Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Psychology of Asian Learners pp 189–201Cite as

The Predictive Power of Psychological Types for Learning Approaches Among Chinese University Students

  • Chapter

  • 2245 Accesses

Abstract

Scant research investigated the relationships between learning approaches and personality traits in the Chinese educational contexts. Therefore, the present study investigated the relationship between the Big Four model of personality types (or in other words, psychological types) and learning approaches among Chinese university students. The participants were 217 students from a university in China. Psychological types and learning approaches were assessed by surveys. The results showed that deep learning approach positively related to sensing-intuition and negatively related to extraversion-introversion and thinking-feeling. Surface learning approach positively related to judgement-perception. Psychological types accounted for approximately 11 percent of the variance in deep learning approach and around 10 percent of the variance in surface learning approach, after controlling for gender and year of study. Moreover, learning approaches were related to gender, year of study, and parents’ education levels. The influence of sociocultural contexts on students’ learning approaches and practical implications for education were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Biggs, J. B. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (2001). Enhancing learning: A matter of style of approach? In L. F. Zhang & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 73–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ- 2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busato, V. V., Prins, F. J., Elshout, J. J., & Hamaker, C. (1998). Learning styles: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study in higher education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(3), 427–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2008). Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(7), 1596–1603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Mainly openness: The relationship between the Big Five personality traits and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19(4), 524–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Lewis, M. (2007). Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(3), 241–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO FFI): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duff, A., Boyle, E., Dunleavy, K., & Ferguson, J. (2004). The relationship between personality, approach to learning and academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(8), 1907–1920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A. (2011). Personality and approaches to learning. In T. Chamorro-Premuzic, S. von Stumm & A. Furnham (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences. Chichester, West Sussex/Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Christopher, A. N., Garwood, J., & Martin, G. (2007). Approaches to learning and the acquisition of general knowledge. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(6), 1563–1571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Dissou, G., Sloan, P., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2007). Personality and intelligence in business people: A study of two personality and two intelligence measures. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(1), 99–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Monsen, J., & Ahmetoglu, G. (2009). Typical intellectual engagement, Big Five personality traits, approaches to learning and cognitive ability predictors of academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 769–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furnham, A., Moutafi, J., & Crump, J. (2003). The relationship between the revised NEO-Personality Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Social Behavior and Personality, 31(6), 577–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jung, C. (1923). Psychological types. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (1998). The dimensionality of approaches to learning: An investigation with confirmatory factor analysis on the structure of the SPQ and LPQ. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(3), 395–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. (2005). Mind or virtue: Western and Chinese beliefs about learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14(4), 190–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1989). Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs Type Indicators from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality, 57(1), 17–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPeek, R. W., Urquhart, C., Breiner, J. F., Holland, D. F., & Cavalleri, D. (2011). The impact on student academic performance and attitudes of psychological type and its introduction to the classroom. Journal of Psychological Type, 71(3), 54–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myers, I. B., & McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2012). A sociocultural perspective of learning: Developing a new theoretical tenet. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education, University of Sydney, Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P. (2011). Deep processing strategies and critical thinking: Developmental trajectories using latent growth analyses. The Journal of Educational Research, 104(4), 283–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, H. P., & Deo, B. (2008). ‘Revisiting’ the South Pacific approaches to learning: a confirmatory factor analysis study. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(4), 371–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler-Smith, E. (1996). Approaches to studying: Age, gender and academic performance. Educational Studies, 22(3), 367–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadler-Smith, E., & Tsang, F. (1998). A comparative study of approaches to studying in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(1), 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Severiens, S., & Ten Dam, G. (1997). Gender and gender identity differences in learning styles. Educational Psychology, 17(1–2), 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: The influence of the learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22(3), 251–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Stumm, S., & Furnham, A. (2012). Learning approaches: Associations with typical intellectual engagement, intelligence and the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(5), 720–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. (1998). Assessing approaches to learning: A cross-cultural perspective. In B. Dart & G. Boulton-Lewis (Eds.), Teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 124–144). Melbourne, Australia: Australia Council for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D. (2001). Correlates of approaches to learning: A cross-cultural meta-analysis. In L. F. Zhang & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 165–195). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, D., & Hattie, J. (1981). The learning processes of Australian university students: Investigations of contextual and personological factors. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(3), 384–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Q. (2013a). Gender and age differences in intellectual styles. Research Studies in Education, 11, 240–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Q. (2013b). Intellectual styles: Their malleability, their associations, and their relationships between ability and personality traits. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Q. (2014). Validating the revised two-factor study process questionnaire among Chinese university students. The International Journal of Educational and Psychological Assessment, 16(2), 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Q. (2015). Intellectual styles: Their associations and their relationships to ability and personality. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 14(1), 63-76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, Q., & Zhang, L. F. (2014). Demographic factors, personality and ability as predictors of learning approaches. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, doi: 10.1007/s40299-014-0202-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. F. (2000). University students’ learning approaches in three cultures: An investigation of Biggs’s 3P model. The Journal of Psychology, 134(1), 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, L. F. (2003). Does the big five predict learning approaches? Personality and Individual Differences, 34(8), 1431–1446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China

    Qiuzhi Xie

  2. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong, China

    Qiuzhi Xie

Authors
  1. Qiuzhi Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qiuzhi Xie .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Curriculum and Instruction, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Ronnel B. King

  2. Department of Psychology Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macau SAR, China

    Allan B. I. Bernardo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer Science+Business Media Singapore

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Xie, Q. (2016). The Predictive Power of Psychological Types for Learning Approaches Among Chinese University Students. In: King, R., Bernardo, A. (eds) The Psychology of Asian Learners. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-576-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-576-1_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-287-575-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-287-576-1

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation