{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017543859649122806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010526315789473684, 'mean_word_length': 5.366071428571429, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The relationship between learning style and learning environment

Does problem-based learning (PBL) have an effect on learning style and student performance? This question is addressed in a study published in this issue, which compares a traditional psychiatry attachment and a problem-based attachment. Both attachments consisted of 12 days of formal teaching, comprising lectures about illnesses in the traditional attachment and discussion around patient problems in the PBL attachment. The authors assumed that the PBL students (n 1⁄4 191) would use less surface learning, more deep and strategic learning and achieve better student performance scores than the students on the traditional attachment (n 1⁄4 188). The Study Process Questionnaire was used to measure students’ learning styles at the beginning and end of both attachments. Student performance was measured at the end of each attachment with 125 multiple choice questions (MCQs) and the presentation of the case of a patient seen during the attachment and answers given to questions on that case. The results demonstrated that the PBL attachment resulted in better student performance scores on both the MCQs and the case presentation. Contrary to expectations, no differences in learning styles were found between the traditional and PBL attachments and neither were any differences in learning style found between the beginning and end of both attachments.