Most of us probably lean towards the method we were ourselves taught.
I came through the Aust military system, which for a long time has been using this technique for ab initio training:
"Base" technique - set power and attitude for descent, balance and trim, then adjust airspeed with attitude and ROD with power. This also applies for cruise descents.
"Finals" technique - select aim point, maintain the aircraft's flight path to that spot with attitude, and maintain IAS with power.
The transition point between the two occurs as you roll out on finals and pick your landing spot (numbers or whatever).
One thing that I have found instructors and students alike to be sometimes confused by is expecting the attitude picture to remain constant down finals once you're there.
That works (until the late stages of finals) if your airspeed remains constant, but if you are flying an approach that requires airspeed to bleed back from some start point to a minimum threshold speed, then the attitude required to maintain a constant glidepath will need to be raised as the speed reduces.
An analogy I used to use was to get yourself at the right starting point on finals (a "gate" of height AGL, speed and distance out from the threshold), then imagine a set of railway tracks running from your eyes to the desired landing spot.
Attitude would be used to maintain the aircraft "on the rails", and power to either maintain a desired airspeed, or allow it to bleed back towards threshold speed as the case might be.
I like the concept, but then again that might just be because it's what I'm used to.