Cognitive structure: a comparison of two theories and measure of integrative complexity ...
Date
1970
Author
Advisor
Michael A. Wallach, Supervisor
Repository Usage Stats
464
views
views
1,452
downloads
downloads
Abstract
This study was intended to assess the generality of a particular type of cognitive
structure characteristic, that of integrative complexity. Pursuant of this, the theories
of H. M. Schroder and O. J. Harvey were com- pared, and their respective measures
administered to 440 students (Ss) of both sexes from three different southern schools.
The theoretical analysis suggested that Schroder's theory is more truly structural
in nature, and is more powerful in that it is more easily and obviously applicable
to a broad range of cognitive domains. Harvey's position is much more firmly grounded
on the content of the interpersonal domain. Both theories claim that the characteristic
of cognitive structure which is most important in determining cognitive complexity
is not differentiation, or an increase in the dimensionality, of the cognitive domain,
but the subsequent integration of the differentiated components. Unfortunately, neither
theorist is able to define integration so as to clearly distinguish it from a dimensional
position. Here again, however, Schroder's theory seems to be the stronger, since it
is at least explicit enough that the locus of difficulty can be precisely identified.
Further, even if Schroder is un- able to define adequately the integration concept,
his theorizing suggests the importance of the possibility of super- and sub-ordinate
relationships among dimensions. Results of the testing were as follows: (a) As expected,
the respective measures of cognitive integration were non-significantly correlated
with each other, (b) Both measures of integration were significantly correlated
with such measures of intelligence as vocabulary, abstract thinking, and SAT verbal
and mathematical scores, (c) Sex differences in the scores may exist, although the
pattern is not clear, (d) Other sample characteristics may affect the distribution
of scores, e.g. large intelligence differences, socioeconomic differences, etc. On
the other hand, Negroes are not ipso facto inferior to Caucasians, even when the latter
enjoy a 100- point advantage on SAT averages. Nor are Southern whites inferior to
Northern whites, at least when both are of superior intellectual ability. (e) Reliability,
as estimated by coefficient alpha, is satisfactory for Harvey's measure and unsatisfactory
for Schroder's, (f) The distribution of scores is such that for both measures complex
Ss are rare, so pools of Ss must be tested in order to obtain adequate numbers of
complex Ss. This is more a problem in attempting to apply Schroder than Harvey, largely
because Schroder has often not bothered to study middle-range Ss, so their characteristics
are unknown. Schroder's variable (especially) is essentially inapplicable to an unscreened
group of subjects. Overall, Schroder's theory seems more promising than Harvey's.
Suggestions were made for improving the reliability and distribution of scores. Additionally,
a translation of Schroder's theory into dimensional terminology was attempted, and
some important implications of his position for the dimensional orientation were discussed.
Description
This thesis was digitized as part of a project begun in 2014 to increase the number
of Duke psychology theses available online. The digitization project was spearheaded
by Ciara Healy.
Type
DissertationDepartment
PsychologyPermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/13558Published Version (Please cite this version)
http://search.library.duke.edu/search?id=DUKE000911584Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Duke Dissertations
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info