A Scoping Review of Different Ways of Thinking in Children

被引:0
作者
Arango, Elisa Jones [1 ]
Costello, Shane [1 ]
Grove, Christine [1 ]
机构
[1] Monash Univ, Fac Educ, 19 Ancora Imparo Way, Clayton, Vic 3800, Australia
来源
BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES | 2018年 / 8卷 / 12期
关键词
individual differences in thinking; children; scoping review;
D O I
10.3390/bs8120115
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Despite the growing interest in differences in thinking, much less is known about differences in how children think and how they come to think. The aim of this scoping review is to map out the key concepts underpinning the conceptual boundaries of children's (5-12 years of age) individual differences in thinking. The scoping review identified eight papers for analysis; all of which were set in an educational context. The findings presented inconclusive results regarding learning and thinking differences related to students' academic achievement. This review has identified two main drawbacks with this research area. Firstly, there is little consensus between the models employed to understand the different ways children think. To further place these findings into context we look at conceptualisations of individual differences, where individuality is considered a process of stable characteristics interacting with more dynamic structures. This analysis highlights the second drawback, previous research has solely focused on exploring thinking characteristics that are not stable and are therefore subject to change depending on the context. The review found that there is little to no research which explores thinking preferences in children that are consistent across contexts and time. Moreover, there was no research identified that explored the impact of differences in thinking outside the educational domain, such as children's wellbeing. Further research is required to identify the more stable characteristics that reflect and capture children's different ways of thinking.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 68 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1983, ORGANITATION LEARNIN
  • [2] Arksey H, 2005, INT J SOC RES METHOD, V8, P19, DOI [10.1080/1364557032000119616, DOI 10.1080/1364557032000119616]
  • [3] Individual differences in cognitive style and their effects on task and social orientations of self-managed work teams
    Armstrong, SJ
    Priola, V
    [J]. SMALL GROUP RESEARCH, 2001, 32 (03) : 283 - 312
  • [4] Baltaci S., 2016, J ED LEARN, V5, P78, DOI [10.5539/jel.v5n4p78, DOI 10.5539/JEL.V5N4P78]
  • [5] Beck JS., 2011, COGNITIVE THERAPY AN, V2
  • [6] Berger K.S., 2015, DEV PERSON CHILDHOOD
  • [7] COMMON FACTORS IN 5 MEASURES OF COGNITIVE-STYLE
    BOKOROS, MA
    GOLDSTEIN, MB
    SWEENEY, MM
    [J]. CURRENT PSYCHOLOGY-RESEARCH & REVIEWS, 1992, 11 (02): : 99 - 109
  • [8] Bostrom L., 2012, INT ED STUDIES, V5, P11, DOI DOI 10.5539/IES.V5N6P11
  • [9] MYERS-BRIGGS TYPE INDICATOR (MBTI) - SOME PSYCHOMETRIC LIMITATIONS
    BOYLE, GJ
    [J]. AUSTRALIAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 1995, 30 (01) : 71 - 74
  • [10] Developmental Pathways Linking Childhood Temperament With Antisocial Behavior and Substance Use in Adolescence: Explanatory Mechanisms in the Peer Environment
    Buil, J. Marieke
    van Lier, Pol A. C.
    Brendgen, Mara R.
    Koot, Hans M.
    Vitaro, Frank
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2017, 112 (06) : 948 - 966