Developmental change in the influence of domain-general abilities and domain-specific knowledge on math

https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037/edu0000159

Citation

Geary, D. C., Nicholas, A., Li, Y., & Sun, J. (2017). Developmental change in the influence of domain-general abilities and domain-specific knowledge on mathematics achievement: An eight-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(5), 680–693. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000159

---

Abstract

The contributions of domain-general abilities and domain-specific knowledge to subsequent mathematics achievement were longitudinally assessed (n = 167) through 8th grade. First grade intelligence and working memory and prior grade reading achievement indexed domain-general effects, and domain-specific effects were indexed by prior grade mathematics achievement and mathematical cognition measures of prior grade number knowledge, addition skills, and fraction knowledge. Use of functional data analysis enabled grade-by-grade estimation of overall domain-general and domain-specific effects on subsequent mathematics achievement, the relative importance of individual domain-general and domain-specific variables on this achievement, and linear and nonlinear across-grade estimates of these effects. The overall importance of domain-general abilities for subsequent achievement was stable across grades, with working memory emerging as the most important domain-general ability in later grades. The importance of prior mathematical competencies on subsequent mathematics achievement increased across grades, with number knowledge and arithmetic skills critical in all grades and fraction knowledge in later grades. Overall, domain-general abilities were more important than domain-specific knowledge for mathematics learning in early grades but general abilities and domain-specific knowledge were equally important in later grades. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved)

Gv-IM: Has the time finally come for Gv visual imagery tests?

In our 2018 CHC chapter  Joel Schneider and I made our long standing affection for visual imagery (Gv-IM per CHC taxonomy) very clear.  See text excerpt below. (double click on images to enlarge)

Today I ran across a potential free PDF book (via Research Gate) that may make IM tests viable.  There is hope.

The evolution of the Woodcock-Johnson (WJ--WJ IV) global IQ or g scores - The WJ is the Elon Musk of IQ testing

 Across the various editions of the WJ Tests of Cognitive Abilities (WJ, WJ-R, WJ III, WJ IV), the authors continually have sought to improve the measurement of intelligence via following contemporary research and theory.  As a result, in contrast to many other IQ tests, the WJ has been known for global IQ scores (original called Broad Cognitive Ability, later changed to General Intellectual Ability) that changed rather dramatically from one revision to the next.  We the WJ authors might be considered to be the Elon Musk of IQ test development.

I was recently asked to explain the changing nature of the BAC/GIA scores.  The result is the table inserted below (double click to enlarge).  I believe the table is self-explanatory.  A nice PDF copy can be downloaded here.  Enjoy.

Can You Ever Be Too Smart for Your Own Good? Comparing Linear and Nonlinear Effects of Cognitive Ability on Life Outcomes

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1745691620964122

Abstract
Despite a long-standing expert consensus about the importance of cognitive ability for life outcomes, contrary views continue to proliferate in scholarly and popular literature. This divergence of beliefs presents an obstacle for evidence-based policymaking and decision-making in a variety of settings. One commonly held idea is that greater cognitive ability does not matter or is actually harmful beyond a certain point (sometimes stated as > 100 or 120 IQ points). We empirically tested these notions using data from four longitudinal, representative cohort studies comprising 48,558 participants in the United States and United Kingdom from 1957 to the present. We found that ability measured in youth has a positive association with most occupational, educational, health, and social outcomes later in life. Most effects were characterized by a moderate to strong linear trend or a practically null effect (mean R² range = .002–.256). Nearly all nonlinear effects were practically insignificant in magnitude (mean incremental R² = .001) or were not replicated across cohorts or survey waves. We found no support for any downside to higher ability and no evidence for a threshold beyond which greater scores cease to be beneficial. Thus, greater cognitive ability is generally advantageous—and virtually never detrimental.

******************************************
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD
Educational & School Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
https://www.themindhub.com
******************************************

The Relationship between Intelligence and Divergent Thinking—A Meta-Analytic Update

Abstract
This paper provides a meta-analytic update on the relationship between intelligence and divergent thinking (DT), as research on this topic has increased, and methods have diversified since Kim's meta-analysis in 2005. A three-level meta-analysis was used to analyze 849 correlation coefficients from 112 studies with an overall N = 34,610. The overall effect showed a significant positive correlation of r = .25. This increase of the correlation as compared to Kim's prior meta-analytic findings could be attributed to the correction of attenuation because a difference between effect sizes prior-Kim vs. post-Kim was non-significant. Different moderators such as scoring methods, instructional settings, intelligence facets, and task modality were tested together with theoretically relevant interactions between some of these factors. These moderation analyses showed that the intelligence–DT relationship can be higher (up to r = .31–.37) when employing test-like assessments coupled with be-creative instructions, and considering DT originality scores. The facet of intelligence (g vs. g_f vs. g_c) did not affect the correlation between intelligence and DT. Furthermore, we found two significant sample characteristics: (a) average sample age was positively associated with the intelligence–DT correlation, and (b) the intelligence–DT correlation decreased for samples with increasing percentages of females in the samples. Finally, inter-moderator correlations were checked to take potential confounding into account, and also publication bias was assessed. This meta-analysis provides a comprehensive picture of current research and possible research gaps. Theoretical implications, as well as recommendations for future research, are discussed. View Full-Text
Keywords: divergent thinking; intelligence; fluid intelligence; crystallized intelligence; meta-analysis


https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/9/2/23

******************************************
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD
Educational & School Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
https://www.themindhub.com
******************************************

The Relationship between Theory of Mind and Intelligence: A Formative g Approach

The Relationship between Theory of Mind and Intelligence: A Formative g Approach

https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence9010011

• Ester Navarro, S. A. Goring, A. Conway
• Published 2021
• Medicine
• Journal of Intelligence

Theory of Mind (ToM) is the ability understand that other people's mental states may be different from one's own. Psychometric models have shown that individual differences in ToM can largely be attributed to general intelligence (g) (Coyle et al. 2018). Most psychometric models specify g as a reflective latent variable, which is interpreted as a general ability that plays a causal role in a broad range of cognitive tasks, including ToM tasks. However, an alternative approach is to specify g as a formative latent variable, that is, an overall index of cognitive ability that does not represent a psychological attribute (Kovacs and Conway 2016). Here we consider a formative g approach to the relationship between ToM and intelligence. First, we conducted an SEM with reflective g to test the hypothesis that ToM is largely accounted for by a general ability. Next, we conducted a model with formative g to determine whether the relationship between ToM and intelligence is influenced by domain-specific tasks. Finally, we conducted a redundancy analysis to examine the contribution of each g variable. Results suggest that the relationship between ToM and intelligence in this study was influenced by language-based tasks, rather than solely a general ability.

******************************************
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD
Educational & School Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
https://www.themindhub.com
******************************************

Nice followup and extension of Floyd et al (2018) IQ exchangeability study

Limited Internal Comparability of General Intelligence Composites: Impact on External Validity, Possible Predictors, and Practical Remedies


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/10731911211005171

Silvia Grieder1 , Anette Bünger1 , Salome D. Odermatt1 , Florine Schweizer1, and Alexander Grob1

Abstract

Research on comparability of general intelligence composites (GICs) is scarce and has focused exclusively on comparing GICs from different test batteries, revealing limited individual-level comparability. We add to these findings, investigating the group- and individual-level comparability of different GICs within test batteries (i.e., internal score comparability), thereby minimizing transient error and ruling out between-battery variance completely. We (a) determined the magnitude of intraindividual IQ differences, (b) investigated their impact on external validity, (c) explored possible predictors for these differences, and (d) examined ways to deal with incomparability. Results are based on the standardization samples of three intelligence test batteries, spanning from early childhood to late adulthood. Despite high group-level comparability, individual-level comparability was often unsatisfactory, especially toward the tails of the IQ distribution. This limited comparability has consequences for external validity, as GICs were differentially related to and often less predictive for school grades for individuals with high IQ differences. Of several predictors, only IQ level and age were systematically related to comparability. Consequently, findings challenge the use of overall internal consistencies for confidence intervals and suggest using confidence intervals based on test–retest reliabilities or age- and IQ-specific internal consistencies for clinical interpretation. Implications for test construction and application are discussed.

Keywords.  general intelligence, IQ, screening, individual level, reliability, validity

Theories and measurement of intelligence. - PsycNET

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-80416-015

Citation
Floyd, R. G., Farmer, R. L., Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2021). Theories and measurement of intelligence. In L. M. Glidden, L. Abbeduto, L. L. McIntyre, & M. J. Tassé (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of intellectual and developmental disabilities: Foundations (p. 385–424). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000194-015

---

Abstract
Advancements in the measurement of intellectual functioning via individually administered intelligence tests during the early 1900s led to reliance on IQs to represent the deficits in intellectual functioning during the past century. Concurrent development of models of intelligence also advanced understanding and measurement of intellectual functioning, and the current consensus is that intellectual functioning is best represented by a latent ability referred to as general intelligence (or psychometric g), as well as numerous broad and narrow abilities. As a result of these developments, the practice of identification of persons with intellectual disability (ID) is now based on a stronger scientific foundation. This chapter discusses three models of intelligence and reviews the genetic and environmental influences on intellectual functioning across the population, and persons with ID in particular. It culminates with a description of best practices and emerging methods in the assessment of intellectual functioning. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

--
***********************************************
Kevin S. McGrew,  PhD
Educational Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
www.themindhub.com
************************************************