Learning Style and Attitude toward Computer among Iranian Medical Students

  • Seyedeh Shohreh Alavi Center for Research on Occupational Diseases, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  • Jalil Makarem Imam Khomeini Medical Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background and purpose: Presently, the method of medical teaching has shifted from lecture-based to computer-based. The learning style may play a key role in the attitude toward learning computer. The goal of this study was to study the relationship between the learning style and attitude toward computer among Iranian medical students.
Methods: This cross-sectional study included 400 medical students. Barsch learning style inventory and a questionnaire on the attitude toward computer was sent to each student. The enthusiasm, anxiety, and overall attitude toward computer were compared among the different learning styles.
Results: The response rate to the questionnaire was 91.8%. The distribution of learning styles in the students was 181 (49.3%) visual, 106 (28.9%) auditory, 27 (7.4%) tactual, and 53 (14.4%) overall. Visual learners were less anxious for computer use and showed more positive attitude toward computer. Sex, age, and academic grade were not associated with students’ attitude toward computer.
Conclusions: The learning style is an important factor in the students’ attitude toward computer among medical students, which should be considered in planning computer-based learning programs.


McNulty JA, Espiritu B, Halsey M, MendezM. Personality preference influences medical student use of specific computer-aided instruction (CAI). BMC Medical Education. 2006;6:7.

Svirko E, Mellanby J. Attitudes to e-learning,learning style and achievement in learning neuroanatomy by medical students. Medical Teacher. 2008;30:219-27.

Heinssen RK, Glass CR, Knight LA.Assessing computer anxiety: development and

validation of computer anxiety relating scale. Computers in Human Behavior. 1987;3:49-59.

Regan DT, Fazio R. On the consistencybetween attitude and behavior: look to the method of attitude formation. Journal of Experimental and Social psychology. 1997;13:28-45.

Czaja JS, Sharit J. Age differences in attitudestoward computers. The Journal of Gerontology. 1998; 329-39.

Simpson C, Du Y. Effects of learning stylesand class participation on students’ enjoyment level in distributed learning environments. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science. 2004;45(2):123-36.

Jolly BC, Jones A, Dacre JE, Elzubeir M,Kopelman P, Hitman G. Relationship between students' clinical experiences in introductory clinical courses and their performances on an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Academic Medicine. 1996;71:909-16.

Peer IS, Johnston M. Influence of learningcontext on the relationship between A-level attainment and final degree performance: a meta-analytic review. The British Journal of Educational Psychology. 1994;6:1-17.

Fink ML. Rethinking faculty support services.Syllabus: New Direction in Education Technology. 2002;15(7):27-9.

Fritz M. Using learning styles inventories topromote active learning. Journal of College Reading and Learning. 2002;32(2):183.

Orr C, Allen D, Poindexter S. The effect ofindividual differences on computer attitudes: An empirical study. Journal of End User Computing. 2001;13(2):26-39.

Knezek G,Christensen R. Impact of newinformation technologies on teachers and students. Education and Information Technologies. 2007;7:369-76.

Barsch, J. Barsch Learning Style Inventory.Novato, CA: Academic Therapy Publications. 1980.

Burke K, Dunn R. Learning style-basedteaching to raise minority student test scores: There is no debate. The Clearing House. 2002;76(2):103.

Doherty WA, Maddox C D. An investigationof methods of instruction and student learning styles in Internet-based community college courses. In Maddox CD, Ewing-Taylor J, Johnson DL (Eds.), Distance Education: Issues and Concerns (pp. 23-32). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press. 2003.

Kirby JR, Knapper CK, Maki SA, EgnatoffWJ, Melle EV. Computers and students’

conceptions of learning: The transition from postsecondaryeducation to the workplace. Educational Technology and Society. 2002;5(2):1-7.

Gould TE, Caswell SV. Stylistic learningdifferences between undergraduate athletic training students and educators: Gregorc mind styles. Journal of Athletic Training. 2006;41(1):109.

Mammen VMJ, Fischer RD, Anderson A,James EL, Nussbaum SM, Bower HR, et al. Learning Styles Vary Among General Surgery Residents: Analysis of 12 Years Of Data. Journal of Surgical Education. 2007;64:386-9.

James-Gordon Y, Bal J. Learning stylepreferences of engineers in automotive design. Journal of Workplace Learning 2001; 13(6): 239.

Nichols M. A theory of eLearning.Educational Technology & Society. 2003;6(2):1-10.

Brown S, Coney R. Changes in physicianscomputer anxiety and attitudes related to clinical information system use. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1994; 1:381-94.

Dørup J. Experience and attitudes towardsinformation technology among first- year medical students in Denmark: longitudinal questionnaire survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2004;6.

Hoover TS, Marshal TT. A comparison oflearning style and demographic characteristics of students enrolled in selected animal Science Courses. Journal of Animal Science. 1998;749:3169-73.

Dyck JI, Smither JA. Age differences incomputer anxiety: The role of computer experience, gender and education. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 1994;10:23.

Original (Research) Articles