27.06.2013 Views

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

Volume Two - Academic Conferences

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Fatemeh Orooji et al.<br />

their popular instructors’ ones which may make them more enthusiastic about their instructors and<br />

related course.<br />

5. Results<br />

The proposed system has been utilized in the university of Tehran, department of electrical and<br />

computer engineering, ECE. At the first step, students of one course have been demanded to fill FLSI<br />

and MBTI questionnaires. Almost 40 students have been participated in this study; most of them are<br />

at the second year of computer engineering. After processing the results, 25% of students, who had<br />

not filled the questionnaire completely, were detected as outliers and put aside.<br />

5.1 Statistical reports<br />

Our unified LS modeling system make it available to see the results in a comparable manner. Table 2<br />

shows the average and variances of each questionnaire dimensions. All dimensions have averages<br />

about 5-6 except FLSI Visual and MBTI Judgment dimensions which have a greater average. In<br />

addition, the variances of all dimensions have values between 4.5 and 5.5 except MBTI Sensing<br />

dimension, which has a smaller one, and MBTI Extroversion dimension, which has a greater one. It<br />

shows that this group of students are either highly or lowly extrovert while they are less variant in their<br />

sensing aspect of their characteristics.<br />

Table 2: Statistical Reports of FLSI and MBTI Dimensions<br />

FLSI<br />

Dimension Active Sensing Visual Sequential<br />

Average 5.71 5.54 6.82 5.14<br />

Variance 5.47 5.29 5.19 4.42<br />

MBTI<br />

Dimension Extroversion Sensing Thinking Judgment<br />

Average 5.11 5.78 5.63 7.15<br />

Variance 8.56 3.79 4.63 4.59<br />

5.2 Correlation analysis<br />

Trying to check the consistency and validation of different modelers, we have designed and<br />

implemented our unified LS modelers. We wanted to check whether there is any relationship between<br />

modelers' dimensions. Table 3 shows the results of the experiments.<br />

Table 3: Correlation between FLSI and MBTI dimensions<br />

Pearson coefficients between FLSI dimensions<br />

Active & Sensing Active & Visual Active & Sequential<br />

Sensing &<br />

Visual<br />

Sensing &<br />

Sequential<br />

Visual &<br />

sequential<br />

0.16 0.14 0.08 -0.12 0.65 -0.06<br />

Extroversion &<br />

Sensing<br />

Extroversion &<br />

Thinking<br />

Pearson coefficients between MBTI dimensions<br />

Extroversion &<br />

Judgment<br />

Sensing &<br />

Thinking<br />

Sensing &<br />

Judgment<br />

Thinking &<br />

Judgment<br />

0.41 -0.49 0.1 -0.30 0.26 0<br />

Sensing &<br />

Sensing<br />

Pearson coefficients between FLSI & MBTI dimensions<br />

Active &<br />

Extroversion<br />

Active & Judgment<br />

Visual &<br />

Sensing<br />

Sensing &<br />

Extroversion<br />

Sequential &<br />

Thinking<br />

0.3 0.55 -0.04 -0.57 0.17 -0.36<br />

We expected that there would be no correlation between a modeler dimensions since each dimension<br />

has a special psychological objective, and as a result, it is naturally expected to be independent from<br />

617

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!