Psicothema 2007. Vol. 19, no 4, pp. 572-577
Authors: M. Adelina Guisande, M. Fernanda Páramo, Carolina Tinajero and Leandro S. Almeida
Main point:
Experiment (n=149, boys and girls almost evenly, mean age 9.53 y). With the effect of intelligence controlled, FI children showed better performance than FD children on the verbal working memory, complex attention and sustained attention/vigilance tasks.
Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1999, 88, 236-239
Authors: Juan Antonio Amador-Campos, Teresa Kirchner-Nebot
Main point:
Experiment (n=179 boys, 110 girls, mean age 9.0 y). Authors found significant correlation (0.3, p<0.1) between FD/I and sustained attention (measured by Zazzo task) but no correlation was found in the case of Bourdon task. The latter is also a tool for measuring sustained attention.
My comment: There were other tests that correlated with FD/I but I was mainly interested in attention. Author argue that FD/I is commonly associated with attentional process.
Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 25, Issue 6, November 2009, Pages 1355–1366
Authors: Charoula Angeli, Nicos Valanides, Paul Kirschner
Main point:
Experiment (n=101 teachers). Two groups: information presented in split-format and in integrated-format. Authors found interaction between type of instructional materials and FD/I in terms of students’ problem-solving performance, while the interaction effects between type of instructional materials and students’ FD/I in terms of students’ cognitive load and time spent on task were not. It means that the cognitive load and split-attention effect are equal to everybody, regardless to the FD/I
My thoughts: It seems to be OK to measure cognitive load with self reports since there is no better tool so far. Field independent learners always do better. How about the attention? It may be that although FI and FD use the same time for completing a task, the quality of the time is not the same. FD’s attention may be disturbed.