Three obstacles to validating the Verbal-Imager Subtest of the Cognitive Styles Analysis

Although the Verbal-Imager Subtest of the Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) has been widely used in research on verbal–visual cognitive style (Riding, 1998), the validity of the test has not been established. This review summarizes evidence that the test lacks three types of validity: (1) face validit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Personality and individual differences 2005-09, Vol.39 (4), p.845-848
Main Authors: Massa, Laura J., Mayer, Richard E.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biological and medical sciences
Cognition. Intelligence
Cognitive style
Cognitive styles
Cognitive styles analysis
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Miscellaneous
Personality. Affectivity
Psychological tests
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Psychometrics
Validity
Verbal
Verbal ability
Visual
Visual information processing
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Although the Verbal-Imager Subtest of the Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA) has been widely used in research on verbal–visual cognitive style (Riding, 1998), the validity of the test has not been established. This review summarizes evidence that the test lacks three types of validity: (1) face validity, in that its surface features do not appear to be related to an underlying theory, (2) construct validity, in that it fails to correlate with other known measures of verbal–visual cognitive style, and (3) predictive validity, in that it fails to predict the behavior of learners. Until the validity of the Verbal-Imager Subtest of the CSA can be established, its value in cognitive style research can be called into question.
ISSN:0191-8869
1873-3549
DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2005.03.008