There is controversy over the exact meaning of the term "cognitive style" and whether it is a single or multiple dimension of human personality.
While matching cognitive styles may make participants feel more comfortable when working with one another, this alone cannot guarantee the success of the outcome.
Riding (1991) developed a two-dimensional cognitive style instrument, his Cognitive Style Analysis (CSA), which is a compiled computer-presented test that measures individuals' position on two orthogonal dimensions – Wholist-Analytic (W-A) and Verbal-Imagery (V-I).
The CSA test is broken down into three sub-tests, all of which are based on a comparison between response times to different types of stimulus items.
These instruments are designed to distinguish field-independent from field-dependent cognitive types; a rating which is claimed to be value-neutral.
However, they, too, are criticised by scholars as containing an element of ability and so may not measure cognitive style alone Liam Hudson (Carey, 1991) identified two cognitive styles: convergent thinkers, good at accumulating material from a variety of sources relevant to a problem's solution, and divergent thinkers who proceed more creatively and subjectively in their approach to problem-solving.
When confronted with an unfamiliar type of problem, holists gather information randomly within a framework, while serialists approach problem-solving step-wise, proceeding from the known to the unknown.
Certain scholars have questioned its construct validity on the grounds of theoretical and methodological approaches associated with its development.
While this may complicate some management and educational applications, previous investigations have suggested it is entirely plausible that cognitive style is related to these social factors.
As the items on the KAI are expressed in clear and simple language, cognitive level plays no significant role.
Bridging is also not leading, although the skilled leader may make use of persons they recognise as good bridgers to maintain group cohesion.
Kirton (2003) suggests that it is easier for a person to learn and assume a bridging role if their cognitive style is an intermediate one.