Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001

THE VALUE OF THE HERRMANN BRAIN DOMINANCE INSTRUMENT (HBDI) IN

FACILITATING EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF CRIMINOLOGY

Ann-Louis de Boer1
Centre for Academic Development
University of Pretoria
Dorette van den Berg
Department of Criminology
University of Pretoria

INTRODUCTION PARADIGM SHIFT

For many decades, educational systems worldwide According to Goodlad (1994:4) a critical part of
have focused mainly on left brain teaching and multicultural education is the continuing education of
evaluation strategies. From a Curriculum 2005 educators. One important factor that emerges is that a
perspective the historically separate worlds of “work” paradigm shift requires a change in teachers’
and “learn” are no longer acceptable and it is therefore traditional perspectives of teaching and learning.
important to look at the context of subjects as well as Therefore a cognitive, social and moral change with
the changes that are being demanded by the future regard to themselves, their teaching practices and
employers. In analysing the needs of potential their students’ behaviour should be brought about
employers it seems as if there is a demand for (Heard 1999:462).
students who can think holistically, be innovative, work
in teams, synthesize information, integrate EFFECTIVE TEACHING AND EFFECTIVE LEARNING
environmental and societal values and ethics into their
work, communicate effectively and solve problems in
It has been documented that effective learning takes
creative ways. These ways of thinking have been
place if all four thinking quadrants, as identified by
neglected in most curricula. With the emergence of a
Herrmann (1995: 418-419,425), are involved in
multicultural political and educational dispensation in
learning. Lumsdaine and Lumsdaine (1995:97)
the new South Africa a new approach which can
describe these four different modes of how students
accommodate a diversity of cultural perspectives and
learn as:
contexts, should be followed. The aim of multicultural
education focuses in part on an approach that
• external learning from an authority through
embraces the complex and very difficult task of helping
lectures and text books – (quadrant A
to create a unified democratic society in which people
learning);
can maintain their cultural and personal identities.
Such a culture of tolerance and respect should focus
• internal learning through visualisation,
on creative ways of teaching students with competing
insight, understanding of concepts,
interests that their differences can form the foundation
holistically and intuitively – (quadrant D
of a critical and creative civil society.
learning);

1
The authors would like to thank and express their gratitude to: Ned Herrmann and Ann Hermann-Nehdi of
Herrmann International for their valuable contribution to the development of students’ full potential; The
University of Pretoria for a research grant; Helene Coetzee for research assistance; The Criminology Class of
2000 who participated in the project; The Criminological Society of Southern Africa for allowing the authors to
make use of information obtained from the Council reports.

119

• interactive learning by means of discussions
and hands-on sensory-based experiments
where the learners try and fail and try again
through encouragement and verbal feedback
– (quadrant C learning); and
• procedural learning through methodical
step-by-step testing of what is being taught,
as well as through practise and repetition to
improve skills – (quadrant B learning).
It is imperative for all educators to develop their
students’ full potential by providing key learning
opportunities “as whole brain activities to whole brain
learners for a whole brain world”.
THINKING STYLE PREFERENCES AND LEARNING
STYLE MODELS
Students arrive at tertiary institutions with thinking style
preferences that have been established through
schooling and life experiences. According to Herrmann
(1996:34-35) mental preferences are not solely
predetermined genetically, but result from a brain-based quadrant model is aligned with, and
combination of nature (genetic inheritance) and nurture
(parenting, teaching, life experiences and cultural
influences). These existing preferences are influential
with regard to all the cognitive activities in which
students are engaged. A thinking style preference
leads to a learning style preference and in turn
determines a student’s dominant cognitive mode in
which he/she communicates and receives information.
The notion of learning style and learning style models
are well documented in research (Felder 1996). The
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) classifies students
according to their preferences on scales derived from
the psychologist Carl Jung's theory of psychological
types. Students may be extroverts or introverts;
sensors or intuitors; thinkers or feelers; and judges or
perceivers. Kolb’s Learning Style Model classifies
students as having a preference for concrete
experience, abstract conceptualisation, active
experimentation, or reflective observation. The
120
Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001
Herrmann Four Quadrant Whole Brain Model, however,
quantifies a person's relative preference for thinking in
four different modes that are based on the task-
specialised functioning of the physical brain
(Herrmann 1995: 72, 350).
For the purpose of this project the Herrmann Brain
Dominance Instrument (HBDI), based on the
Herrmann Four Quadrant Model, was used to
determine the thinking style preferences of the
students.
THE HERRMANN FOUR QUADRANT WHOLE BRAIN
MODEL AND THE HBDI
Based on his extensive research on brain dominance,
which spans 20 years, Herrmann (1995 &1996)
developed an assessment tool that quantifies the
degree of a person’s preference for a specific thinking
style – the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument
(HBDI). It takes the form of a survey consisting of 120
questions to be completed by an individual. Although
Herrmann discusses his model as a metaphor, the
supported by, various research projects and is used
as a measuring tool. It also points out that brain
dominance is natural and normal for all humans
beings. This means that brain dominance influences
all four specialised thinking structures of the brain and
not just the two hemispheres. The different modes
(quadrants) are indicated in Figure 1.
According to Herrmann (1995:79-85), preference for
the A-quadrant (left cerebral mode) means that a
person favours activities that involve logical, analytical
and factual information combined with an ability to
perceive, verbalise and express information precisely.
A preference for the B-quadrant (left limbic mode)
implies similarities to an A-quadrant thinking
preference. In both cases a linear approach to
activities is taken and ambiguity is rejected. Individuals
with a B-quadrant preference favour organised,
sequential, planned and detailed information. They are

conservative in their actions and like to keep things as
they are. A preference for the C-quadrant (right limbic
mode) indicates a preference for information that is
interpersonal, involves emotion (based on feelings)
and which is kinaesthetic. A preference for the D-
quadrant (right cerebral mode) is mainly characterised
by a holistic approach.
GENERAL REMARKS ON THE INTERPRETATION OF
THE HBDI
Through co-workers and independent researchers, as
well as the Institute of Educational Testing Survey in
the United States of America, Bunderson in Herrmann
(1995:72; 337-379) documented the Bundersons’
validity study of the HBDI (in Herrmann 1995:337-379).
He concluded that the instrument provides a valid,
reliable measure of human mental preferences when
applied in a professional way, interpreted in conformity
with the four quadrant model and scored by means of
the approved scoring method.
For South African users, the scoring is done at
Herrmann International in the USA. The data of over
one million individual surveys form the database of the
Herrmann International headquarters in North Carolina
(Lumsdaine, Lumsdaine & Shellnutt, 1999:52).
In addition to the whole brain model illustrated in
Figure 1, Herrmann (1995:220) developed a whole
brain teaching and learning model based on his
research. This model is illustrated in Figure 2.
In this model the learning process is divided according
to the four brain quadrants, and then further
summarised into two categories: structured (left) and
unstructured (right). In the structured (left mode)
category we have what Herrmann refers to as hard
processing dealing with logical, rational, critical and
quantitative issues and activities. The procedural,
planned, sequential, and organized elements of the
learning process are also found in this mode
(associated with the A- and B-quadrant thinking
121
Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001
modes). All these stand in direct contrast to the
unstructured (right mode) non-linear and non-verbal
modalities of the right brain. The unstructured right
mode represents visual, conceptual, and
simultaneous processing, and soft processing
involves emotional, expressive, and interpersonal
activities (associated with the C- and D-quadrant
thinking modes). Together, these comprise the full
range of preferences for teaching and learning
(Herrmann 1995:221). The model serves as a
teaching and learning tool enabling educators to
design and deliver content to students in ways that not
only reach each learner by accommodating their
learning preferences, but also address learning
avoidance. Students should be made aware of the fact
that in order to realize their full potential, they need to
develop skills in all four thinking modes. In this
manner students’ potential can be fully developed
(Herrmann 1996:152).
Educators should be aware of the fact that students
with the same preferred thinking style will find it easier
to communicate and understand each other,
compared to students who have opposite preferences
of thinking. It is also important to note that even though
two people can have almost identical profiles, they will
be different thinkers with differing abilities and
competencies because of clustering that takes place
within each dominant quadrant.
RESEARCH PROJECT
Aim of the project
The aim of the research project was:
• to determine the preferred thinking styles of a
group of first-year students studying a first
course in Criminology;
• to determine the distribution of thinking style
preferences of this group; and
• to introduce a practical whole brain teaching
and learning model for lecturers of

Criminology.
Methodology
Qualitative research was undertaken and the study
involved 68 students at the University of Pretoria who
were all registered for a first course in Criminology.
The students were introduced to the whole brain
concept and emphasis was placed on the fact that the
instrument was not a test that measured cognitive
abilities. Students received their profiles as well as a
document enabling them to interpret their own thinking
preference. The data were entered into the HBDI
scoring program and were transmitted by modem to
the Herrmann International Group in North Carolina for
scoring. The numerical results were returned by
computer via the Internet and were manually entered
on the profile data sheet by the researchers.
For the purpose of this article the group is briefly
discussed with regard to gender, language, and race.
The main focus, however, is on the diversity pertaining
to the students’ thinking style preferences.
Diversity in gender, language and race
In Table 1 the diversity with regard to gender, language
and race is indicated for all the students.
With regard to the gender of the 68 students in this
study, 63,2 percent are females and 36,8 percent
males. According to Table 1 - 54 percent use
Afrikaans as mother tongue, 9 percent use English
and 37 percent use an African/Ethnic language. The
data clearly illustrate the existence of diversity with
regard to gender, language and race amongst
students enrolled for a first course in Criminology.
DIVERSITY IN THINKING PREFERENCES OF STUDENTS
WHO ENROLLED FOR A FIRST COURSE IN
CRIMINOLOGY
The thinking preferences of first-year students enrolled
122
Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001
for a first course in Criminology at the University of
Pretoria were assessed using the Hermann Brain
Dominance Instrument (HBDI). The scores and
profiles reveal thinking preferences for four different
ways of thinking and "knowing".
Examples of individual student profiles
The examples of the profiles displayed in Figure 3 are
indicative of the diversity in the thinking style
preferences of the students enrolled for a first course
in Criminology.
Individual profile showing an A-quadrant thinking
preference
The profile in Figure 3A displays a strong preference
for the thinking modes of the A-quadrant as well as an
overall tilt towards the thinking preferences associated
with cerebral functions. This profile indicates a strong
preference for the analytical, rational and logical
processes of the upper left A-quadrant, and in contrast
also shows a preference for the integrated,
synthesizing, creative and holistic aspects of the upper
right D-quadrant. The profile indicates a lower
preference for the controlled, structured and organised
thinking modes associated with the lower left B-
quadrant but a non-preference for the kinesthetic
thinking modes associated with the lower right C-
quadrant.
Individual profile showing a B-quadrant thinking
preference
The profile in Figure 3B displays a strong preference
for the thinking modes associated with the B-quadrant
as well as the C-quadrant indicating an overall tilt
towards the thinking preferences in the limbic mode.
This implies a strong preference for the controlled,
structured, and organised thinking modes associated
with the lower left B-quadrant as well as for the
interpersonal, feeling-based thinking modes of the
 Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001

lower right C-quadrant. The profile also shows a non- composite profile indicates preferred modes of
preference for the analytical, rational and logical thinking in all four quadrants. This confirms the

processes of the upper left A-quadrant and a non- research findings of Knowles (1990:245) claiming that

preference for the upper right D-quadrant which is people are equally distributed throughout the teaching
and learning model in terms of their mental
associated with holistic thinking modes.
preferences. In addition, the research findings of
Herrmann (1996:47), namely that individual profiles
Individual profile showing a C-quadrant thinking
represent a highly diverse, but well balanced,
preference
distribution of thinking style preferences with regard to
the four quadrants of the Whole Brain Model are
The profile in Figure 3C displays a strong preference
confirmed.
for the thinking modes associated with the C-quadrant
and the D-quadrant indicating an overall tilt towards the
Figure 5 the dominance map of the group is analysed.
thinking styles in the right mode. This implies a strong
This map indicates the dominant preferences of the
preference for the interpersonal, feeling-based,
participants. The map reveals that the dominant
emotional and spiritual thinking modes of the lower
characteristics of the group show a tilt towards the C-
right C-quadrant, and also a strong preference for the
quadrant thinking modes, with a preference for the
holistic, imaginative, and conceptual thinking styles
interpersonal, emotional and spiritual processes.
associated with the upper right, D-quadrant. This
From the dominance map it is further concluded that
profile, however, reveals that there is almost an
the group has a non-preference for the A- and the D-
avoidance of the upper left A-quadrant thinking
quadrant thinking modes. Thinking processes are
processes associated with logical, rational thought.
associated with the logical, analytical, mathematical
The overall interpretation is that this individual shows
and problem solving modes of the A-quadrant as well
a low preference for the left brain hemisphere thinking
as with the imaginative, artistic, holistic
processes.
conceptualising and synthesising thinking modes of
the D-quadrant. All these thinking skills are needed by
Individual profile showing a D-quadrant thinking
employers in South Africa and should be addressed by
preference
tertiary education institutions if they want to be globally
competitive and nationally relevant (Vice-Chancellor
The profile in Figure 3D displays a very strong
Prof J van Zyl UP Academic Opening 1-2-2000).
preference for the thinking modes associated with the
D-quadrant as well as an overall tilt towards the
HERRMANN’S WHOLE BRAIN TEACHING AND
thinking preferences of the right brain hemisphere. The
LEARNING MODEL
thinking styles in this case are characterised by
creative, holistic, and synthesising modes in
Based on his Whole Brain Teaching and Learning
combination with interpersonal, emotional, and
Model illustrated in Figure 2, Herrmann (1995:419)
spiritual processes. This profile also indicates a non-
identified preferred learning activities within the
preference for the thinking modes associated with the
quadrant model. These activities should be taken into
left brain hemisphere and that there is almost an
account if educators want to teach effectively. Figure 2
avoidance of the A-quadrant thinking preferences
gives a summary of these activities.
associated with logical and rational thoughts.

FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS OF FOUR QUADRANT

The composite profile for this group is displayed in
WHOLE BRAIN TEACHING AND LEARNING
Figure 4A while Figure 4B displays the dominance
preference of the group in a single map.
Results from this project reveal that a wide range of
thinking preferences exists amongst students
If the profiles of the group are superimposed, their

123

following a first course in Criminology.
The following aspects are of importance to educators
of Criminology:
• The statement that every classroom
represents a complete spectrum of thinking
preferences is proven to be correct
(Herrmann, 1996:151). This implies that
curriculum designers and lecturers must be
careful not to make unfounded assumptions
about learners in the classroom. The project
reveals that there is a distribution of learning
preferences in all quadrants and that all
modes are equally represented (Figure 4).
• Just as there is a distribution of thinking
preferences across the spectrum of all four
quadrants in the classroom, there is also a
distribution of learning avoidance across the
four quadrants (Figure 5). Learning avoidance
is even more significant to facilitators of
learning because according to Herrmann
(1996:152) “they turn people off ” and ”a
turned off learner is a waste of educational
time and effort ”. The greater the alignment
between the thinking preference (teaching
style) of the educator and the thinking
preference (learning style) of the learner, the
more competencies will be acquired by the
learner. The greater the misalignment
between the thinking preference of the
educator and the thinking preference of the
learner, the fewer competencies will be
acquired by the learner.
• Data collected from several educational
institutions show that there is no learning
institution in South Africa with either a
composite whole brain faculty or a whole
brain curriculum. It is necessary to shift the
focus away from traditional teaching methods
since such methods are outdated within the
context of whole brain teaching and learning
(Lumsdaine & Lumsdaine 1995:96.).
124
Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001
• In order to develop the full potential of
learners, whole brain learning should form
the basis of teaching practices. This
approach will assist all students to acquire
skills over a wide spectrum and to develop
and grow in areas of lesser preference by
practising applicable mental processes in
those modes.
CHALLENGES FOR THE TEACHING OF CRIMINOLOGY
In order to adapt existing teaching practices to the new
paradigm it is necessary for lecturers to realise that
they not only have to cope with and face the challenges
posed by transformation but they also have to remain
actively involved in the process. Rozenholtz (1989:24)
suggests that this process for lecturers who seek to
make changes in their teaching may involve various
phases of thinking and behavioural experiences that
could vary from confusion, doubt, stress, lost of control,
redefinition of intent or purpose of teaching.
Criminology lecturers may go through phases of trail
and error but the process could also lead to clarity,
enthusiasm and success. It should, however, be kept
in mind these changes and the development of a new
understanding of teaching and learning could not be
achieved without sacrifices from individuals and/or
cultures. Therefore lecturers should adopt a new
attitude and perspective that could facilitate the
process of change. Opportunities for development
should be created not only for the Criminology
students but also for the lecturers. Criminology
lecturers should create and expand a coherent, critical
approach to knowledge. The main focus should be to
modify their beliefs regarding teaching and learning
and to objectively evaluate the purpose of teaching in
order to effect democratic student learning and social
outcomes through education and institutional change.
CONCLUSION
The HBDI Metaphoric Model proved to be a valid and
useful diagnostic assessment tool to determine the
thinking preferences (learning styles) of students. The
results obtained in this project correspond with the
universal results of Herrmann’s study (1996:151) that
 Acta Criminologica Vol 14(1) 2001

BIBLIOGRAPHY London: Harper & Row.

Barnett, R. 1994: The limits of competence. Ballmoor,
SRHE and Open University press.
Bellis, I. 1997. Competence: ideals, images and
applications – issues of definition, deprivation and
implementation. Paper 1-70.
Bellis, I. 1998. The process of change in vocational
education and training: the South African experience.
Paper presented at the Technicon Pretoria. p 1-70.
Bunderson, C V. 1995. Appendix A 337-379. The
validity of the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument:
In Herrmann. N. 1995. The creative brain. 2 ed. U.S.A:
Quebecor Printing Book group.
De Boer, A & Steyn, T. 1999. Thinking style preferences
of underprepared first-year students in the Natural
Science. South African Journal of Ethnology. 22 (3), 97-
102.
Felder, R. 1996. Matters of style. ASEE Prism,
December:18-23.
Gravett, S. 1996. The Assessment of learning in higher
education: guiding principles. South African Journal of
Higher Education. 10 (1), 76 – 81.
Kotzé, G S. 1999. Assessment for an outcomes based-
approach. South African Journal of Education. 19 (1),
31- 36.
Lumsdaine, M & Lumsdaine, E. 1995. Thinking
Preferences of Engineering Students: Implications for
Curriculum Restructuring. Journal of Engineering
Education. 84 (2) April:193-204.
National Commission of Higher Education. (NCHE)
1996. A framework of Transformation.
Olivier, C. 1998. How to educate and train outcomes
based. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Rosenholtz, S. 1989. Teachers’ Workplace: the social
organisation of schools. New York: Longman.
Sutherland, L & Peckham, G. 1998. A re-appraisal of
assessment practices in the light of the South African
Qualifications Authority. (SAQA) Act. South African
Journal of Higher Education. 12 (2), 98 -103.
Van Zyl, J. 2000. Opening of the academic year : 1
February 2000. The University of Pretoria in a Global
Context. http://www.up.ac.za/intranet/principal
/20000201.html.

Goodlad, J. 1994. Educational renewal: better
teachers, better schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Grundy, S. 1987. Curriculum: product or praxis?
London: Falmer press.
Venter, E. 1997. Philosophy of education in a new
South Africa. The South African Journal of Higher
Education. 11 (1), 57 – 64.

Heard, D. 1999. A developing model of teachers

educating themselves for multicultural pedagogy.
Higher Education, 38, 461-487.

Herrmann, N. 1995. The creative brain. 2 ed. U.S.A.:

Quebecor Printing Book group.

Hermann, N. 1998. Twenty years of thinking about the

thinking brain. A special summary of learning
outcomes. Herrmann International Unpublished data.

Herrmann, N. 1996. The whole brain business book.

New York: Mc Graw Hill .

Herrmann, N & Herrmann N A., 1999. Whole brain

tools for today’s training challenges. Unpublished
document Herrmann International. Lake Lure. North
Carolina.

Kelly, A V. 1989. Curriculum theory and practice.

129