The Association of Personality Characteristics with Learning Strategy Preferences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe the association between the learning strategy preference of the learners as identified by Assessing The Learning Strategies of AdultS (ATLAS) and the individual personality traits as defined by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The sample was 553 adults in Canada and the United States. Two types of analyses were used to investigate the association between learning strategy preferences and personality traits. First, discriminant analysis explored the interaction of personality traits with the learning strategy preference. Second, analysis of variance measured the association of each personality trait with the learning-strategy-preference groups separately. The findings provided several explicit personality traits associated with each learning-strategy-preference group. These findings support the conclusion that a strong association exists between personality traits and learning-strategy-preference characteristics. Learning strategy preferences and personality traits complement each other. Each clarifies and enriches the other. As a result, teachers have two indicators that can help them personalize the teaching-learning environment for each student. Teachers can use the learning-strategy-group descriptions as guides for organizing each learner's instructional activities and plans and as a cognitive framework for uncovering and monitoring student behaviors and alerting teachers to potential learning difficulties for some students. Students can apply the descriptions of the learning-strategy-preference groups to facilitate self-assessment and metacognition. Theory can be enhanced by considering the two concepts of learning strategy preferences and personality traits coupled and by conducting quantitative and qualitative research to test and expand the generalizability of the learning-strategy-group descriptions. (Permission is granted to use Assessing The Learning Strategies of AdultS and the Personality Identity Estimator in practice and research. Links to printable copies and online completion are appended.)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".