Cognitive style and learning: performance of adaptors and innovators in a novel dynamic task

Pounds, Julia; Bailey, Larry L. · 2001 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1002/acp.725

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates whether cognitive style, specifically the distinction between Adaptors and Innovators as defined by Kirton (1976), influences performance in a novel, dynamic task modeled on air traffic control. The research was motivated by the need to identify individual characteristics that predict success in complex joint systems involving human operators and technology. While previous studies examined personality traits like anxiety and conscientiousness, this study focused on cognitive style—the preferred manner of problem-solving—to determine if Adaptors, who prefer working within established structures, would outperform Innovators, who challenge rules and redefine problems, in a proceduralized environment. The researchers recruited 200 high school graduates, screening for basic computer skills and aviation experience. Participants completed the Kirton Adaptation-Innovation Inventory (KAI) to measure cognitive style, the Shipley Institute of Living Scale to measure cognitive capacity, and a survey assessing familiarity with computer games. The experimental task utilized the Controller Teamwork Evaluation and Assessment Methodology (CTEAM), a computer-based simulation of a four-sector radar environment. Participants worked in teams of four, managing aircraft transfers while adhering to strict separation and procedure rules. Performance was measured by the frequency of separation violations and procedure-following errors. The study design included three phases: a screening session to ensure basic competency, practice trials with increasing difficulty, and two experimental trials of 28 minutes each under randomized difficulty levels. Results indicated that cognitive style did not influence performance during the initial screening or practice phases. During screening, performance was significantly predicted by verbal and abstract reasoning skills and computer game familiarity, with both Adaptors and Innovators improving equally. Similarly, during practice, only abstract reasoning skills correlated with performance. However, during the experimental trials, cognitive style had a significant effect. An interaction between cognitive style and trial number revealed that Adaptors improved their performance from the first to the second trial, whereas Innovators’ performance declined. This suggests that while Innovators may possess an initial advantage in novel situations, they struggled to sustain performance over time in a rule-bound task, whereas Adaptors benefited more from practice and maintained their adherence to procedures. The findings support the hypothesis that cognitive style influences performance in structured, dynamic tasks, but only during sustained execution rather than initial learning. Adaptors were better suited to the procedural demands of the air traffic control simulation, improving with repetition, while Innovators failed to maintain their initial performance levels. The study concludes that while cognitive capacity and task familiarity drive initial learning, cognitive style becomes a critical factor for maintaining performance in complex, rule-based environments. These results have implications for personnel selection and training in aviation, suggesting that Adaptors may be more effective in roles requiring strict adherence to established protocols over extended periods. Future research is recommended to examine team-level performance and subjective workload differences between these cognitive styles.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• cognitive capacity variation