Learning approaches: Associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five

Sophie von Stumm; Adrian F. Furnham

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014

Learning approaches: Associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five

Sophie von Stumm^*, Adrian F. Furnham

^*Corresponding author for this work

Education

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Learning approaches, i.e. students' learning strategies and motives, predict academic performance but it is not clear how much variance they share with intelligence and personality. Here, the relationship of the Big Five personality traits, intelligence, and Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) with deep, achieving and surface learning was explored in a sample of 579 British undergraduate students. A structural equation model showed that (a) intelligence was negligibly associated with learning approaches; (b) TIE was strongly related to all three types of learning approaches; (c) deep learning shared the greatest amount of variance with TIE, while (d) achieving learning was best explained by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness. Only 25% of the variance in surface learning was accounted for by intelligence and personality. Thus, personality traits and learning approaches share much variance but not enough to dismiss either construct as redundant.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	720-723
Number of pages	4
Journal	Personality and Individual Differences
Volume	53
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014
Publication status	Published - 1 Oct 2012

Keywords

Big Five
Intelligence
Learning approaches
Typical Intellectual Engagement

Access to Document

10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014

Cite this

@article{9c5a60a343c54749a72dc40f3e5ddbeb,

title = "Learning approaches: Associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five",

abstract = "Learning approaches, i.e. students' learning strategies and motives, predict academic performance but it is not clear how much variance they share with intelligence and personality. Here, the relationship of the Big Five personality traits, intelligence, and Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) with deep, achieving and surface learning was explored in a sample of 579 British undergraduate students. A structural equation model showed that (a) intelligence was negligibly associated with learning approaches; (b) TIE was strongly related to all three types of learning approaches; (c) deep learning shared the greatest amount of variance with TIE, while (d) achieving learning was best explained by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness. Only 25% of the variance in surface learning was accounted for by intelligence and personality. Thus, personality traits and learning approaches share much variance but not enough to dismiss either construct as redundant.",

keywords = "Big Five, Intelligence, Learning approaches, Typical Intellectual Engagement",

author = "{von Stumm}, Sophie and Furnham, {Adrian F.}",

year = "2012",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014",

language = "English",

volume = "53",

pages = "720--723",

journal = "Personality and Individual Differences",

issn = "0191-8869",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Learning approaches

T2 - Associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five

AU - von Stumm, Sophie

AU - Furnham, Adrian F.

PY - 2012/10/1

Y1 - 2012/10/1

N2 - Learning approaches, i.e. students' learning strategies and motives, predict academic performance but it is not clear how much variance they share with intelligence and personality. Here, the relationship of the Big Five personality traits, intelligence, and Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) with deep, achieving and surface learning was explored in a sample of 579 British undergraduate students. A structural equation model showed that (a) intelligence was negligibly associated with learning approaches; (b) TIE was strongly related to all three types of learning approaches; (c) deep learning shared the greatest amount of variance with TIE, while (d) achieving learning was best explained by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness. Only 25% of the variance in surface learning was accounted for by intelligence and personality. Thus, personality traits and learning approaches share much variance but not enough to dismiss either construct as redundant.

AB - Learning approaches, i.e. students' learning strategies and motives, predict academic performance but it is not clear how much variance they share with intelligence and personality. Here, the relationship of the Big Five personality traits, intelligence, and Typical Intellectual Engagement (TIE) with deep, achieving and surface learning was explored in a sample of 579 British undergraduate students. A structural equation model showed that (a) intelligence was negligibly associated with learning approaches; (b) TIE was strongly related to all three types of learning approaches; (c) deep learning shared the greatest amount of variance with TIE, while (d) achieving learning was best explained by Extraversion, Openness to Experience, and Conscientiousness. Only 25% of the variance in surface learning was accounted for by intelligence and personality. Thus, personality traits and learning approaches share much variance but not enough to dismiss either construct as redundant.

KW - Big Five

KW - Intelligence

KW - Learning approaches

KW - Typical Intellectual Engagement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84863779702&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014

DO - 10.1016/j.paid.2012.05.014

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84863779702

VL - 53

SP - 720

EP - 723

JO - Personality and Individual Differences

JF - Personality and Individual Differences

SN - 0191-8869

IS - 5

ER -

Learning approaches: Associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Cite this