Describe how these theories differ in regard to the ever-reversing role of general intellectual ability factor (g).
General intelligence tends to relate to various degrees with each other (Cohen 2012). An example of this is that if an individual is good in math, they may also be good in spelling. In this weeks reading we reviewed several different models of measurement of intelligence. In regard to these theories and general intelligence (g), the theories are various but have commonality and overlap. The Spearman's two-factor theory is if a test has high correlation with other test than the measurement of g is highly saturated (Cohen, 2012). The greater the importance of g on a test, the better the test is believed to predict intelligence
…show more content…
Crystalized is referred to as acquired skills and knowledge (Cohen, 2012). Fluid intelligence is in reference to memory (Cohen, 2012). Luria's information processing approach is a theory that there are two basic processing styles, simultaneous and successive (Cohen, 2012). Simultaneous is when the thought as happening all at once, where as successive is when the thought is gathered over several thoughts in a series (Cohen, 2012). The Carroll's three-stratum theory is a belief that intelligence is layered with general intelligence of top and thoughts and processing below, similar to the stratum in geology (Cohen, 2012). The Cattell-Horn and Carroll's CHC model is a blended model of the Cattell-Horn model of crystalized and fluid intelligence and the Carroll model of …show more content…
The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, fifth edition uses the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intellectual abilities (Cohen, 2012).
Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities, third or fourth editions.
The Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities, third edition is also based on the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities (Cohen, 2012).
Explain your thoughts regarding an intelligence test that has a dual theoretical basis, based on your readings and review of the theoretical influences on these tests. Explain your position by including consideration of validity.
My general thought is that a test that uses more than one theory would be a better test than a test that using a single ideation. The measurement of intelligence can be very subjective so the idea of incorporating several models would elevate that subjectivity of a single model.
In order for a test to have appeal is must have validity (Cohen, 2012). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales has been praised for its validity, and it utilizes the CHC model with is a composite model of intelligence (Cohen, 2012). The Wechsler model also shows strong validity and it also uses the CHC model (Cohen,
Not only does the KBIT-2 lack in accommodating for cultural and language barriers, but it is also deficient towards those with mild to moderate motor difficulties due to the fact that the test requires minimal motor skills (Bain & Jaspers, 2010). However, since the test does not require time limits individuals with mild motor difficulties could be assessed. Overall, the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition appears to be psychometrically strong and feasible assessment to administer (Bain & Jaspers, 2010).
The Bell Curve is a book originally published in 1994. It was written by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray to explain the variations of intelligence in American Society. They accomplished this by using statistical analysis, for the purpose of raising warnings regarding the consequences of the intelligence gap. This was also made to propose a national social policy with the goal of mitigating bad consequences that have been attributed to this intelligence gap. Much of the information is widely considered controversial. An example of this is the low African-American scores compared to whites and Asians, and genetic factors in intelligence abilities. The introduction of the book starts with a brief history of intelligence theory and recent developments in intelligence thought and testing. The author creates six assumptions that has to do with the validity of the “classical” cognitive testing techniques.
Construct validity is the degree to which scores measure an intended construct. Construct validity is demonstrated by the correlation with other established intelligence and school achievement tests, and item performance. Developers computed correlation coefficients between scores on the TONI-4 and scores on two nonverbal intelligence tests, the Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence–Second Edition (CTONI-2; Hammill, Pearson, & Wiederholt, 2009) and the TONI-3 (Brown, Sherbenou, & Johnsen, 1997). For the CTONI-2 study, there were 72 participants 6 to 17 years old. Form A scores were correlated with scores on the CTONI-2 Pictorial Scale, CTONI-2 Geometric Scale, and CTONI-2 Full Scale. The corresponding corrected coefficients between the TONI-4 and these scales were .74, .73, and .79, respectively. In the TONI-3 study, 56 participants were randomly sampled from the standardization sample. Participants’ item-level data were rescored to obtain TONI-3 scores. The corrected correlation coefficient between the TONI-4 and TONI-3 was .74. Developers also calculated average correlation coefficients between TONI-4 scores and scores on three school achievement tests ranging from .55 to .78. The resulting correlations confirm construct validity. These results show the TONI-4 scores are generally more correlated with other intelligence test scores than with achievement test scores. Item
The field of psychology has continuously endeavored to find an appropriate method in evaluating intelligence. The Stanford-Binet intelligence test is one of pioneering tests created to measure facets of intelligence, and it is still being utilized today (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997). Weschler created several intelligence tests focusing on age range in relation to intelligence (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997). While these tests are staples in the psychological testing community, there are many criticisms of intelligence testing. One such criticism is the absence of race and culture as influential factors of intelligence (Carroll, 2010).
Howard Gardner’s theory contains eight main multiple intelligence. As the years have progressed there have taken one out and is left with the main seven. These seven are: Linguistic, Mathematical, Spatial, bodily, Musical, Interpersonal, and Intrapersonal. These are found in everyone; however, each person will excel in one or two. Once teachers can determine what intelligence the students will exceed on and teach to their strengths the student will learn much more.
Intelligence tests have been developed by scientists as a tool to categorize army recruits or analyze school children. But still discussing what intelligence is, academics have a difficult time defining what intelligence tests should measure. According to the American researcher Thorndike, intelligence is only that what intelligence tests claim it is (Comer, Gould, & Furnham, 2013). Thus, depending on what is being researched in the test and depending on the scientist’s definition of intelligence the meaning of the word intelligence may vary a lot. This essay will discuss what intelligence is in order to be able to understand the intelligence theories and aims of intelligence tests.
Charles Spearman's model of intelligence and Howard Gardner's multiple intelligence theory are two of the most widely used theories of intelligence. In order to understand how similar the two theories are we must first understand their differences. These two men differed in opinion on how IQ and intelligence should be measured, and they differed in opinion on what made a person "smart". In order to examine these things they first had to understand the human brain and how it works. They had to examine the human study habits and rituals, along with the human test taking habits.
Many psychology theories have been developed in order to determine how to measure intelligence. Volume 63 of the Annual Review of Psychology details a few studies citing popular theories from the 1970s to 2000 (Deary, 2012), including the measurement of, “sensory discrimination and reaction time,” (Deary, 2012). After 2000, however, “interest has focused, in the broadly psychometric-experimental levels, on processing speed and working memory as potential explanatory variables for intelligence,” (Deary, 2012). In measuring intelligence, scientists are focu...
Wayne, PA: Author. Wechsler, D. (2008). The 'Standard'. Wechsler adult intelligence scale–fourth edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson University Press, Inc.
Intelligent Quotient, or IQ score, is a measure of mental ability. It plays a major role in how individuals’ lives play out. It can be accredited for everything from personality to interests to occupation. The main debate when it comes to the subject of IQ is how a person’s score is influenced by environment and heredity. There are many theories on the matter. Some state that either heredity or environment exclusively determines IQ. Others believe that a person’s score is a result of the two. In this paper, we will analyze all of these theories and prove that while heredity plays a much greater role, they both have a very notable influence.
Intelligence can not only be measured by a test. It can be measured on how that person perceives more than just a complex worded question or two. I do however prefer the Criterion-referenced type of performance measurement; everyone is graded upon the quality of performance that is based on the person’s willingness to receive a certain grade. If you put in enough effort, even if you are not good at taking test you will eventually get what is
The two approaches are similar in what they would take into account. It is difficult to draw a clear line just on the theoretical approach. Distinction came from research procedures because it clearly demonstrates the disagreement on the origin for both intelligence and personality. It is as David said 'what we wish to know' is causing differences in what is produce in targeted experiments, it is therefore clearer to see when you look at experiments from two different approach.
In this world, there are many different individuals who are not only different in demographics but also different neurologically. Due to an immense amount of people it is important to first understand each individual, in order, to better understand them and to help them when it comes to certain areas such as education, the work force, and etc…. For this reason psychologists have aimed to further understand individuals through the use of psychological assessments. This paper aims to examine a particular assessment tool, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (Fifth Edition), which measures both intelligence and cognitive abilities (Roid, 2003). This assessment is usually administered by psychologists and the scores are most often used to determine placement in academics and services allotted to children and adolescents (despite their compatibility for adults) (Wilson & Gilmore, 2012). Furthermore before the investigation dives into the particulars of the test, such as its strengths and weakness’, it is best to first learn more about the intelligence scales general characteristics.
On the ‘nature’ side of the debate is the psychometric approach, considered to be the most dominant in the study of intelligence, which “inspired the most research and attracted the most attention” (Neisser et al. 1996, p. 77). It argues that there is one general (‘g’) factor which accounts for intelligence. In the 1880s, Francis Galton conducted many tests (measuring reaction times to cognitive tasks), (Boundless 2013), in order to scientifically measure intelligence. These tests were linked to the eugenic breeding programme, which aimed to eliminate biologically inferior people from society. Galton believed that as intelligence was inherited, social class or position were significant indicators of intelligence. If an individual was of high social standing, they would be more intelligent than those of a lower position. However he failed to show any consistency across the tests for this hypothesis, weakening his theory that social class correlated with intelligence. Nevertheless, his creation of the intelligence test led many to continue to develop...
Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligence focuses more on how numerical expressions of human intelligence are not a full and accurate depiction of people’s abilities (McFarlane, 2011). He includes and describes eight intelligences that are based on skills and abilities that are valued within different cultures. The eight intelligences include visual-spatial (e.g. sailor navigating with no navigational systems), verbal-linguistic (e.g. poets, writers, orators, and communicators), bodily-kinesthetic (e.g. dancers, athletes, surgeons, craftspeople), logical-mathematical (e.g. mathematicians and logicians), interpersonal(e.g. salespeople, teachers, clinicians, politicians, and religious leaders), musical (e.g. musicians and