing that those in East Asian
Cultures tend to use a holistic cognitive style more often than those in Western cultures
(Chiu, 1972; Monga & John, 2007; 2009; Nisbett, 2003; Nisbett, Peng, Choi, &
Norenzayan, 2001; Choi, Koo, & Choi, 2007). Furthermore, Ancillotie (1984) found that
individuals with an analytic style tend to be more reflective while individuals with a
holistic style tend to be more impulsive. The findings are consistent with the observation
that eastern cultures appear not only to be more holistic but also to be more reflective,
while Western cultures tend not only to be impulsive but also to be more analytic
(Huang & Chao, 1998). Researchers point out that the findings regarding cultural
differences in cognitive style do not apply to individual members of the culture, but
rather to the culture taken as a whole (Na et al., 2010).

Empirical studies investigating whether cognitive styles vary across ethnic groups
suggest that an individuals’ cognitive style is similar to that of family members and
members of their social group (Cohen, 1969; Watkins, 2001). Several studies
comparing the cognitive styles of Black and White Americans found that the cognitive
styles of Black Americans were more holistic than White Americans (Ramirez & Price-
Williams, 1974; Guild, 2002; Figueroa, 1980; See also Richardson, 1993). Research
comparing Black Americans to Black South Africans found that Black Americans tend to
be more analytic than Black South Africans (Engelbrecht & Natzel, 1997). Other studies
have found that the cognitive styles of Mexican American students tend to be more
holistic than analytic and that analytic styles were more rewarded by teachers (Ramirez,
1973; Ramirez & Castaneda, 1974).

Researchers have recognized the potential for cognitive styles to have an impact in the
workplace. Peterson, Rayner, and Armstrong (2009) points out that there is still a great
deal of controversy in the field regarding the way cognitive styles are measured across
cultures. For example, studies investigating cultural differences in the cognitive style of
managers from western and eastern cultures have found differences’ however;
researchers may disagree about how cultures are classified as western versus eastern.
Some researchers believe the true differences do not depend upon western or eastern
cultures but that the differences are a product of the stage of industrial development the
culture is in as a whole (Allinson & Hayes, 2000). Work by Savvas, El-Kot, and Sadler-
Smith (2001) suggests that cultural differences are observed between distinct cultural
groups rather than between different geographical locations. However, attempts to
delineate the differences between cultural groups more specifically have resulted in
conflicting findings (Savvas et al. 2001). While debate continues, it is mostly agreed that
cognitive styles are developed in the same manner cross culturally and the differences
between cultural groups are due to culture-specific environmental and social influences
(Watkins, 2001).

References

Allinson, C.W., & Hayes, J. (2000). Cross-national differences in cognitive style:

Implications for management. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 11, 161-170.
Allport, G., & Pettigrew, T. (1957). Cultural influences on the perception of movement.
The trapezoidal illusion among Zulus. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology,
55(1), 104-113.
Chiu, L. H., (1972). A cross-cultural comparison of cognitive styles in Chinese and
American children. International Journal of Psychology, 7, 235-242.
Choi, I., Koo, M., & Choi, J. A. (2007). Individual differences in analytic versus holistic
thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(5), 691-705.
Cohen, R. A. (1969). Conceptual styles, culture conflict, and nonverbal tests of
intelligence. American Anthropologist, 71 (5), 828-856.
Das, P. (1983). Impulsive behavior and assessment of impulsivity with hospitalized
adolescents. Psychological Reports, 53(3-1). 764-766.
Engelbrecht, P., & Natzel, S. G. (1997). Cultural variations in cognitive style: Field
dependence vs. field independence. School Psychology International, 18(2), 155-
164.
Figueroa, R.A. (1980). Field dependence, ethnicity, and cognitive styles. Hispanic
Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 2(1), 35-42.
Guild, P. (2002). An educational leader’s guide to culture and learning style. In S. J.
Denbo, L. Beaulieu, (Eds.), Improving schools for African American students: A
reader for educational leaders (pp. 103-113). Springfield, IL US: Charles C.
Thomas Publisher.
Huang, J., & Chao, L. (1998). A study of reflectivity and impulsivity of Chinese and
American university students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 86(2), 440-442.
Monga, A., & John, D. (2007). Cultural differences in brand extension evaluation: The
influence of analytic versus holistic thinking. Journal of Consumer Research,
33(4), 529-536.
Monga, A., & John, D. (2009). Understanding cultural differences in brand extension
evaluation: The influence of analytic versus holistic thinking. In D. J. Maclnnis, C.
Park, J.R. Preiester (Eds.), Handbook of brand relationships (pp. 247-266).
Armonk, NY US: M E Sharpe.
Na, J., Grossmann, I., Varnum, M. W., Kitayama, S., Gonzalez, R., & Nisbett, R. E.
(2010). Cultural Differences are not always reducible to individual differences.
PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of
America, 107(14), 6192-6197.
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and westerners think
differently… and why, New York, NY US: Free Press.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of
thought; Holistic versus analytic cognition, Psychological Review, 108(2),291-
310.
Peterson, E. R., Rayner, S. G., & Armstrong, S. J. (2009). Researching the psychology
of cognitive style and learning style: Is there really a future? Learning and
Individual Differences, 19(4), 518-523.
Ramirez, M. (1973). Cognitive styles and cultural democracy. Social Science Quarterly.
53, 895-904.
Ramirez, M., & Castaneda, A. (1974). Cultural democracy, biocognitive development,
and education. New York, NY US: Academic press.
Ramirez, M., & Price-Williams, D. R. (1974). Cognitive styles of children of three ethnic
groups in the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 5(2), 212-219.
Richardson, T. Q. (1993). Black cultural learning styles: is it really a myth? School
Psychology Review, 22(3), 562-567.
Riding, R. J., (1997). On the nature of cognitive style. Educational Psychology, 17(1-2),
29-49.
Savvas, M., El-Kot, G., & Sadler-Smith, E. (2001). Comparative study of cognitive styles
in Egypt, Greece, Hong Kong and the UK. International Journal of Training and
Development, 5(1), 64-73.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1997). Are cognitive styles still in style?. American
Psychologist, 52(7), 700-712.
Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. (Ed.). (2001). Perspectives on thinking, learning, and
cognitive styles. Mahwah, NJ US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Watkins D. (2001). Correlates of approaches to learning: A cross-cultural meta-
analysis. In R. Sternberg & L. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning,
and cognitive styles (pp. 165-195). Mahwah, NJ US: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publisher.
Zhang, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A threefold model of intellectual styles.
Educational Psychology Review, 17(1), 1-53.