A Study of Lateralized Cognitive Processes in Upper-Division Electrical Engineering Students’: Correlating Written Language Functions with Analytical Reasoning in Microelectronics


The human brain is asymmetrical in function, with each of its two hemispheres being somewhat responsible for distinct cognitive and motor tasks, to include writing. It stands to reason that engineering students who have established entrance into their upper-division programs will have demonstrated cognitive proficiency in math and logical operations, abstract and analytical reasoning and language usage, to include writing. In this study the question was asked: is there a correlation between an upper-division electrical engineering students’ analytical reasoning ability and their descriptive writing ability? Descriptive writing is taken here to mean a students’ ability to identify key physical aspects of a mathematical model and to express—in words—a concise and well-balanced description that demonstrates a deep conceptual understanding of the model. This includes more than a description of the variables or the particular application to an engineering problem; it includes a demonstrated recognition of the basic physics that govern the model, certain limitations (idealizations) inherent in the model, and an understanding of how to make practical experimental measurements to verify the governing physics in the model. A student at this level may demonstrate proficiency in their analytical reasoning skills and hence be capable of correctly solving a given problem. However, this does not guarantee that the same student is skilled in associating equations with their physical meaning on a deep conceptual level or in understanding physical limitations of the equation. Consequently, such a student may demonstrate difficulty in mapping their comprehension of the model into written language that demonstrates a sound conceptual understanding of the governing physics. The findings represent a sample of two independent class sections of Electrical and Computer Engineering junior’s first course in Microe-lectronic Devices and Circuits during fall semesters 2012 and 2013 at a private mid-size university in NW Oregon. A total of three exams were administered to each of the 2012/2013 groups. Correlations between exam scores that students achieved on their descriptive writing of microelectronics phenomena and their analytical problem-solving abilities were examined and found to be quite significant.

Share and Cite:

Melendy, R. (2014) A Study of Lateralized Cognitive Processes in Upper-Division Electrical Engineering Students’: Correlating Written Language Functions with Analytical Reasoning in Microelectronics. World Journal of Engineering and Technology, 2, 73-81. doi: 10.4236/wjet.2014.22008.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Ackerman, P. and Cianciolo, A. (2000) Cognitive, Perceptual Speed, and Psychomotor Determinants of Individual Differences during Skill Acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 259-290.
[2] Driscoll, M. (2000) Psychology of Learning for Instruction.
[3] Kandel, E., et al. (2000) Principles of Neural Science. McGraw-Hill Health Professions Division, Upper Saddle River, New York, San Francisco, London.
[4] Kahol, K., et al. (2008) Effect of Fatigue on Psychomotor and Cognitive Skills. American Journal of Surgery, 195, 195-204.
[5] Wolpert, D., et al. (2008) The Statistics of Natural Hand Movements. Experimental Brain Research, 188, 223-236.
[6] Driscoll, M. (2001) Psychology of Learning for Assessment. 2nd Edition, Allyn & Bacon, Boston.
[7] Amaral, L. and Detmar, M. (2008) From Recording Linguistic Competence to Supporting Inferences about Language Acquisition in Context. Journal of Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 323-338.
[8] Thevenot, C. and Castel, C. (2012) Relationship and Transfer between Mental and Written Arithmetic. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 286-294.
[9] McCutchen, D. (1986) Domain Knowledge and Linguistic Knowledge in the Development of Writing Ability. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 431-444.
[10] Bloom’s Taxonomy.
[11] Dauer, F. (1989) Critical Thinking: An Introduction to Reasoning. Oxford University Press, New York.
[12] Fisher, A. and Scriven, M. (1997) Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. University of East Anglia, Centre for Research in Critical Thinking.
[13] Domjan, M. and Burkhard, B. (1986) The Principles of Learning and Behavior. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Belmont.
[14] Milner, B., et al. (1988) Cognitive Neuroscience and the Study of Memory. Neuron, 20, 445-468.
[15] Krakauer, J. and Chez, C. (2000). The Organization of Movement. Journal of Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21, 323-338.
[16] Knoblich, G., et al. (2002) Authorship Effects in the Prediction of Handwriting Strokes: Evidence for Action Stimulation during Action Perception. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 55, 1027-1046.
[17] Simpson, E. (1972) The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain. Gryphon House, Washington DC.
[18] Harrow, A. (1972) A Taxonomy of the Psychomotor Domain. David McKay Publishing Co., New York.
[19] Dave, R. (1967) Introduction to the Psychomotor Behaviors.
[20] Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. (1987) The Psychology of Written Composition. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
[21] Hayes, J. and Flower, L. (1987) Identifying the Organization of Writing Processes. In: Gregg, L. and Steinberg, E., Eds., Cognitive Processes in Writing, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 3-30.
[22] Blakemore, C. (1977) Mechanics of the Mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[23] McClelland, J. and McNaughton, B. (1995)
[24] Hayes, J. (1996) A New Framework for Understanding Cognition and Affect in Writing. In: Levy, C. and Ransdell, S., Eds., The Science of Writing: Theories, Methods, Individual Differences and Applications, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, 1-27.
[25] Applebee, A. (1984) Writing and Reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577-596.
[26] Deacon, T. (1997) The Symbolic Species: The Co-Evolution of Language and the Brain. Norton, New York.
[27] Dronkers, N. (2000) The Pursuit of Brain-Language Relationships. Brain and Language, 71, 59-61.
[28] Hambrick, D. (2001) Effects of Domain Knowledge, Working Memory Capacity and Age on Cognitive Performance: An Investigation of the Knowledge-Is-Power Hypothesis. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 339-387.
[29] Poole, M. and O’Farrell, P. (1970) The Assumptions of the Linear Regression Model.
[30] Goldstein, D. and Britt, T. (1994) Visual-Motor Coordination and Intelligence as Predictors of Reading, Mathematics, and Written Language Ability.
[31] Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient.

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.