场依存和场独立特性及其对英语学习影响的研究
|
摘要
场依存和场独立认知方式的发现者和研究者当首推心理学家Witkin。Witkin 从20世纪40年代末开始, 相继设计了棒框测验 （Rod and Frame Test）、身体顺应测验（Body Adjust Test）、转屋实验(Rotating-Room Test)和镶嵌图形实验(Embedded Figures Test)等测量工具，研究垂直知觉和图形分离问题，从而发现人们在认知活动中所表现的对外界参照依赖的不同程度。Witkin椐此提出了这样的理论构想：凡是在知觉活动中以依赖外在参照或受背景影响大者属于场依存特征，反之属于场独立特征。该认知风格一经提出后，在语言学术界引起了比较大的轰动，因为研究者认为认知风格诸如场依存场独立对一个人的二语学习有很重要的影响。许多人开始从事这方面的研究，但他们的发现却不尽相同。有人认为场独立者是优秀的二语学习者，因为这种人能更好地注意课堂学习或交谈中的相关变量，而有人则认为凭借自己的社交倾向性和更强的移情特征，场依存者才是优秀的二语学习者。 本文旨在对场依存场独立认知风格做进一步的探讨和研究，并通过实验分析论证了该认知风格对中国学生英语学习的重要影响。
第一章注重介绍了本文的选题意义。第一，场依存场独立认知风格在学生第二语言学习过程中起重要的作用，这一点已经被大部分研究者所证实。第二，关于该课题每年都有大量的文献，虽然研究结果不尽相同，但却说明了该研究领域的复杂性和重要性。第三，目前基于该项认知风格的研究异议颇多，极具挑战性，急需我们的进一步研究。所有这些原因促使我将场依存场独立认知风格选做研究项目，尽管该课题已经略显过时且颇具争议。
第二章是文献综述。该部分首先简要地交代了场依存场独立认知风格研究的起源及其发展过程。它是由Herman Witkin 在主流心理学的发展过程中提出的一种认知风格，当时定义为人们对外界参照的依赖程度，或者更通俗地说，人们的分析性感知程度。场依存和场独立各有利弊，前者让人把握全局却容易忽视细节，后者让人只见树木不见森林。在定义了场依
存场独立之后，Witkin提议用镶嵌图形实验来测试一个人的场依存场独立程度。Witkin的观点自从提出后就遭到了众多研究者的反对，他们认为Witkin所测试的场依存场独立认知风格其实是一种认知能力。正是在此基础上Chapelle和Green 开始着手发展该理论并提出了著名的三部分假说。他们认为场依存场独立风格包括三个组成部分：内部参照或外部参照依赖性，结构重组能力以及人际交往能力。除此之外，该章还介绍了场依存场独立认知风格的研究现状，目前所采用的主要研究方法及主要研究成果。场依存场独立认知风格是一个比较抽象的概念，为了对它有进一步的了解，该部分还对其相关概念认知风格和学习风格的研究做了相应的回顾和总结。最后，该章简要评价了以往学者对场依存场独立认知风格的不足，为下一章的进一步研究做了铺垫。
第三章是关于场依存场独立认知风格的进一步研究，该部分共有四方面内容。首先对Chapelle和 Green 的新解说模型进行了评价。这种新型解说将场依存场独立认知风格从原来的单一含义上升到三部分假设：内部参照或外部参照倾向性，结构重组能力及人际交往能力，不仅开阔了该领域的研究视野，还缓和了长久以来人们关于场依存场独立认知风格的本质---能力还是风格---的理论争辩。但是，该理论模型依然有不完善的地方。一个问题是在划分三个部分及其归属时过于绝对化。一个人不可能具有完全的内部参照或外部参照倾向性，这只是个度的区别。一个内部参照性强的人不一定具有较高的结构重组能力和较差的人际交往能力，三部分之间并非简单的顺应关系。另外一个问题是他们没有谈及这三部分在决定一个人场依存场独立特点时的地位关系。其实这三部分并不是同等重要，经过后面的实验分析我们认为内部参照和外部参照依赖性在决定一个人场依存场独立程度时的比重应比其他两部分大些，因为第二部分是关于认知能力，而第三部分受其他因素影响较大。在讨论了Chapelle和 Green 的新解说模型之后，第三章又探讨了场依存场独立认知风格的测量手段。镶嵌图形实验是用的最广的测试方法，但根据我们对新解说模型的理解，该手段只测出了人们的认知能力，而非场依存场独立程度。鉴于此，我们设计了新的测试手段，该手段建立在新解说模型理论基础上，以20个问题的问卷方法从三个方面对实验对象进行考察，并根据相对比重取值决定一个人的场依存场独立程度。紧接着该部分又讨论了影响个人场依存场独立程
度的因素，它们包括年龄、性别、性格、文化及其他因素。因为本文注重探讨场依存场独立认知风格在中国学生英语学习过程中的影响，我们在文化因素上做了较详尽的阐述。最后，本章对场依存场独立作为认知风格的特性进行了初步探讨，该风格具有相对稳定性，价值中立性及非极端性。这些阐述在让我们更了解该认知风格的同时也为最后一章的教学启示做了理论铺垫。
第四章重点讨论了场依存场独立认知风格对中国学生英语学习的影响。首先，该部分简要总结了研究者们对该认知风格学习影响所做的假设及初步发现。然后对该风格影响二语学习的中介机制进行了详细分析。简而言?
Fifty years ago, Witkin (1948) discovered that individual differences in the effects of visual cues are not merely errors of method, but that people show remarkable consistency in degree of field dependence on tests of orientation perception (Goodenough, 1986). After the concept has been proposed, Witkin has devised various methods to measure FDI degree, among them the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT) is the most famous but controversial method. During its later development，the FDI theory has been improved by Chapelle and Green with their new interpretation. But their research is far from being perfect. Other researchers also make efforts in this field, but their findings are inconsistent and controversial. It is for this reason that the paper aims to give a comprehensive understanding and carry out a further research on the cognitive style field dependence-independence (FDI) and tries to combine the findings with Chinese students’ ESL learning to explore its influence upon ESL learning in China.
In chapter one, the paper mainly introduces the reasons for choosing such a topic as FDI cognitive style. Firstly, FDI, as a cognitive style, plays an important role in students’ second language learning. Findings concerning this topic are various and they all prove that FDI is quite important in influencing, if we cannot say deciding, the students’ learning process and result. Secondly, the fact that so many papers on FDI have been published has also proved that FDI is quite a complicated yet important topic for our discussion. So many researchers make efforts on this aspect and lots of papers concerning this aspect have been published each year. Nowadays, the topic FDI is not so popular as some years ago. But there must be some reasons for its widespread research in those years and its relative decline recently. This is one of the most important reasons that stimulated me to make an exploration and research in this field. Thirdly, I find findings in this field are not consistent and
researchers always disagree with each other for some reasons, and this makes research on FDI seem quite challenging. It is for these reasons that I finally decided to choose FDI research as the topic of my paper though it seems to be a little bit outdated and controversial.
Chapter 2 is about the literature review. Firstly, the origin and development of FDI research has been generally discussed. FDI, as a cognitive construct, was originally proposed and developed by Herman Witkin in mainstream psychology. At that time, he defined field dependence independence（FDI）as the extent to which a person perceives part of a field as discrete from the surrounding field as a whole, or, to put it into everyday terms, the extent to which a person perceives analytically. There are positive and negative characteristics of both field independence and field dependence. After fiddling with a perception test using rods and frames, Witkin finally developed the GEFT to determine the degree of field dependence or independence we each possess. However, his concept and method have met serious challenges. People think his FDI style is actually a kind of ability instead of style. It is on this base that Chapelle and Green proposed their new interpretation of FDI—the three-component model which consists of internal vs. external reference, restructuring ability and interpersonal competence. Apart from the origin and development of FDI research, this part also reviews the present researching situation of FDI by checking the main research methods and educational implication worked out by other researchers. Secondly, research on learning styles and cognitive styles, the most closely related concepts of FDI, has been roughly reviewed here, and this part mainly includes the definition or understanding and the origin and researching development of learning styles and cognitive styles. The purpose of our description here is to offer additional information for our further perception of FDI, for FDI is a kind of cognitive style and learning style. Thirdly, br
第一章注重介绍了本文的选题意义。第一，场依存场独立认知风格在学生第二语言学习过程中起重要的作用，这一点已经被大部分研究者所证实。第二，关于该课题每年都有大量的文献，虽然研究结果不尽相同，但却说明了该研究领域的复杂性和重要性。第三，目前基于该项认知风格的研究异议颇多，极具挑战性，急需我们的进一步研究。所有这些原因促使我将场依存场独立认知风格选做研究项目，尽管该课题已经略显过时且颇具争议。
第二章是文献综述。该部分首先简要地交代了场依存场独立认知风格研究的起源及其发展过程。它是由Herman Witkin 在主流心理学的发展过程中提出的一种认知风格，当时定义为人们对外界参照的依赖程度，或者更通俗地说，人们的分析性感知程度。场依存和场独立各有利弊，前者让人把握全局却容易忽视细节，后者让人只见树木不见森林。在定义了场依
存场独立之后，Witkin提议用镶嵌图形实验来测试一个人的场依存场独立程度。Witkin的观点自从提出后就遭到了众多研究者的反对，他们认为Witkin所测试的场依存场独立认知风格其实是一种认知能力。正是在此基础上Chapelle和Green 开始着手发展该理论并提出了著名的三部分假说。他们认为场依存场独立风格包括三个组成部分：内部参照或外部参照依赖性，结构重组能力以及人际交往能力。除此之外，该章还介绍了场依存场独立认知风格的研究现状，目前所采用的主要研究方法及主要研究成果。场依存场独立认知风格是一个比较抽象的概念，为了对它有进一步的了解，该部分还对其相关概念认知风格和学习风格的研究做了相应的回顾和总结。最后，该章简要评价了以往学者对场依存场独立认知风格的不足，为下一章的进一步研究做了铺垫。
第三章是关于场依存场独立认知风格的进一步研究，该部分共有四方面内容。首先对Chapelle和 Green 的新解说模型进行了评价。这种新型解说将场依存场独立认知风格从原来的单一含义上升到三部分假设：内部参照或外部参照倾向性，结构重组能力及人际交往能力，不仅开阔了该领域的研究视野，还缓和了长久以来人们关于场依存场独立认知风格的本质---能力还是风格---的理论争辩。但是，该理论模型依然有不完善的地方。一个问题是在划分三个部分及其归属时过于绝对化。一个人不可能具有完全的内部参照或外部参照倾向性，这只是个度的区别。一个内部参照性强的人不一定具有较高的结构重组能力和较差的人际交往能力，三部分之间并非简单的顺应关系。另外一个问题是他们没有谈及这三部分在决定一个人场依存场独立特点时的地位关系。其实这三部分并不是同等重要，经过后面的实验分析我们认为内部参照和外部参照依赖性在决定一个人场依存场独立程度时的比重应比其他两部分大些，因为第二部分是关于认知能力，而第三部分受其他因素影响较大。在讨论了Chapelle和 Green 的新解说模型之后，第三章又探讨了场依存场独立认知风格的测量手段。镶嵌图形实验是用的最广的测试方法，但根据我们对新解说模型的理解，该手段只测出了人们的认知能力，而非场依存场独立程度。鉴于此，我们设计了新的测试手段，该手段建立在新解说模型理论基础上，以20个问题的问卷方法从三个方面对实验对象进行考察，并根据相对比重取值决定一个人的场依存场独立程度。紧接着该部分又讨论了影响个人场依存场独立程
度的因素，它们包括年龄、性别、性格、文化及其他因素。因为本文注重探讨场依存场独立认知风格在中国学生英语学习过程中的影响，我们在文化因素上做了较详尽的阐述。最后，本章对场依存场独立作为认知风格的特性进行了初步探讨，该风格具有相对稳定性，价值中立性及非极端性。这些阐述在让我们更了解该认知风格的同时也为最后一章的教学启示做了理论铺垫。
第四章重点讨论了场依存场独立认知风格对中国学生英语学习的影响。首先，该部分简要总结了研究者们对该认知风格学习影响所做的假设及初步发现。然后对该风格影响二语学习的中介机制进行了详细分析。简而言?
Fifty years ago, Witkin (1948) discovered that individual differences in the effects of visual cues are not merely errors of method, but that people show remarkable consistency in degree of field dependence on tests of orientation perception (Goodenough, 1986). After the concept has been proposed, Witkin has devised various methods to measure FDI degree, among them the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT) is the most famous but controversial method. During its later development，the FDI theory has been improved by Chapelle and Green with their new interpretation. But their research is far from being perfect. Other researchers also make efforts in this field, but their findings are inconsistent and controversial. It is for this reason that the paper aims to give a comprehensive understanding and carry out a further research on the cognitive style field dependence-independence (FDI) and tries to combine the findings with Chinese students’ ESL learning to explore its influence upon ESL learning in China.
In chapter one, the paper mainly introduces the reasons for choosing such a topic as FDI cognitive style. Firstly, FDI, as a cognitive style, plays an important role in students’ second language learning. Findings concerning this topic are various and they all prove that FDI is quite important in influencing, if we cannot say deciding, the students’ learning process and result. Secondly, the fact that so many papers on FDI have been published has also proved that FDI is quite a complicated yet important topic for our discussion. So many researchers make efforts on this aspect and lots of papers concerning this aspect have been published each year. Nowadays, the topic FDI is not so popular as some years ago. But there must be some reasons for its widespread research in those years and its relative decline recently. This is one of the most important reasons that stimulated me to make an exploration and research in this field. Thirdly, I find findings in this field are not consistent and
researchers always disagree with each other for some reasons, and this makes research on FDI seem quite challenging. It is for these reasons that I finally decided to choose FDI research as the topic of my paper though it seems to be a little bit outdated and controversial.
Chapter 2 is about the literature review. Firstly, the origin and development of FDI research has been generally discussed. FDI, as a cognitive construct, was originally proposed and developed by Herman Witkin in mainstream psychology. At that time, he defined field dependence independence（FDI）as the extent to which a person perceives part of a field as discrete from the surrounding field as a whole, or, to put it into everyday terms, the extent to which a person perceives analytically. There are positive and negative characteristics of both field independence and field dependence. After fiddling with a perception test using rods and frames, Witkin finally developed the GEFT to determine the degree of field dependence or independence we each possess. However, his concept and method have met serious challenges. People think his FDI style is actually a kind of ability instead of style. It is on this base that Chapelle and Green proposed their new interpretation of FDI—the three-component model which consists of internal vs. external reference, restructuring ability and interpersonal competence. Apart from the origin and development of FDI research, this part also reviews the present researching situation of FDI by checking the main research methods and educational implication worked out by other researchers. Secondly, research on learning styles and cognitive styles, the most closely related concepts of FDI, has been roughly reviewed here, and this part mainly includes the definition or understanding and the origin and researching development of learning styles and cognitive styles. The purpose of our description here is to offer additional information for our further perception of FDI, for FDI is a kind of cognitive style and learning style. Thirdly, br
引文
Bennett, Christine. Comprehensive Multicultural Education: Theory and Practice, 3rd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995.
Carol A. Chapelle. Field-Dependence/Field-Independence in the L2 Classroom. 1995.
Chapelle, C. & Abraham, R. G. Cloze test method: What difference does it make? Language Testing. 1990 7, 121-146.
Chapelle, C. & Green, P. Field independence/dependence in second language acquisition research. Language Learning. 1992 42, 47-83.
Chapelle, C. & Roberts, C. Ambiguity tolerance and field independence as predictors of proficiency in English as a second language. Language Learning. 1986 36, 27-45.
Christison, M.A.Teaching and learning languages through multiple intelligences. TESOL Journal, 6. 1996 (1), 10-14.
Christison, M.A. A guidebook for applying multiple intelligence theory in the ESL/EFL classroom. Burlingame, CA: Alta Book Center. 1999a.
Christison, M.A. Multiple intelligences. ESL Magazine, 2 (5), 10-13. 1999b.
Curry, Lynn. A Critique of the Research on Learning Styles. Educational Leadership. 1990 48 (2), 50-55.
Dunn, Rita and Shirley Griggs. Hispanic-American Students and Learning Style. ERIC DIGEST. 1996 ED 393607.
Ellis, R. Second language acquisition and language pedagogy. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters Ltd. 1992.
Fischer, Barbara Bree and Louis Fischer. Styles in Teaching and Learning. Educational Leadership. 1979 36 (January), 251.
Frank, B.M., & Davis, J.K. Effect of field-independence match or mismatch on a communication task. Journal of Educational Psychology,
1982 74, 23 - 31.
Frank, B.M. Effect of field independence-dependence and study technique on learning from lecture. American Educational Research Journal, 1984 21, 669 - 678.
Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. Combining Performance Assessment and Curriculum-Based Measurement to Strengthen Instructional Planning. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 1993 11, (3), p. 183 - 192.
Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. 1972.
Gardner, H.. The theory of multiple intelligences (10th anniversary ed.): Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. 1993.
Gilbert, S.E. and G. Gay. Improving the Success in School of Poor Black Children. In Culture, Style and the Educative Process, ed. B.J.R. Shade. 1983 275-83.
Goodenough, D.R. The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 1976. 83, 675 – 694
Goodenough, D.R., Oltman, P.K., Friedman, F., Moore, C.A., Witkin, H.A., Owens, D., & Raskin, E. Cognitive styles in the development of medical careers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1979. 14, 341 - 351.
Griffiths, R. & Sheen, R. Disembedded figures in the landscape: A reappraisal of L2 research on field dependence/independence. Applied Linguistics. 1992 13, 133-148.
Hansen, J. & Stansfield, C. The relationship of field dependent -independent cognitive styles to foreign language achievement. Language Learning. 1981.31, 349-367.
Hansen, J. & Stansfield, C. Student-teacher cognitive styles and foreign language achievement: A preliminary study. Modern Language Journal, 1982 66, 263-273.
Hansen, L. Field dependence-independence and language testing: Evidence from six Pacific island cultures. TESOL Quarterly, 1984 18,
311-324.
Johnson, Janice, Prior, Suzanne, Artuso, Mariangela Field dependence-independence as a factor in second language communicative production. Language Learning. 2000 00238333, Sep2000, Vol. 50, Issue 3 Database.
Jolly, P.J.E. Student achievement in biology in terms of cognitive styles of students and teachers (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University), Dissertation AbstractsInternational, 1980 44, 416.
Jonassen, D.H. & Grabowski, B.L. Cognitive Controls. Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning, and Instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London, England. 1993.
Kallenbach, S. Emerging themes in adult multiple intelligences research. Focus on Basics. 1999. 3 (A), 16-20.
Larsen-Freeman, D. and Long, M. H. An introduction to second language acquisition research. New York: Longman Inc. 1991.
Majima, J. A study of field independence and Achievement among American college students learning Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, 1994b.
Miyake, A., Witzki, A. H., & Emerson, M. J. Field dependence -independence from a working memory perspective: A dual-task investigation of the Hidden Figures Test. Memory. 2001 9, 445-457.
Majima, J. Learner difference and Japanese language education: A study of field dependence/independence cognitive styles and Japanese language learning. Osaka University of Foreign Studies.
Nakagawa, Kazuko. How does cognitive style difference affect L2 learning? Paper presented at the annual conference of Nihongo Kyoiku Gakkai [The Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language],Tokyo, Japan. 1990.
Ogbu, John U. Cultural Diversity and Human Development. In Black Children and Poverty, ed. D.T. Slaughter, 11-28. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Cited in Irvine & York, 1995.
Rickards, J.P., Fajen, B.R., Sullivan, J.F. & Gillespie, G. Signaling,
Note-taking, and Field Independence-Dependence in Text Comprehension and Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1997 89, 508 - 517.
Tannenbaum, R.K. An investigation of the relationship(s) between selected instructional techniques and identified field dependent and field independent cognitive styles as evidenced among high school students enrolled in studies of nutrition (Doctoral dissertation, St. John's University), Dissertation Abstracts International, 1982 43, 68.
Thompson, G., & Knox, A.B. Designing for diversity: Are field dependent learners less suited to distance education programs of instruction? Contemporary Educational Psychology. 1987 12, 17 - 29.
Viens, J., & Kallenbach, S. MI grows up: Multiple intelligences in adult education sourcebook. Boston: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. 1995.
Witkin, H.A. Group Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto: CA. Consulting Psychologists Press. Cited in Irvine & York, 1971.
Witkin, H.A. & Goodenough, D.R. Field dependence and interpersonal behavior, (RB 76 - 12). Princeton: Educational Testing Service. 1976
Wiggins, G. (1992). Creating tests worth taking. Educational Leadership, 49, (8), p. 26 - 33.
Worthley, K.M. Evenson. Learning Style Factor of Field Dependence -Independence and Problem Solving Strategies of Hmong Refugee Students. 1999.
王初明 《应用心理语言学》[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1991.
徐希纬 “浅谈英语教学应与学生认知风格相匹配” [M] 《景德镇高专学报》 2001年第3期86-87页
姚旦墅 “场独立、场依赖与英语阅读能力的培养” 《煤炭高等教育》2002年第6期85-86页
李哲 “学习者认知风格的差异性与外语教学” 《外语教学》2000年第3期61-64页
彭飞 “重视学生认知风格差异—因材施教”《山东师范大学外国语学院学报》2003第1期61-65页
李广超 “学习风格与英语教学策略”《广东教育学院学报》2000年第5期91-104页
Carol A. Chapelle. Field-Dependence/Field-Independence in the L2 Classroom. 1995.
Chapelle, C. & Abraham, R. G. Cloze test method: What difference does it make? Language Testing. 1990 7, 121-146.
Chapelle, C. & Green, P. Field independence/dependence in second language acquisition research. Language Learning. 1992 42, 47-83.
Chapelle, C. & Roberts, C. Ambiguity tolerance and field independence as predictors of proficiency in English as a second language. Language Learning. 1986 36, 27-45.
Christison, M.A.Teaching and learning languages through multiple intelligences. TESOL Journal, 6. 1996 (1), 10-14.
Christison, M.A. A guidebook for applying multiple intelligence theory in the ESL/EFL classroom. Burlingame, CA: Alta Book Center. 1999a.
Christison, M.A. Multiple intelligences. ESL Magazine, 2 (5), 10-13. 1999b.
Curry, Lynn. A Critique of the Research on Learning Styles. Educational Leadership. 1990 48 (2), 50-55.
Dunn, Rita and Shirley Griggs. Hispanic-American Students and Learning Style. ERIC DIGEST. 1996 ED 393607.
Ellis, R. Second language acquisition and language pedagogy. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters Ltd. 1992.
Fischer, Barbara Bree and Louis Fischer. Styles in Teaching and Learning. Educational Leadership. 1979 36 (January), 251.
Frank, B.M., & Davis, J.K. Effect of field-independence match or mismatch on a communication task. Journal of Educational Psychology,
1982 74, 23 - 31.
Frank, B.M. Effect of field independence-dependence and study technique on learning from lecture. American Educational Research Journal, 1984 21, 669 - 678.
Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. Combining Performance Assessment and Curriculum-Based Measurement to Strengthen Instructional Planning. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 1993 11, (3), p. 183 - 192.
Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. 1972.
Gardner, H.. The theory of multiple intelligences (10th anniversary ed.): Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. 1993.
Gilbert, S.E. and G. Gay. Improving the Success in School of Poor Black Children. In Culture, Style and the Educative Process, ed. B.J.R. Shade. 1983 275-83.
Goodenough, D.R. The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 1976. 83, 675 – 694
Goodenough, D.R., Oltman, P.K., Friedman, F., Moore, C.A., Witkin, H.A., Owens, D., & Raskin, E. Cognitive styles in the development of medical careers. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1979. 14, 341 - 351.
Griffiths, R. & Sheen, R. Disembedded figures in the landscape: A reappraisal of L2 research on field dependence/independence. Applied Linguistics. 1992 13, 133-148.
Hansen, J. & Stansfield, C. The relationship of field dependent -independent cognitive styles to foreign language achievement. Language Learning. 1981.31, 349-367.
Hansen, J. & Stansfield, C. Student-teacher cognitive styles and foreign language achievement: A preliminary study. Modern Language Journal, 1982 66, 263-273.
Hansen, L. Field dependence-independence and language testing: Evidence from six Pacific island cultures. TESOL Quarterly, 1984 18,
311-324.
Johnson, Janice, Prior, Suzanne, Artuso, Mariangela Field dependence-independence as a factor in second language communicative production. Language Learning. 2000 00238333, Sep2000, Vol. 50, Issue 3 Database.
Jolly, P.J.E. Student achievement in biology in terms of cognitive styles of students and teachers (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University), Dissertation AbstractsInternational, 1980 44, 416.
Jonassen, D.H. & Grabowski, B.L. Cognitive Controls. Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning, and Instruction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London, England. 1993.
Kallenbach, S. Emerging themes in adult multiple intelligences research. Focus on Basics. 1999. 3 (A), 16-20.
Larsen-Freeman, D. and Long, M. H. An introduction to second language acquisition research. New York: Longman Inc. 1991.
Majima, J. A study of field independence and Achievement among American college students learning Japanese. Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, 1994b.
Miyake, A., Witzki, A. H., & Emerson, M. J. Field dependence -independence from a working memory perspective: A dual-task investigation of the Hidden Figures Test. Memory. 2001 9, 445-457.
Majima, J. Learner difference and Japanese language education: A study of field dependence/independence cognitive styles and Japanese language learning. Osaka University of Foreign Studies.
Nakagawa, Kazuko. How does cognitive style difference affect L2 learning? Paper presented at the annual conference of Nihongo Kyoiku Gakkai [The Society for Teaching Japanese as a Foreign Language],Tokyo, Japan. 1990.
Ogbu, John U. Cultural Diversity and Human Development. In Black Children and Poverty, ed. D.T. Slaughter, 11-28. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Cited in Irvine & York, 1995.
Rickards, J.P., Fajen, B.R., Sullivan, J.F. & Gillespie, G. Signaling,
Note-taking, and Field Independence-Dependence in Text Comprehension and Recall. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1997 89, 508 - 517.
Tannenbaum, R.K. An investigation of the relationship(s) between selected instructional techniques and identified field dependent and field independent cognitive styles as evidenced among high school students enrolled in studies of nutrition (Doctoral dissertation, St. John's University), Dissertation Abstracts International, 1982 43, 68.
Thompson, G., & Knox, A.B. Designing for diversity: Are field dependent learners less suited to distance education programs of instruction? Contemporary Educational Psychology. 1987 12, 17 - 29.
Viens, J., & Kallenbach, S. MI grows up: Multiple intelligences in adult education sourcebook. Boston: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. 1995.
Witkin, H.A. Group Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto: CA. Consulting Psychologists Press. Cited in Irvine & York, 1971.
Witkin, H.A. & Goodenough, D.R. Field dependence and interpersonal behavior, (RB 76 - 12). Princeton: Educational Testing Service. 1976
Wiggins, G. (1992). Creating tests worth taking. Educational Leadership, 49, (8), p. 26 - 33.
Worthley, K.M. Evenson. Learning Style Factor of Field Dependence -Independence and Problem Solving Strategies of Hmong Refugee Students. 1999.
王初明 《应用心理语言学》[M].长沙:湖南教育出版社,1991.
徐希纬 “浅谈英语教学应与学生认知风格相匹配” [M] 《景德镇高专学报》 2001年第3期86-87页
姚旦墅 “场独立、场依赖与英语阅读能力的培养” 《煤炭高等教育》2002年第6期85-86页
李哲 “学习者认知风格的差异性与外语教学” 《外语教学》2000年第3期61-64页
彭飞 “重视学生认知风格差异—因材施教”《山东师范大学外国语学院学报》2003第1期61-65页
李广超 “学习风格与英语教学策略”《广东教育学院学报》2000年第5期91-104页