{"id":{"repo_id":"vt","oai_identifier":"oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/28239"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/vt/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/28239","repository":{"repo_id":"vt","name":"Virginia Tech","base_url":"https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/oai/request"},"display":{"title":"A comparative study of information processing capacity and cognitive style in learning disabled and normally achieving boys: a Neo-Piagetian approach","abstract":"This study investigated the relevance of a Neo-Piagetian theory of cognitive development in examining the competence/performance discrepancy associated with children who have specific learning disabilities. According to Neo-Piagetian theory (Pascual-Leone, 1970), a cognitive device called the M-operator is responsible for the integration of schemes necessary to solve developmental tasks. The M-capacity available to children increases in an all or none fashion according to a linear scale which corresponds to the Piagetian substages of cognitive development. A moderator variable which is conceptualized as the cognitive style field-independence-dependence may determine whether a child demonstrates his modal M-capacity on a task which demands the application of maximum M-space. A matched pairs design was applied in order to compare the performance of 25 learning disabled and 25 normally achieving boys ages 8.5 to 10.0 years on measures of M-capacity, field-independence, and level of operative thinking. It was hypothesized that the learning disabled boys would demonstrate M-capacities comparable to the normally achieving boys, but would be more field dependent, thereby manifesting a discrepancy between their structural and functional M-capacities on Piagetian tasks. Comparisons of group differences on two criterion measures of M-capacity, two measures of field independence (the Children's Embedded Figures Test and WISC-R Block Design Subtest), and seven classical Piagetian tasks which included measures of conservation, seriation, and classification abilities, yielded the following results: 1. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower M-space estimates than the normally achieving group; 2. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower scores on the instruments used to assess level of field independence; 3. The learning disabled group failed more Piagetian tasks than the normally achieving group, therefore manifesting a delay in operative thinking. 4. The relationships between the two measures of M-space and the two measures of field-independence were markedly different for the two samples. The results indicated a lack of independence between M-capacity and a field dependent cognitive style in the LD group; no comparable relationship was found within the NA group. Further research applying Neo-Piagetian theory in order to investigate the inefficient processing strategies used by children with learning disabilities appears warranted. Testing interventions which restructure cognitive tasks by reducing memory load demands and/or allow LD children to develop and apply efficient task strategies is needed.","abstract_html":"This study investigated the relevance of a Neo-Piagetian theory of cognitive development in examining the competence/performance discrepancy associated with children who have specific learning disabilities. According to Neo-Piagetian theory (Pascual-Leone, 1970), a cognitive device called the M-operator is responsible for the integration of schemes necessary to solve developmental tasks. The M-capacity available to children increases in an all or none fashion according to a linear scale which corresponds to the Piagetian substages of cognitive development. A moderator variable which is conceptualized as the cognitive style field-independence-dependence may determine whether a child demonstrates his modal M-capacity on a task which demands the application of maximum M-space. A matched pairs design was applied in order to compare the performance of 25 learning disabled and 25 normally achieving boys ages 8.5 to 10.0 years on measures of M-capacity, field-independence, and level of operative thinking. It was hypothesized that the learning disabled boys would demonstrate M-capacities comparable to the normally achieving boys, but would be more field dependent, thereby manifesting a discrepancy between their structural and functional M-capacities on Piagetian tasks. Comparisons of group differences on two criterion measures of M-capacity, two measures of field independence (the Children's Embedded Figures Test and WISC-R Block Design Subtest), and seven classical Piagetian tasks which included measures of conservation, seriation, and classification abilities, yielded the following results: 1. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower M-space estimates than the normally achieving group; 2. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower scores on the instruments used to assess level of field independence; 3. The learning disabled group failed more Piagetian tasks than the normally achieving group, therefore manifesting a delay in operative thinking. 4. The relationships between the two measures of M-space and the two measures of field-independence were markedly different for the two samples. The results indicated a lack of independence between M-capacity and a field dependent cognitive style in the LD group; no comparable relationship was found within the NA group. Further research applying Neo-Piagetian theory in order to investigate the inefficient processing strategies used by children with learning disabilities appears warranted. Testing interventions which restructure cognitive tasks by reducing memory load demands and/or allow LD children to develop and apply efficient task strategies is needed.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Grimes, Therese Ehrgott"],"institution":"Virginia Tech","degree_name":"Doctor of Education","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":"Educational Supervision","degree_department":"Educational Supervision","school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":["Houck, Cherry K.","Cross, Lawrence H."],"committee_members":["Weber, Larry J.","Sabaroff, Rose","Fu, Victoria R."],"year":1981,"date_issued":"1981-03-05","date_published":"1981-03-05","updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:39Z","subjects":[],"languages":["en"],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"identifier_entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-07092010-020023"],"render_values":[{"text":"etd-07092010-020023","href":null,"code":true}]}]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://hdl.handle.net/10919/28239","outbound_label":"Handle","outbound_source":"dc:identifier.uri"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.committeechair","label":"Committee Chair","values":["Houck, Cherry K.","Cross, Lawrence H."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.committeemember","label":"Committee Member","values":["Weber, Larry J.","Sabaroff, Rose","Fu, Victoria R."]},{"key":"dc:contributor.department","label":"Department","values":["Educational Supervision"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Grimes, Therese Ehrgott"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.accessioned","label":"Dc Date Accessioned","values":["2014-03-14T20:13:49Z"]},{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2014-03-14T20:13:49Z","2010-07-09"]},{"key":"dc:date.issued","label":"Date","values":["1981-03-05"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["Virginia Tech"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"dc:type.dcmitype","label":"Dc Type Dcmitype","values":["Text"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Educational Supervision"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Education"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language.iso","label":"Language (ISO)","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]},{"key":"dc:rights.uri","label":"Rights URI","values":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier.other","label":"Dc Identifier Other","values":["etd-07092010-020023"]},{"key":"dc:identifier.uri","label":"Identifier URI","values":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/28239"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This study investigated the relevance of a Neo-Piagetian theory of cognitive development in examining the competence/performance discrepancy associated with children who have specific learning disabilities. According to Neo-Piagetian theory (Pascual-Leone, 1970), a cognitive device called the M-operator is responsible for the integration of schemes necessary to solve developmental tasks. The M-capacity available to children increases in an all or none fashion according to a linear scale which corresponds to the Piagetian substages of cognitive development. A moderator variable which is conceptualized as the cognitive style field-independence-dependence may determine whether a child demonstrates his modal M-capacity on a task which demands the application of maximum M-space. A matched pairs design was applied in order to compare the performance of 25 learning disabled and 25 normally achieving boys ages 8.5 to 10.0 years on measures of M-capacity, field-independence, and level of operative thinking. It was hypothesized that the learning disabled boys would demonstrate M-capacities comparable to the normally achieving boys, but would be more field dependent, thereby manifesting a discrepancy between their structural and functional M-capacities on Piagetian tasks. Comparisons of group differences on two criterion measures of M-capacity, two measures of field independence (the Children's Embedded Figures Test and WISC-R Block Design Subtest), and seven classical Piagetian tasks which included measures of conservation, seriation, and classification abilities, yielded the following results: 1. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower M-space estimates than the normally achieving group; 2. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower scores on the instruments used to assess level of field independence; 3. The learning disabled group failed more Piagetian tasks than the normally achieving group, therefore manifesting a delay in operative thinking. 4. The relationships between the two measures of M-space and the two measures of field-independence were markedly different for the two samples. The results indicated a lack of independence between M-capacity and a field dependent cognitive style in the LD group; no comparable relationship was found within the NA group. Further research applying Neo-Piagetian theory in order to investigate the inefficient processing strategies used by children with learning disabilities appears warranted. Testing interventions which restructure cognitive tasks by reducing memory load demands and/or allow LD children to develop and apply efficient task strategies is needed."]},{"key":"dc:description.degree","label":"Dc Description Degree","values":["Ed. D."]},{"key":"dc:format.medium","label":"Dc Format Medium","values":["BTD"]},{"key":"dc:format.mimetype","label":"Dc Format Mimetype","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A comparative study of information processing capacity and cognitive style in learning disabled and normally achieving boys: a Neo-Piagetian approach"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.committeechair":["Houck, Cherry K.","Cross, Lawrence H."],"dc:contributor.committeemember":["Weber, Larry J.","Sabaroff, Rose","Fu, Victoria R."],"dc:contributor.department":["Educational Supervision"],"dc:creator":["Grimes, Therese Ehrgott"],"dc:date.accessioned":["2014-03-14T20:13:49Z"],"dc:date.available":["2014-03-14T20:13:49Z","2010-07-09"],"dc:date.issued":["1981-03-05"],"dc:description.abstract":["This study investigated the relevance of a Neo-Piagetian theory of cognitive development in examining the competence/performance discrepancy associated with children who have specific learning disabilities. According to Neo-Piagetian theory (Pascual-Leone, 1970), a cognitive device called the M-operator is responsible for the integration of schemes necessary to solve developmental tasks. The M-capacity available to children increases in an all or none fashion according to a linear scale which corresponds to the Piagetian substages of cognitive development. A moderator variable which is conceptualized as the cognitive style field-independence-dependence may determine whether a child demonstrates his modal M-capacity on a task which demands the application of maximum M-space. A matched pairs design was applied in order to compare the performance of 25 learning disabled and 25 normally achieving boys ages 8.5 to 10.0 years on measures of M-capacity, field-independence, and level of operative thinking. It was hypothesized that the learning disabled boys would demonstrate M-capacities comparable to the normally achieving boys, but would be more field dependent, thereby manifesting a discrepancy between their structural and functional M-capacities on Piagetian tasks. Comparisons of group differences on two criterion measures of M-capacity, two measures of field independence (the Children's Embedded Figures Test and WISC-R Block Design Subtest), and seven classical Piagetian tasks which included measures of conservation, seriation, and classification abilities, yielded the following results: 1. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower M-space estimates than the normally achieving group; 2. The learning disabled group obtained significantly lower scores on the instruments used to assess level of field independence; 3. The learning disabled group failed more Piagetian tasks than the normally achieving group, therefore manifesting a delay in operative thinking. 4. The relationships between the two measures of M-space and the two measures of field-independence were markedly different for the two samples. The results indicated a lack of independence between M-capacity and a field dependent cognitive style in the LD group; no comparable relationship was found within the NA group. Further research applying Neo-Piagetian theory in order to investigate the inefficient processing strategies used by children with learning disabilities appears warranted. Testing interventions which restructure cognitive tasks by reducing memory load demands and/or allow LD children to develop and apply efficient task strategies is needed."],"dc:description.degree":["Ed. D."],"dc:format.medium":["BTD"],"dc:format.mimetype":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier.other":["etd-07092010-020023"],"dc:identifier.uri":["http://hdl.handle.net/10919/28239"],"dc:language.iso":["en"],"dc:publisher":["Virginia Tech"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:rights.uri":["http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/"],"dc:title":["A comparative study of information processing capacity and cognitive style in learning disabled and normally achieving boys: a Neo-Piagetian approach"],"dc:type":["Dissertation"],"dc:type.dcmitype":["Text"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Educational Supervision"],"thesis:degree_level":["doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Education"],"thesis:institution_name":["Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-22T22:19:39Z"}