Volume 4, Issue 3 (September 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(3): 1-20 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Hasanimoghadam B, Hosseini Drankalaei Z, Hosseinzadeh B. (2025). Identifying the Dimensions and Components of Professors' Thinking Styles with a Psychological Approach in Universities. IJER. 4(3), 1-20.
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-171-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-171-en.html
1- Ph. D student of educational management, Department of educational management, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Department of educational management, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran ,s.zahra.hoseini61@gmail.com
3- Assistant Professor, Department of educational management, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Department of educational management, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran ,
3- Assistant Professor, Department of educational management, Babol Branch, Islamic Azad University, Babol, Iran
Abstract: (1058 Views)
Objective: This study aimed to identify and investigate the dimensions and components of professors' thinking styles with a psychological approach in the universities of Babol City in 2022.
Methods: This study was applied in terms of purpose and adopted a mixed method with an exploratory approach. The statistical population of the qualitative study consisted of experts in the field of education who were selected purposefully, and finally, due to the saturation method, 12 experts were selected as a sample. The research data collection tool in the qualitative phase was a semi-structured interview whereas, in the quantitative section, a researcher-made questionnaire was extracted from interviews. Data in the qualitative phase were analyzed using thematic analysis, and in the quantitative phase, confirmatory factor analysis, divergent, and convergent validity were used. The face, content, and construct validity of the instrument were confirmed. Their composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha were calculated above 0.70, which was approved.
Results: The study identified two dimensions of professors’ thinking styles: functional (analytical, creative, executive, realistic) and orientational (collaborative, critical, free-thinking, conservative). All dimensions and components were confirmed to influence professors’ thinking styles. Quantitative analysis showed that thinking style variables (structural and managerial) followed a normal distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov, p > 0.05), and the KMO & Bartlett test further validated the assumptions (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of understanding professors’ cognitive processes in teaching and research. Recognizing these styles can guide universities in designing targeted training and interventions to strengthen thinking skills and improve student learning outcomes.
Methods: This study was applied in terms of purpose and adopted a mixed method with an exploratory approach. The statistical population of the qualitative study consisted of experts in the field of education who were selected purposefully, and finally, due to the saturation method, 12 experts were selected as a sample. The research data collection tool in the qualitative phase was a semi-structured interview whereas, in the quantitative section, a researcher-made questionnaire was extracted from interviews. Data in the qualitative phase were analyzed using thematic analysis, and in the quantitative phase, confirmatory factor analysis, divergent, and convergent validity were used. The face, content, and construct validity of the instrument were confirmed. Their composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha were calculated above 0.70, which was approved.
Results: The study identified two dimensions of professors’ thinking styles: functional (analytical, creative, executive, realistic) and orientational (collaborative, critical, free-thinking, conservative). All dimensions and components were confirmed to influence professors’ thinking styles. Quantitative analysis showed that thinking style variables (structural and managerial) followed a normal distribution (Kolmogorov-Smirnov, p > 0.05), and the KMO & Bartlett test further validated the assumptions (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of understanding professors’ cognitive processes in teaching and research. Recognizing these styles can guide universities in designing targeted training and interventions to strengthen thinking skills and improve student learning outcomes.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2024/03/17 | Accepted: 2024/07/19 | Published: 2025/09/1
Received: 2024/03/17 | Accepted: 2024/07/19 | Published: 2025/09/1
References
1. Abuhamda, E., Ismail, I. A., & Bsharat, T. R. (2021). Understanding quantitative and qualitative research methods: A theoretical perspective for young researchers. International Journal of Research, 8(2), 71-87.
2. Akyurek, G., Efe, A., Kilic, B. G., & Bumin, G. (2018). The effect of cognitive therapy on executive functions and occupational routines in children with dyslexia. Archives of physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 99(10), e19. [DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2018.07.062]
3. Badamchi, S., & Yazdani, S. (2023). The Relationship between Sternberg Thinking Styles and Perfectionism with the Happiness of Female High School Students in Khoy City. Women and Family Studies, 60(16), 101-123. [DOI:10.30495/jwsf.2022.1942097.1626]
4. Behfar, Z., Mardanirad, M., & Rezazadeh, H. R. (2021). The Relationship Between Thinking Styles and Emotional Intelligence with Family Functioning in Married Women. Geography and Human Relationships, 4(2), 488-507.
5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
6. Chaudhary, P., & Singh, R. K. (2022). A meta analysis of factors affecting teaching and student learning in higher education. Frontiers in Education, [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2021.824504]
7. Grigorenko, E. L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1995). Thinking styles. In International handbook of personality and intelligence (pp. 205-229). Springer. [DOI:10.1007/978-1-4757-5571-8_11]
8. Hashemi, M., & Gholami, M. (2024). The Relationship between Thinking Styles and Decision-Making Styles with The Mediation of Problem Solving Employees of Startups [Research]. Cognitive Psychology Journal, 11(4), 89-104. [DOI:http://jcp.khu.ac.ir/article-1-3735-fa.html]
9. Hossinpanah, Z., & Kazemianmoghadam, K. (2021). The causal relationship between cultural intelligence and academic vitality with self-directed learning through academic procrastination. Psychological Achievements, 28(1), 177-196. [DOI:10.22055/psy.2021.33118.2527]
10. Keshtegar, A., & NastieZaie, N. (2021). The Effect of Ethical Leadership on Organizational Intentional Forgetting with the Mediating Role of Organizational Learning. Scientific Journal of Strategic Management of Organizational Knowledge, 3(4), 171-211. [DOI:10.47176/SMOK.2020.1237]
11. khademi, Y., & Rasoli, E. (2021). Investigating the Effect of Organizational Culture on Organizational Learning Ability with the Mediating Role of Knowledge Sharing Among Employees of the Ardabil Branch of Islamic Azad University. Organizational Culture Management, 19(1), 153-174. [DOI:10.22059/jomc.2020.301406.1008026]
12. Lauermann, F., & Berger, J.-L. (2021). Linking teacher self-efficacy and responsibility with teachers' self-reported and student-reported motivating styles and student engagement. Learning and Instruction, 76, 101441. [DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101441]
13. Messick, S. (2021). Structural relationships across cognition, personality, and style. In Aptitude, learning, and instruction (pp. 35-76). Routledge.
14. Mirshojaeiyan Hosseini, S. S., Nasseri, N., & Fariborzi, E. (2018). Relationship between thinking Styles and self-development with the Competency of Educational Managers in Primary School Managers of Tabadakan Area. Research on Educational Leadership and Management, 4(15), 5-5. [DOI:10.22054/jrlat.2019.42944.1462]
15. Mohammadi, S., Nadaf, M., & Roshan, S. (2020). The Impact of Emotional Intelligence and Cultural Intelligence on Resistance to Changing Employees with the Mediating Role of Psychological Capital. Social Psychology Research, 10(39), 140-119. [DOI:10.22034/spr.2020.195157.1238]
16. Narimani, M., & Sadeghzadeh Belil, N. (2024). Comparison of thinking styles and academic well-being in students with and without learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, -. [DOI:10.22098/jld.2024.14819.2159]
17. Piri, M., & Pourfarhadi, L. (2018). The Relationship between Thinking and Teaching Styles with Classroom Management (Case Study: Faculty Members of Urmia University). Higher Education Letter, 11(41), 89-111.
18. Shafiei Servestani, M., Jahani, J., Zare, A. A., & Mousavi poor, S. R. (2020). The role of different types of teachers' thinking styles in the effectiveness of classroom instruction from the perspectives of teachers and students: Case Study of elementary Schools in Shiraz. Journal of Educational Psychology Studies, 16(36), 73-96. [DOI:10.22111/jeps.2019.5147]
19. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human development, 31(4), 197-224. [DOI:10.1159/000275810]
20. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. Cambridge university press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511584152]
21. Thommen, D., Grob, U., Lauermann, F., Klassen, R. M., & Praetorius, A.-K. (2022). Different levels of context-specificity of teacher self-efficacy and their relations with teaching quality. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 857526. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.857526]
22. Zahra Najafzadeh, S. K. (2021). An Ethics and Performance-Based Model for Promoting Faculty Members'Social Responsibility: The Case of Islamic Azad Universities in Tehran. The Journal of Productivity Management, 57(15), 259-279. [DOI:10.30495/qjopm.2021.1867488.2448]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
