Individual differences in memory:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n
• The most basic cognitive ability test is a short-term memory test o g. digit span forward (repeat the following digits in the order presented) o About 90% of people can remember somewhere between 5 and 8 digits o Has a correlation (r =.35) with a GPA o Correlates with years of education complete (.44)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

  Digit span and practice:<\/strong><\/p>\n

  \n
  • A person\u2019s digit span can be enhanced very substantially through practice\/training<\/li>\n
  • A key element of the definition of intelligence is \u2018novel\u2019 problem or environments (practice makes the intelligence test invalid)<\/li>\n
  • The rate at which can improve their digit span through practice would be expected to correlate positively with their level of intelligence<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    Digit span backward:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
    • Made as a better indicator of intelligence<\/li>\n
    • Participants to recall the digits in the reverse order with which they were presented<\/li>\n
    • R=.35 with GPA<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Working memory capacity (WMC):<\/strong><\/p>\n

      \n
      • The ability to maintain two or more pieces of info in consciousness simultaneously and manipulate that information in a very basic manner<\/li>\n
      • Some have argued WMC is a fundamental basis of intelligence, not the case<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Fluid intelligence:<\/strong><\/p>\n

        \n
        • Core component of intelligence<\/li>\n
        • Represents the ability to perceive complex relationships, develop aids to learning, reason, abstract and solve novel problems in which a cultural context is not needed<\/li>\n
        • Spearman originally defined intelligence as the \u2018education of relations and correlates\u2019<\/li>\n
        • Raven\u2019s progressive matrices is consider the most common measure of non-verbal fluid intelligence o Fill in the missing shape<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          o Reliability estimate of internal consistency greater than .80 (lots of items) o Good predictive validity (e.g. academic achievement, career success) o Is not a pure measure of intelligence, but fluid intelligence<\/p>\n

          Processing speed:<\/strong><\/p>\n

          \n
          • The notion that more intelligent people are quicker at processing speed has a long history<\/li>\n
          • Two common methods used to measure individual differences o Reaction time o Inspection time<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

            Reaction time:<\/strong><\/p>\n

            \n
            • The time in milliseconds it takes an individual to respond cognitively to a stimulus<\/li>\n
            • Very simple version:\n
              \n
              • Places finger on a button, looks at screen<\/li>\n
              • Remove finger from button when a dot appears on a computer screen o Time between presentation and removal represents reaction time o Known as simple reaction time<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
              • Choice reaction time:\n
                \n
                • Choose two alternatives presented<\/li>\n
                • Two words presented, participant decides whether they are synonyms or antonyms by pressing the left or right button<\/li>\n
                • Speed at which the button is pressed is the choice reaction time<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                • Movement time:\n
                  \n
                  • Must distinguish between reaction time and movement time o Reaction time is cognitive process (taking a finger off the button is the time measured, pressing a button is movement time)<\/li>\n
                  • Many researchers fail to distinguish reaction time from movement time<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                  • Simple reaction time correlated with intelligence at -.30<\/li>\n
                  • Choice reaction time correlated with intelligence at -.50<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                    Inspection time:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                    \n
                    • Basic visual stimulus is presented on a computer screen<\/li>\n
                    • \u2018flash mask\u2019 is the presented for 300-500msec<\/li>\n
                    • Correlates with intelligence around .50<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      Processing speed:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                      \n
                      • Clinician\u2019s do not use reaction time and inspection time as a measure of processing speed<\/li>\n
                      • Use tests such as Coding or trials A and B<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                        Crystallised intelligence:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                        \n
                        • Represents an individuals acquired knowledge, not culture free<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          o Knowledge of world facts o Vocabulary size<\/p>\n

                          \n
                          • Many people believe that crystallised intelligence should not be considered important, as it would be influenced by opportunity<\/li>\n
                          • However a very good indicator of intellectual functioning<\/li>\n
                          • Highly heritable<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                            Crystallised intelligence- heritability:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                            \n
                            • Researchers have tested twins vocabulary size<\/li>\n
                            • Monozygotic twins (100% genes) and dizygotic (50% genes shared)<\/li>\n
                            • Monozygotic twins vocabulary (r=.79)<\/li>\n
                            • Dizygotic twins vocabulary (r=.25)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                              Positive manifold:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                              \n
                              • People who have good memories, tend to have good reasoning skills, and good vocabularies, and good processing speed etc.<\/li>\n
                              • General consensus that most cognitive abilities correlate positively with each other<\/li>\n
                              • Not a perfect correlation, vary from .20 to .75<\/li>\n
                              • rne of the first researchers was Charles Spearman o Theorised that the positive manifold arises because of a general factor of intelligence o Developed analytic techniques to test and estimate the general factor of intelligence<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                Nature\/strength of g factor:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                \n
                                • Fluid intelligence is the strongest indicator of g (.93), second strongest is crystallised (.86)<\/li>\n
                                • Processing speed is the weakest indicator (.52)<\/li>\n
                                • The g factor accounts for up to 85% of the variability in test scores<\/li>\n
                                • Lower-order factors (gf, gc, gsm, gs) account for much less of the variability in test scores, questioned whether it is justifiable to interpret them in applied contexts<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                  Intelligence and age:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                  \n
                                  • Fluid intelligence peaks around 25 years<\/li>\n
                                  • Crystallised intelligence peaks at around 45 years<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                    Self-report intelligence:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                    \n
                                    • Some researchers use self-report questionnaires to measure a person\u2019s intelligence<\/li>\n
                                    • They know it won\u2019t replace an IQ test, just want t know well people can rate their own intelligence<\/li>\n
                                    • g. self-reported questionnaire in university students:\n
                                      \n
                                      • Internal consistency reliability .73<\/li>\n
                                      • PCA uncovered one dimension with positive loadings from all of the items (.35-.75) o The correlation between elf-report IQ and task based IQ was .30 o So 9% of the variance in task based iq WAS accounted for by the self-report questionnaire<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                        Implications for personality:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                        \n
                                        • If self-report IQ has validity of only .30 as an indicator of \u201cobjective\u201d IQ, should we expect the same validity for self-report personality and \u201cobjective\u201d personality?<\/li>\n
                                        • \u201cI\u2019m the life of the party\u201d<\/li>\n
                                        • \u2026probably correlates with an objective test of life of the party at around .30 to .50.<\/li>\n
                                        • Intelligence researchers would never take seriously the notion of measuring of intelligence via self-report.<\/li>\n
                                        • It\u2019s bizarre that personality researchers are satisfied with self-report.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                          Education assessment – Blooms taxonomy:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                          \n
                                          • Taxonomy for learning teaching and assessing<\/li>\n
                                          • Two overall dimensions:\n
                                            \n
                                            • Knowledge<\/li>\n
                                            • Cognitive processing<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                              Cognitive processing dimension model:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                                              \n
                                              • The original model had evaluation at the top of the model, now revised to have creating at the top of the model<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                                                Defined- the education of elations and correlates o The ability to detect patterns in stimuli It\u2019s what person does when they don\u2019t know what to do The ability to… Continue Reading Intelligence<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[107],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4297"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4297"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4297\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4867,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4297\/revisions\/4867"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4297"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4297"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.amyork.ca\/academic\/zz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4297"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}