A pesar de que la dependencia-independenciade campo se concibió inicialmente como una dimensión carente de connotaciones valorativas y, por lo tanto, no equiparable a la inteligencia y/o al nivel de desarrollo, pronto fue cuestionado este supuesto, generándose un amplio debate que permanece abierto en nuestros días. El enfoque evolutivo ha contribuido de manera importante al debate con datos e interpretaciones teóricas. En el presente trabajo se extracta y comenta dicha contribución: se retoman lospuntos de coincidencia entre el estilo cognitivo y el modelo psicogenético de Piaget, se revisa la evidencia empírica disponible en torno a la relación entre los índices de dependencia-independenciade campo y las pruebas de desarrollo operatorio, así como las interpretaciones teóricas que se han venido efectuando al hilo de la misma. Finalmente se aborda el constructo de movilidad-fijezay se comenta su convergencia con el nivel de desarrollo.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BrodzinskyD.M. (1985). On the relationship between cognitive styles and cognitive structures. En NeimarkE.D.De LisiR.NewmanJ.L. (Eds.), Moderators of competence (pp. 147–174). Hillsdale, Nueva Jersey: Erlbaum.
2.
CarreteroM. (1980). Desarrollo intelectual durante la adolescencia: competencia, actuación y diferencias individuales.Infancia y Aprendizaje, 12, 81–98.
3.
CarreteroM. (1982). El desarrollo del estilo cognitivo dependencia-independencia de campo.Infancia y Aprendizaje, 18, 65–82.
4.
CollingsJN. (1985). Scientific thinking through the development of formal operations: training in the cognitive restructuring aspects of field independence.Research in Science and Technological Education, 3, 145–152.
5.
CorralA. (1982). La influencia del estilo cognitivo dependencia-independencia de campo en la resolución de dos problemasde física.Infancia y Aprendizaje, 18, 107–123.
6.
CunninghamD.M.RidleyS.E.CampbellA. (1988). Performance of field-independent and dependent college students, and their «fixed» and «mobile» subtypes, on two formats of a cognitive task.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 66, 311–317.
7.
DavisJ.K.CochranK.F. (1990). An information processing view of field dependence-independence. En SarachoO.N. (Ed.), Cognitive style and early education (pp. 61–78). Nueva York: Gordon and Breach Science.
8.
De RibaupierreA. (1983). Un modele neo-piagetien du development: La theorie des operateurs constructifs de Pascual-Leone.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 3, 327–356.
9.
De RibaupierreA. (1989). Cognitive style and operational development: A review of french literature and a neopiagetian reinterpretation. En GlobersonT.ZelnikerT. (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp. 86–115). Norwood: Ablex.
10.
Dor ShavZ.PelegR. (1989). Mobile field-independence and rating as «good teacher».Educational Psychology, 9, 149–163.
11.
EisnerD.A. (1972). Developmental relationships between field independence and fixity-mobility.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 34, 767–770.
12.
FlexerB.K.RobergeJ. (1980). IQ, field dependence-independence, and the development of formal operational thought.The Journal of General Psychology, 103, 191–201.
13.
FlexerB.K.RobergeJ.J. (1983). A longitudinal investigation of field dependence-independence and the development of formal operational thought.British Journal of Educational Psychology, 53, 195–204.
14.
GlobersonT. (1983a). Mental capacity and cognitive functioning: Developmental and social class differences.Developmental Psychology, 19, 225–230.
GlobersonT. (1985). Field-dependence/independence and mental capacity.Developmental Review, 5, 261–273.
17.
GlobersonT. (1987). Confusing developmental and individual differences: A reply to Anderson.Developmental Review, 7, 142–144.
18.
GlobersonT. (1989). What is the relationship between cognitive style and cognitive development. En GlobersonT.ZelnikerT. (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp. 71–85). Norwood: Ablex.
19.
GlobersonT.WeinsteinE.SharabanyR. (1985). Teasing out cognitive developent from cognitive style: A training study.Developmental Psychology, 21, 682–691.
20.
GoodenoughD.R. (1976). The role of individual differences in field dependence as factor in learning and memory.Psychological Bulletin, 83, 75–694.
21.
HanssonS.B.RydenO.O.JohnssonP. (1986). Field dependence/independence ability in relation to mobility-fixity.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 63, 279–293.
22.
HicksL.A.LindgrewH.C. (1985). Field dependence and ability to judge spatial coordinates.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 984–986.
23.
HillD. (1980). Relation of field independence to development of conservation.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 50, 1247–1250
24.
HuteauM. (1980). Dépendance-indépendance a l'égard du champ et development de la pensee operatoire.Archives de Psychologie, 48, 1–40.
25.
HuteauM. (1987). Style cognitif et personalité. La dépendance-indépendance du champ.Lille: Presses Universitaires.
26.
KalyanmasihV.CurryE. (1987). Cognitive performance and cognitive style of young children.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 571–579.
27.
KepnerM.D.NeimarkE.D. (1984). Test-retest reliability and differential patterns of score change on the group embedded figures test.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1405–1413.
28.
LinnM.C. (1978). Influence of cognitive style and training on tasks requiring the separation of variables schema.Child Development, 49, 874–877.
29.
López-rupérezF.PalaciosC.SánchezJ. (1991). Relation of field independence and test-item format to student performance on written piagetian tests.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 389–400.
30.
MarendazC. (1984). Dépendance-indépendance a l'égard du champ, activities opératoires et sénescence.L'AnnéePsycho- logique, 84, 185–205.
31.
MckennaF.P. (1984). Measures of field dependence: Cognitive style or cognitive ability.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 593–603.
32.
MckennaF.P. (1990). Learning implications of field dependence-independence: Cognitive style versus cognitive ability.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 425–438.
33.
MoránA.P. (1985). Unresolved issues in research of field dependence-independence.Social Behavior and Personality, 13, 119–125.
34.
NeimarkE.D. (1975). Longitudinal development of formal operations thought.Genetic Psychological Monographs, 91, 171–225
35.
NeimarkE.D. (1981). Confounding with cognitive style factors: An artifact explanation for the apparent nonuniversal incidence of formal operations. En SigelI.BrodzinskyD.M.GolinkoffR. (Eds.), New directions in piagetian theory and practice (pp. 177–189). Hillsdale, Nueva Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
36.
NiazM. (1987). Mobility-fixity dimension in Witkin's theory of dield dependence/independence and its implications for problem solving in science.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 65, 755–764.
37.
NiazM. (1989a). A neo-piagetian interpretation of the mobility-fixity dimension.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 68, 1315–1319
38.
NiazM. (1989b). The role of cognitive style and its influence on proportional reasoning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 221–235.
39.
NiazM. (1991). Correlates of formal operational reasoning: A neopiagetian analysis.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 19–40.
40.
NiazM.De NunezG.S. (1992). The relationship of mobility-fixity to creativity formal reasoning and intelligence.Journal of Creative Behavior, 25, 205–217.
41.
OhlmannT.BejeanM.BouscarelM.CianC.DubourdeauG.MourierG.MuzetE.VerchereM. (1985). Postural or euclidean horizontals and verticals?Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 5, 707–726.
42.
OhlmannT.MendenlsohnP.L. (1982). Variabilité intra-individuelle des activités opératoires et dépendance-indepéndance a l'égard du champ.L'Année Psychologique, 82, 131–154.
43.
PáramoM.F. (1992). Proyecto Docente. Universidad de Santiago de Compostela.
44.
Pascual LeoneJ. (1969). Cognitive development and cognitive style: A general psyhcological integration. Tesis doctoral no publicada. Universidad de Ginebra.
45.
Pascual LeoneJ. (1974). A neo-piagetian process structural model of Witkin's psychological differentiation. En Witkin (Ed.), Actas del Second International Conference of International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology (pp. 6–10). Kingstone, Ontario, Canadá.
46.
PascualleoneJ. (1989). An organismic model of Witkin's field dependence-independence. En GlobersonT.ZelnikerT. (Eds.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp.36–70). Norwood: Ablex.
47.
PiagetJ. (1967). Psicología de la inteligencia.Buenos Aires: Psiqué. (Orig. 1947).
48.
RubinsteinR.A. (1980). Field-dependence and piagetian operational though in nothern Beliza.Child Study Journal, 10, 67–76.
49.
StrawitzB.M. (1984a). Cognitive style and the acquisition and transfer of the ability to control variables.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 133–141.
50.
StrawitzB.M. (1984b). Cognitive style and the effects of two instructional treatments on the acquisition and transfer of the ability to control variables: A longitudinal study.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 833–841.
51.
SwyterL.J.MichaelW.B. (1982). The interrelationships of four measures hypothesized to represent the field dependence-field independence construct.Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 877–888.
52.
TourretteG. (1990). Souplesse-inertie mentale et jugement de sens.Revue Canadiensie de Psychologie, 44, 30–43.
53.
WapnerS. (1991). Some relations between field dependence-independence and holistic, developmental systems-oriented. En WapnerS.DemickJ. (Eds.), Field dependence-independence: Cognitive style across life span (pp. 353–383). Nueva Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
54.
WernerH. (1957). The concept of development from a comparative and organismic point of view. En HarrisD.B. (Ed.), The concept of development: An issue in the study of human behavior (pp. 125–148). Minneapolis: Universidad de Minnesota.
55.
WidigerT-A.KnudsonR.M.RorerL.G. (1980). Convergent and discriminant validity of measures of cognitive styles.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 116–129.
56.
WitkinH.A. (1965). Psychological differentiation and forms of pathology.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 70, 317–336.
57.
WitkinH.A.AschS.E. (1948a). Studies in space orientation. III. Perception of the upright in the absence of visual field.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 603–614.
58.
WitkinH.A.AschS.E. (1948b). Studies in space orientation. IV. Further experiments on perception of the up-right with displaced visual fields.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 762–782.
WitkinH.A.GoodenoughD.R.KarpS.A. (1967). Stability of cognitive style from childhood to young adulthood.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7, 291–300.
WitkinH.A.OltmanP.K.RaskinE.KarpS.A (1971). A manual for the embedded figures tests.Palo Alto, California: Consulting Psychologist Press.
63.
ZelnikerT. (1989). Cognitive style and dimensions of information processing. En GlobersonT.ZelnikerT. (Ed.), Cognitive style and cognitive development (pp. 172–191). Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
