The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes
Abstract
Five studies are presented—all related to the de velopment and application of a self-report inventory for measuring individual differences in learning processes. Factor analysis of items derived by trans lating laboratory learning processes into the context of academic study yielded four scales: Synthesis- Analysis, Study Methods, Fact Retention, and Elab orative Processing. There were no sex differences, and the scales demonstrated acceptable reliabilities. The Synthesis-Analysis and Elaborative Processing scales both assess aspects of information processing (including depth of processing), but Synthesis- Analysis assesses organizational processes, while Elaborative Processing deals with active, elaborative approaches to encoding. These two scales were positively related to performance under incidental learning instructions in both a lecture-learning and traditional verbal-learning study. Study Methods assessed adherence to systematic, traditional study techniques. This scale was positively related to per formance in the intentional condition of the verbal learning study. The Fact Retention scale assessed the propensity to retain detailed, factual informa tion. It was positively related to performance in the incidental condition of the verbal-learning but not the lecture-learning study. Future research and ap plications are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors
Cattell, R. B. (1966) · Multivariate Behavioral Research · doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10 · Cited by 13,554
The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation in Factor Analysis
Kaiser, H. F. (1958) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02289233 · Cited by 7,580
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain
Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1966) · Cited by 4,616
Paivio, A. (2013) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315798868 · Cited by 4,142
Depth of Processing and the Retention of Words in Episodic Memory
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 · Cited by 4,121
Mezei, A., & Paivio, A. (1972) · Leonardo · doi:10.2307/1572599 · Cited by 3,246
Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., & Madigan, S. A. (1968) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0025327 · Cited by 2,827
The two disciplines of scientific psychology.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0043943 · Cited by 2,523
Coding Processes in Human Memory
Peterson, L. R., Melton, A. W., & Martin, E. (1973) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421959 · Cited by 1,619
Battig, W. F., Tulving, E., & Donaldson, W. (1973) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421962 · Cited by 1,412
Cited by
Reporting Structural Equation Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results: A Review
Schreiber, J. B., Nora, A., Stage, F. K., Barlow, E. A., & King, J. (2006) · The Journal of Educational Research · doi:10.3200/joer.99.6.323-338 · Cited by 6,937
Dual coding theory and education
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/bf01320076 · Cited by 2,108
Cognitive Styles—an overview and integration
Riding, R., & Cheema, I. (1991) · Educational Psychology · doi:10.1080/0144341910110301 · Cited by 1,181
Study Habits, Skills, and Attitudes: The Third Pillar Supporting Collegiate Academic Performance
Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00089.x · Cited by 780
Methodological issues in questionnaire-based research on student learning in higher education.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2004) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0004-z · Cited by 154
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmeck, R. R., Ribich, F., & Ramanaiah, N.
- Venue
- Applied Psychological Measurement
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1977-06
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 413-431
- ISSN
- 0146-6216 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3497
- OpenAlex
- W1976394757
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 4.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/014662167700100310
- The paper
- Schmeck, R. R., Ribich, F., & Ramanaiah, N. (1977). Development of a Self-Report Inventory for Assessing Individual Differences in Learning Processes. Applied Psychological Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167700100310
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.