Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests
http://www.blogs.com/topten/top-10-psychology-blogs-for-curious-minds/index.html
Kevin McGrew PhD
Educational/School Psych.
IAP (www.iapsych.com)
Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)
This weeks "recent literature of interest" is now available. Click here to view and/or download to your hardrive. WARNING....this batch is long...400+ references. Yes...there is an information explosion in research of interest. Maybe I need to become more narrow and selective.
Has there ever been a time when there were so many different views of human nature floating around all at once? The economists have their view, in which rational people coolly chase incentives. Traditional Christians have their view, emphasizing original sin, grace and the pilgrim’s progress in a fallen world. And then there are the evolutionary psychologists, who get the most media attention. For 99 percent of human history, they observe, our species lived in small hunter-gatherer bands. The people who survived developed certain mental modules, which have been passed down to us through our genes. Some of these traits serve us well in the modern age. Children have the capacity to learn language with astonishing speed. Some of these traits don’t. Humans have an insatiable craving for fatty and sugary foods. In 2000, Geoffrey Miller, a leading evolutionary psychologist, published a book called “The Mating Mind,” in which he argued that the process of sexual selection among early human groups hardwired many of the behaviors we see in humans today. Some of the traits are physical. Men generally prefer women with a 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio (that’s a 24-inch waist and 36-inch hips, for those of you reading this at the gym). Women generally prefer men who are taller and slightly older. Some of these traits are more subtle. Men, Miller argues, tip better in restaurants, because they’ve been programmed to show how much surplus wealth they have. The average American adult knows 60,000 words, far more than we need. We have all those words because we like to mate with people who caress us with language. Now Miller has published another book, “Spent,” in which he takes evolutionary psychology to the mall. The basic argument is that each of us is born with our own individual level of six big traits: intelligence, openness to new things, conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability and extraversion. These modules are built into humans and other animals (apparently squid can be shy). We are all narcissists, Miller asserts. We spend much of our lives trying to broadcast our excellence in these traits in order to attract mates. Even if we’re not naturally smart or outgoing, we buy products and brands that give the impression we are. According to Miller, driving an Acura, Infiniti, Subaru or Volkswagen is a sign of high intelligence. Driving a Cadillac, Chrysler, Ford or Hummer is a sign of low intelligence. Listening to Bjork is a sign of high intelligence, while listening to Lynyrd Skynyrd is a sign of low intelligence. Watching Quentin Tarantino movies is a sign of high openness. He theorizes that teenage girls may cut themselves as a way to demonstrate their ability to withstand infections. Evolutionary psychology has had a good run. But now there is growing pushback. Sharon Begley has a rollicking, if slightly overdrawn, takedown in the current Newsweek. And “Spent” is a sign that the theory is being used to try to explain more than it can bear. The first problem is that far from being preprogrammed with a series of hardwired mental modules, as the E.P. types assert, our brains are fluid and plastic. We’re learning that evolution can be a more rapid process than we thought. It doesn’t take hundreds of thousands of years to produce genetic alterations. Moreover, we’ve evolved to adapt to diverse environments. Different circumstances can selectively activate different genetic potentials. Individual behavior can vary wildly from one context to another. An arrogant bully on the playground may be meek in math class. People have kaleidoscopic thinking styles and use different cognitive strategies to solve the same sorts of problems. Evolutionary psychology leaves the impression that human nature was carved a hundred thousand years ago, and then history sort of stopped. But human nature adapts to the continual flow of information—adjusting to the ancient information contained in genes and the current information contained in today’s news in a continuous, idiosyncratic blend. The second problem is one evolutionary psychology shares with economics. It’s too individualistic: individuals are born with certain traits, which they seek to maximize in the struggle for survival. But individuals aren’t formed before they enter society. Individuals are created by social interaction. Our identities are formed by the particular rhythms of maternal attunement, by the shared webs of ideas, symbols and actions that vibrate through us second by second. Shopping isn’t merely a way to broadcast permanent, inborn traits. For some people, it’s also an activity of trying things on in the never-ending process of creating and discovering who they are. The allure of evolutionary psychology is that it organizes all behavior into one eternal theory, impervious to the serendipity of time and place. But there’s no escaping context. That’s worth remembering next time somebody tells you we are hardwired to do this or that.
An enduring enterprise of experimental psychology has been to account for individual differences in human performance. Recent advances in neuroimaging have permitted testing of hypotheses regarding the neural bases of individual differences but this burgeoning literature has been characterized by inconsistent results. We argue that careful design and analysis of neuroimaging studies is required to separate individual differences in processing capacity from individual differences in processing speed to account for these differences in the literature. We utilized task designs which permitted separation of processing capacity influences on brainbehavior relationships from those related to processing speed. In one set of studies, participants performed verbal delayed-recognition tasks during blocked and event-related fMRI scanning. The results indicated that those participants with greater working memory (WM) capacity showed greater prefrontal cortical activity, strategically capitalized on the additional processing time available in the delay period, and evinced faster WM-retrieval rates than low-capacity participants. In another study, participants performed a digit-symbol substitution task (DSST) designed to minimize WM storage capacity requirements and maximize processing speed requirements during fMRI scanning. In some prefrontal cortical (PFC) brain regions, participants with faster processing speed showed less PFC activity than slower
With the advancement of image acquisition and analysis methods in recent decades, unique opportunities have emerged to study the neuroanatomical correlates of intelligence. Traditional approaches examining global measures have been complemented by insights from more regional analyses based on pre-defined areas. Newer state-of-the-art approaches have further enhanced our ability to localize the presence of correlations between cerebral characteristics and intelligence with high anatomic precision. These in vivo assessments have confirmed mainly positive correlations, suggesting that optimally increased brain regions are associated with better cognitive performance. Findings further suggest that the models proposed to explain the anatomical substrates of intelligence should address contributions from not only (pre)frontal regions, but also widely distributed networks throughout the whole brain.Exploring possible neural mechanisms of intelligence differences using processing speed and working memory tasks: An fMRI study (Gordon D. Waiter, Ian J. Deary, Roger T. Staff, Alison D. Murray, Helen C. Fox, John M. Starr and Lawrence J. Whalley). Intelligence 37 (2009) 199–206
To explore the possible neural foundations of individual differences in intelligence test scores, we examined the associations between Raven's Matrices scores and two tasks that were administered in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) setting. The two tasks were an n-back working memory (N = 37) task and inspection time (N = 47). The subjects were members of the Aberdeen Birth Cohort 1936, aged in their mid–late 60s when tested for this study. Performance on both tasks was correlated significantly with scores on Raven's Matrices. In the inspection time task there were regions with significant correlations between the neural activity (BOLD response) and performance but not between BOLD response and scores on Raven's Matrices. In the working memory task there were no significant correlations between BOLD response and either performance or scores on Raven's Matrices. Moreover, there was almost no mediation of the Raven's Matrices versus n-back and inspection time scores correlations by the respective BOLD response. These findings partially replicate important aspects of a prominent report in this field [Gray, J.R., Chabris, C.F., & Braver, T.S. (2003). Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 316–322.], but have also extended the those finding into both a unique population and a novel functional task.Intelligence and neural efficiency: Measures of brain activation versus measures of functional connectivity in the brain (Aljoscha C. Neubauer and Andreas Fink). Intelligence 37 (2009) 223–229
The neural efficiency hypothesis of intelligence suggests a more efficient use of the cortex (or even the brain) in brighter as compared to less intelligent individuals. This has been shown in a series of studies employing different neurophysiological measurement methods and a broad range of different cognitive task demands. However, most of the studies dealing with the brain–IQ relationship used parameters of absolute or relative brain activation such as the eventrelated (de-)synchronization of EEG alpha activity, allowing for interpretations in terms of more or less brain activation when individuals are confronted with cognitively demanding tasks. In order to investigate the neural efficiency hypothesis more thoroughly, we also used measures that inform us about functional connectivity between different brain areas (or functional coupling, respectively) when engaged in cognitive task performance. Analyses reveal evidence that higher intelligence is associated with a lower brain activation (or a lower ERD, respectively) and a stronger phase locking between short-distant regions of the frontal cortex.Gray matter and intelligence factors: Is there a neuro-g? (Richard J. Haier, Roberto Colom, David H. Schroeder, Christopher A. Condon, Cheuk Tang, Emily Eaves and Kevin Head). Intelligence 37 (2009) 136–144
Heterogeneous results among neuro-imaging studies using psychometric intelligence measures may result from the variety of tests used. The g-factor may provide a common metric across studies. Here we derived a g-factor from a battery of eight cognitive tests completed by 6929 young adults, 40 of whom also completed structural MRI scans. Regional gray matter (GM) was determined using voxel-based-morphometry (VBM) and correlated to g-scores. Results showed correlations distributed throughout the brain, but there was limited overlap with brain areas identified in a similar study that used a different battery of tests to derive g-scores. Comparable spatial scores (with g variance removed) also were derived from both batteries, and there was considerable overlap in brain areas where GM was correlated to the respective spatial scores. The results indicate that g-scores derived from different test batteries do not necessarily have equivalent neuro-anatomical substrates, suggesting that identifying a “neurog” will be difficult. The neuro-anatomical substrate of a spatial factor, however, appears more consistent and implicates a distributed network of brain areas that may be involved with spatial ability. Future imaging studies directed at identifying the neural basis of intelligence may benefit from usinga psychometric test battery chosen with specific criteria.Intergenerational transmission of neuropsychological executive functioning ("Jennifer M. Jester, Joel T. Nigg, Leon I. Puttler, Jeffrey C. Long, Hiram E. Fitzgerald and Robert A. Zucker"). Brain and Cognition 70 (2009) 145–153
Relationships between parent and child executive functioning were examined, controlling for the critical potential confound of IQ, in a family study involving 434 children (130 girls and 304 boys) and 376 parents from 204 community recruited families at high risk for the development of substance use disorder. Structural equation modeling found evidence of separate executive functioning and intelligence (IQ) latent variables. Mother’s and father’s executive functioning were associated with child’s executive functioning (beta = 0.34 for father–child and 0.51 for mother–child), independently of parental IQ, which as expected was associated with child’s IQ (beta = 0.52 for father–child and 0.54 for mother–child). Familial correlations also showed a significant relationship of executive functioning between parents and offspring. These findings clarify that key elements of the executive functioning construct are reliably differentiable from IQ, and are transmitted in families. This work supports the utility of the construct of executive function in further study of the mechanisms and etiology of externalizing psychopathologies.
Brain Fitness Webinar
with Elkhonon Goldberg & Alvaro Fernandez.
Kindle Book. Twitter Discussion.
June 2009
Greetings!
SharpBrains' new book continues to get excellent endorsements:
"Kudos for an excellent resource! This SharpBrains Guide is full of top notch information, provides practical tips and helps separate hype from hope in the brain health arena."
-- Elizabeth Edgerly, Ph.D., Chief Program Officer, Alzheimer's Association
"The SharpBrains' Guide to Brain Fitness helped answer many of my questions on the importance of both physical and mental exercise to stay sharp as we age. This is an important book for anyone in the fitness industry, and, for that matter, for anyone with a brain."
-- Robin Klaus, Chairman, Club One Fitness Centers
"We're talking a short, sweet, entertaining read on a complex topic, with timely reviews of 21 top technology products, as well as informed and expert predictions of where this burgeoning brain-fitness field is headed. More importantly, after you read it, you'll have a good, detailed sense of where you, personally, can act to improve your own couch-potato brain - and how to keep it fit and flexible your whole life. The SharpBrains Guide To Brain Fitness reminds of us all why books (and not just googling a topic) can be well worth your time and money. Two Stethoscopes Up - check it out."
-- Doc Gurley, Internist Physician and Robert Wood Johnson Fellow, full book review Here
Alvaro Fernandez and Dr. Elkhonon Goldberg, co-authors of The SharpBrains Guide to Brain Fitness, will cover the main highlights from this new book and address the questions submitted by readers.
When: Tuesday July 21st, 10am Pacific Time; 1pm Eastern Time
How to Register: Click HERE for more information and to Register
- A Kindle edition is now available HERE.
- The print edition of the book is available HERE.
- Alvaro Fernandez will facilitate a twitter-based book club over the summer. If you have a twitter account, please follow alvarof for more instructions.
- If your organization is interested in ordering the book in bulk at 40-60% discount depending on volume, please contact us HERE.
Have a stimulating summer!,
- The SharpBrains Team
This weeks "recent literature of interest" is now available. Click here to view and/or download to your hardrive
http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/the-domestication-of-the-savage-mind
Kevin McGrew PhD
Educational/School Psych.
IAP (www.iapsych.com)
Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)
This weeks "recent literature of interest" is now available. Click here to view and/or download to your hardrive
For over four decades the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) has been one of the most distinctive tests of prefrontal function. Clinical research and recent brain imaging have brought into question the validity and specificity of this test as a marker of frontal dysfunction. Clinical studies with neurological patients have confirmed that, in its traditional form, the WCST fails to discriminate between frontal and non-frontal lesions. In addition, functional brain imaging studies show rapid and widespread activation across frontal and non-frontal brain regions during WCST performance. These studies suggest that the concept of an anatomically pure test of prefrontal function is not only empirically unattainable, but also theoretically inaccurate. The aim of the present review is to examine the causes of these criticisms and to resolve them by incorporating new methodological and conceptual advances in order to improve the construct validity of WCST scores and their relationship to prefrontal executive functions. We conclude that these objectives can be achieved by drawing on theory-guided experimental design, and on precise spatial and temporal sampling of brain activity, and then exemplify this using an integrative model of prefrontal function [i.e., Miller, E. K. (2000). The prefrontal cortex and cognitive control. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 1, 59–65.] combined with the formal information theoretical approach to cognitive control [Koechlin, E., & Summerfield, C. (2007). An information theoretical approach to prefrontal executive function. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 229–235.].
the WCST consists of four key cards and 128 response cards with geometric figures that vary according to three perceptual dimensions (color, form, or number). The task requires subjects to find the correct classification principle by trial and error and examiner feedback. Once the subject chooses the correct rule they must maintain this sorting principle (or set) across changing stimulus conditions while ignoring the other – now irrelevant – stimulus dimensions. After ten consecutive correct matches, the classification principle changes without warning, demanding a flexible shift in set. The WCST is not timed and sorting continues until all cards are sorted or a maximum of six correct sorting criteria have been reached.Conclusions
The present interest in prefrontal cortex function has renewed the use of the WCST in clinical and experimental settings. However, much criticism has questioned the utility of this test as a marker of prefrontal function. A critical review of clinical studies suggests that the original WCST does not distinguish between frontal and non-frontal lesions. Likewise, functional neuroimaging studies confirm that delivery of negative feedback during WCST rule transitions activates a widespread network of frontal and non-frontal regions within a split-second time scale. New methodological and conceptual advances from theory-guided experimental designs, precise spatial and temporal sampling of brain activity, and modern integrative models of prefrontal function (Miller, 2000) combined with a formal information theoretical approach to cognitive control (Koechlin & Summerfield, 2007) can improve our understanding of the WCST and its relationship to prefrontal executive functions. These advances suggest that simple modifications of the original version of the WCST may offer more valid and reliable measures of key component operations, such as the maintenance, shifting, and updating of task-set information over trials. Fast brain imaging techniques help us put into perspective the specificity of the test as a marker of prefrontal function as a key node within the widely distributed and tightly interconnected neural networks subserving human cognition.
Kevin McGrew PhD
Educational/School Psych.
IAP (www.iapsych.com)
Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)
To understand the extent to which the general-factor loadings of tests are inherent in their characteristics or due to the sampling of tests, the number of tests in the correlation matrix, and the factor-extraction methods used to obtain them, test scores from a large sample of young adults were inserted into independent and overlapping batteries of varying sizes. Principal factors analysis, maximum-likelihood estimation, and principal components analysis yielded general-factor loadings for each test. Generalizability theory analyses revealed that the characteristics of the tests consistently contributed the largest percentage of variance. Variance attributable to the factor-extraction method and its interactions was sizeable when principal components analysis was included in the analysis but negligible when it was excluded. Psychometric sampling error produced sizeable variance components in some analyses, and its effects were magnified when test batteries diminished in size. When results from principal components analysis were excluded and when the effects of psychometric sampling error were reduced, general-factor loadings were highly dependable across varying conditions.
Kevin McGrew PhD
Educational/School Psych.
IAP (www.iapsych.com)
Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile). (If message includes an image-
double click on it to make larger-if hard to see)
A new issue of PsycCRITIQUES is available online.
- If you would like subscription information, please go to http://www.apa.org/psyccritiques.
- If you have a subscription to the product and experience any access problems, please go to http://members1.apa.org/memhelp1.html.
June 10, 2009
Volume 54, Issue 23
1. Correcting Fallacies About Educational and Psychological Testing
Author: Richard P. Phelps (Ed.)
Reviewer: Christopher A. Was
2. The Neuropsychology of Women
Author: Elaine Fletcher-Janzen (Ed.)
Reviewer: Alejandra Suarez
3. Persuasive Messages: The Process of Influence
Authors: William L. Benoit and Pamela J. Benoit
Reviewer: Isidro Maya Jariego
4. The Others Within Us: Constructing Jewish-Israeli Identity
Author: Dan Bar-On
Reviewer: Jasmin Habib
5. Psychological Aspects of Cyberspace: Theory, Research, Applications
Author: Azy Barak (Ed.)
Reviewer: Matthew G. Hile
6. How Infants Know Minds
Author: Vasudevi Reddy
Reviewer: Barbara Y. Whitman
7. The Science of Compassionate Love: Theory, Research, and Applications
Authors: Beverly Fehr, Susan Sprecher, and Lynn G. Underwood (Eds.)
Reviewer: Jean Henry
8. Richard Rorty: The Making of an American Philosopher
Author: Neil Gross
Reviewer: Richard W. Bloom
9. Revolutionary Road
Director: Sam Mendes
Reviewer: Karen Conner
We provide a detailed review of data from psychology, genetics, and neuroscience in a point-counterpoint format to enable readers to identify the merits and demerits of each side of the debate over whether the culture-only (0% genetic-100% environmental) or hereditarian (50% genetic-50% environmental) model best explains observed mean ethnic group differences in intelligence test scores: Jewish (mean IQ = 113), East Asian (106), White (100), Hispanic (90), South Asian (87), African American (85), and sub-Saharan African (70). We juxtapose Richard Nisbett’s position, expressed in his book Intelligence and How to Get It, with our own, to examine his thesis that cultural factors alone are sufficient to explain the differences and that the hereditarian model we have presented over the last 40 years is unnecessary. We review the evidence in 14 topics of contention: (1) data to be explained; (2) malleability of IQ test scores; (3) culture-loaded versus g-loaded tests; (4) stereotype threat, caste, and “X” factors; (5) reaction-time measures; (6) within-race heritability; (7) between-race heritability; (8) sub-Saharan African IQ scores; (9) race differences in brain size; (10) sex differences in brain size; (11) trans-racial adoption studies; (12) racial admixture studies; (13) regression to the mean effects; and (14) human origins research and life-history traits. We conclude that the preponderance of evidence demonstrates that in intelligence, brain size, and other life history traits, East Asians average higher than do Europeans who average higher do South Asians, African Americans, or sub-Saharan Africans. The group differences are between 50 and 80% heritable.
