This study seeks to investigate the effect of diversity in cognitive styles (deep-level variable) and gender and age (surface-level variables) in small teams (dyads), on satisfaction with the team and performance. A multisource study was conducted using 318 business school students, who were tested during a two-month, in-company project. Variables were measured at different time intervals, and performance was rated by an academic jury. Dyadic relationships proved to depend on the specific cognitive styles used — providing evidence for the complexity and multidimensionality of the concept. More specifically, diversity in knowing style led to less satisfaction, while diversity in planning style led to more satisfaction, and diversity in creating style had no effect. Satisfaction with the team in turn was positively linked to the performance of the team. Neither age diversity nor gender diversity had an effect on team satisfaction or performance.

Given the lack of insights into the micro-determinants of strategic planning (SP) in public organizations, this study uses information-processing theory and self-efficacy theory to investigate individual-level predictors of commitment to strategic plans among planning team members (PTMs). Specifically, we investigate whether plan commitment is contingent upon the fit between PTMs' preferred way of information-processing (i.e. their cognitive style) and the information-processing characteristics underlying SP processes in public organizations. Based on data gathered with 439 PTMs from 203 Flemish municipalities, we find that PTMs with a creating and planning style are committed to strategic plans because they deem SP useful.

This study provides insights and recommendations concerning methodological practices of cognitive style research applied to the field of business and psychology. Based on a carefully designed selection process, 139 style-related articles published between 1986 and 2010 were content-analysed. In terms of research design, we found the field to be dominated by quantitative, cross-sectional, and single-source designs that relied heavily on self-reports, sample surveys, and student samples. While this might indicate a potential vulnerability in terms of internal and external validity, a strong emphasis on construct validity was also found, exemplified by high attention to reliability, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. With regard to construct measurement, although more than 30 different instruments were used, the field was dominated by three of these. Regarding data analysis, traditional approaches have been mainly used and more advanced and novel approaches have not yet permeated through the cognitive style field. Implications and suggestions for future research are offered. This is the first review of methodological practices in cognitive style research and represents an important step in the advancement of the field.

This study aims to clarify whether and how various configurations of three cognitive style dimensions (creating, knowing, and planning) emerge among graduate business students, with differential impacts on their learning approaches. With a person-centered, latent transition analysis of cognitive styles, the authors identify several distinct cognitive style profiles: a moderate cognitive style profile, a dominant creating and knowing style profile, a dominant creating and low planning style profile, and a dominant planning and low creating style profile. The analysis also offers evidence of the trait-like character of these cognitive style profiles, by demonstrating their temporal stability. Furthermore, significant differences arise across profiles in terms of how they relate to different learning approaches (strategic, deep, and surface learning).