AllportG. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation.New York: Holt.
2.
AltunA. (2003). Ögretmen Adaylarının Bilışsel Stilleri ile Bilgisayara Yönelik Tutumları Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi [Relationship between teacher trainees’ attitudes toward computers and their cognitive styles]. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), Article 9.
3.
AtaiziM. (1999). Bilgisayar Destekli Durumlu Öğrenmede Bilişsel Biçim ve İçeriğin Geçerlik Düzeyinin Sorun Çözme Becerilerinin Gelişimine Etkisi [The effects of cognitive style and authenticity level on development of problem solving skills during computer-based situated learning]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Anatolian University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
4.
ÇıkrıkçıN. (1990). Olumsuz Beklenti ve Bilişsel Tarzın Zihinsel Performansa Etkisi [The effect of intellectual performance of negative expectation and cognitive style]. Ankara, Turkey: Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
5.
CioniniL., SmithP., MagaroP. A., & VelecognaF. (1979). Relationship between sex, age, education, and field dependence: A cross-cultural comparison. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 49(3), 581–582.
6.
DasJ. P. (1988). Simultaneous and successive processing and planning. In SchmeckR. (Ed.), Learning styles and learning strategies (pp. 101–129). New York: Plenum.
7.
DikdereM. (1999). İngilizce'yi Yabancı Dil Olarak Öğrenen Türk Öğrencilerinin Bilişsel Stillerinin (Alan Bağımlı, Alan Bağımsız) Sözcük Düzleminde Kullandıkları İletişim Stratejilerinin Çeşidi ve Sayısına Etkisi [A study on the communication strategies used by field dependent and independent Turkish EFL learners to express lexical meaning]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Anatolian University, Eskişehir, Turkey.
8.
EntwistleN. J. (1981). Styles of teaching and learning: An integrated outline of educational psychology for student, teachers, and lecturers.Chichester, England, United Kingdom: Wiley.
HallJ. K. (2000). Field dependence-independence and computer-based instruction in geography. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg.
HuJ. (1998). The relationship between hypermedia features and the learning styles/cognitive control of hypermedia developers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, West Virginia University, Morganstown. Retrieved September 2, 2006, from www.etd.wvu.edu/templates/showETD.cfm?recnum=691
13.
KaganJ., & MessickF. (1976). Group Embedded Figures Test: Normative data for male automotive mechanical apprentice tradesman. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 60, 803–806.
14.
McKennaF. P. (1984). Measures of field dependence: Cognitive style or cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47(3), 593–603.
15.
MessickS. (1976). Individuality in learning: Implication of cognitive styles and creativity for human development.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
MillerG. (1995). Learning styles of agricultural distance learners. Paper presented at the 22nd National Agricultural Education Research Meeting, Denver, CO.
17.
MorganH. (1997). Cognitive styles and classroom learning.Westport, CT: Praeger.
18.
SarachoO. N. (1988). Cognitive styles and young children's learning. Early Child Development and Care, 30, 1–4.
19.
WitkinH. A., & GoodenoughD. R. (1981). Field dependent-independent. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(5).
20.
WitkinH. A., MooreC. A., GoodenoughD. R., & CoxP. W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Reviews of Educational Research, 47, 1–64.
21.
WitkinH. A., OltmanP. K., RaskinE., & KarpS. A. (1971). A manual for the group embedded figures test.Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.