A comparison of measures of preferred processing style: method or trait variance?

A comparison of measures of preferred processing style: method or trait variance?

[Abstract]: Paivio's (1971) 'dual code' theory proposes that there are two basic ways of encoding data. The first is a symbolic form, the second an imaginal or pictorial form. Individuals are said to differ in their preference for these basic encoding forms. A number of tests have been used to measure individual differences in preference. The aim of the present study was to check for agreement among three of these measures and to see whether or not processing preference was linked to spatial and verbal abilities. Richardson's (1977) Verbaliser-Visualiser Questionnaire, Aylwin's (1985) Modes of Thought Questionnaire, and Clark and Chase's (1972) sentence-verification task were used to assess processing preferences, and the Space Relations and Verbal Reasoning scales of the Differential Aptitude Battery (Bennett, Seashore, & Wesman, 1989) were used to assess spatial and verbal abilities. This battery was administered to 154 adults. The results indicated that there was little commonality among the measures of processing preference with method variance far outweighing trait variance in LISREL multitrait-multimethod analyses.
Relations with spatial and verbal ability measures were also quite weak. It is suggested that processing preferences are not captured adequately by any of these measures and that further effort be devoted to operationalising this construct. It is also suggested that a twocode model may not accurately describe the richness of the encoding process and that models such as Ahsen's (1984) Triple Code Model be considered as a basis for measuring
styles.