Unit 3 Flashcards
INT Varies, Prof. Agree & Disagree
Prof. cannot agree.
-“INT is what INT tests measure”
Agree INT is:
-Capacity to learn w/ exp
-Ability to adapt (to ENV)
What is INT? Lay person VS Prof. VS Contemporary tests
Lay person: SOC competence
-Verbal ability, PS
Prof.: Practical INT
Contemporary tests measure verbal, quantitative, spatial-vis. ability (Block test, Candy crush), & Mem.
-Above skills important in school & work in W SOC
What isn’t considered in the INT Def.?
Cultural diff., E VS Africa
-Kpelle object food sort (ex: W = utensils together VS A = Food w/ utensils)
Capacity to learn
-Dynamic Ass.: Eval client performance on new material/what learn “on the fly”
What isn’t considered in the INT Def.? pt 2
Cr. (D production)
-Novel solutions to common problems
-CT VS DT: CT: logic, DT: Cr.
Practical INT
Contextual INT
Practical INT
How to function effectively & efficiently in ED life & situations
Contextual INT
Ability to adapt to, shape, and select suitable ENV
3 Ways INT is studied/Measured
Psychometric Approach: Exam test structure
Info-Processing Approach: How we & brain processes/intakes info
-Eye reacting to light
-Mental processes for learning & PS
COG Approach: Adapting to ENV & IRL demand
INT Theories
Galton, Binet, Wechsler
Galton’s INT Th.
INT is good sensory abilities b/c info enters brain via senses
-EX: Anthropometric lab & Brass instrument testing
Binet INT Th.
INT is H mental skills, not sense keenness
-Judgement, understanding, & reasoning
-INT can grow & be practiced
-WK: All verbal
Wechsler INT Th.
INT is the capacity to think purposefully, rationally, & effectively in the ENV
-Recognition of non-INT factors other than, COG ability, that impact INT performance like ANX, motive, frustration tolerance, & emo. state
Factor Analysis
Data reduction tech. looking for clusters of items (subtests) w/ a common factor
EX: Meat:
-Poultry, pork
*Poultry: Chicken, duck
*pork: Bacon, ham
Lumper VS Splitter INT Theories
Lumpers believe INT is 1, tapped by all COG abilities. Splitters believe INT is composed of diff. varying w/ independence.
Splitters:
-Ability used depends on COG activity engaged in
-Some brain areas DEV more than others
-EX: There are many ways to travel (walk, run, drive, plane, ect)
Lumper INT Theories
Charles Spearman, Raymond Cattel, & A. Luria
Charles Spearman’s 2 Factor Th. of INT
g-factor: General INT ability necessary for INT functioning
-Mental energy for PS, neural efficiency
-s-factor: Specific INT factor necessary for specific task
Cattel 2-factor Th.
Fluid g(f) INT: H reasoning to solve unique & novel problems
-Sm depend on storage knowledge
-EX: Matrix reasoning
-Adapt to new situations, COG flexibility
-Measured w/ NV tasks
-L dependent on culture, training in attnt & working memory helps tho
-Decline after adolescence
*Pre-frontal cortex mediates g(f) & deteriorates w/ age
Crystalized INT g(c): Breadth & depth of INT obtained via formal instruction & outside learning
-Relies on culture & schooling
-Stored know. about nature of IRL
-Lang. & IRL know. & info used to PS
-g(c) accumulates w/ application of g(f) to new info
-Is robust w/ age, w/out degenerative COG disease
A. Luria’s Info-Processing Th., PASS
(S)equential (serial) Processing: Info processed step by step
(S)imultaneous (parallel) Processing: Info integrated at once, forming a whole
-Instructions/directions
(A)ttending relevant info & (P)lanning effective solutions are critical.
PASS Th.: Planning, Attending, Simultaneous, Sequential
Splitter Theories
Louis Thustone’s 7 mental abilities, Guilford’s Structure of INT Model
Thurstone’s 7 Primary Mental Abilities
Each mental ability is independent but corr.
-Verbal comprehension
-Word fluency
-Number ability
-Spatial Ability
-Assoc. Memory
-Perceptual (clerical) speed
-Inductive Reasoning
*Inductive r. EX: 1, 3, 6, 10, ____. Ans: 15, diff. INC by 1 at a time
Guildford’s Structure of INT Model
4 types of content (input), X 5 mental operations = ~120 INT abilities
-Helpful for DT VS CT & production
Of INT models/Ths, who is right?
It depends! Vernon’s Hierarchal model resolves debates between lumpers & splitters
Vernon’s Hierarchal Model: g(eneral) INT factor at top, broader factors in following LVLS (Verbal & Practical INT)
-Specific factors in each broad lvl
-g: Verbal (education) & Practical (Spatial & mech.)
*Verbal: Vocal, arithmetic
*Practical: BD, OA, Mazes
Cattel-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Th.
Most used hierarchal model
-Cattel: Fluid VS Crystal INT
-Horn: Extends g(f) & g(c), adding broad abilities
-Carroll: Brings together decades of factor analysis rsch, makes “big picture” of INT
g is still at top, broad abilities in 2nd tier, narrow abilities at bottom
Challenges of g theory
Savant syndrome: Mildly retarded w/ H INT in one area
-EX: Spongebob is a great sculptor
Number obtained during test VS INT profile of client
R. Sternberge Triarchic Theory of INT
Analytical (component) INT: Most commonly measured
Cr. (experimental) INT: Ability to deal w/ novelty
Practical (Contextual) INT: Adapt to ENV, shape ENV, selecting ENV
H. Gardener’s Theory of Multiple INT
Linguistic, logic-math, & spatial measured by current test.
Bodily Kinesthetic INT
Personal INT
-INTRApersonal
-INTERpersonal
Musical INT
Upcoming additions: Naturalist, spiritual, & existential INT
Stanford-Binet 5th ed. Background
1905 first origin
-Children tested to ID body parts
-Terman influences to INC rng & standardization
-Is not similar to Wechsler b/c S-B director worked on Wechsler tests
S-B updated age & IQ range
Is now 2-85+ yo
-PREV was only 2-23, used by school psych
-INC life expectancy, INC test age rng
IQ rng 40-100
-H items to address gifted, L items for kids & L function adults
*EX: Manipulatives: Items physically used/manipulated by test taker
Norm Sample
4800 participants ages 2-85yo
-Stratified sample where demographics match consensus, checked for fairness in G, race, ability status, & religion
Structure of S-B5
-Is a hierarchical model test partly based on Cattel’s th.
-Full Scale IQ (FSIQ): Composite score based on 10 subtests
-M = 100, SD = 15
The two domains of the S-B5
Nonverbal IQ & Verbal IQ
-M = 100, SD = 15
-Each domain based on 5 subtests
-The 5 subtests test the 5 factors
-Not all subtests given if client has disability
The two domains of the S-B5 pt 2
5 factors, of 2 domains, makes 1 full IQ test
-Each factor based on 2 subtests, NV & V
-Similar to 5 index score
-10 subtests total
*M = 10, SD = 3
Administration of S-B5
Starts w/ 2 routing subtests (1 NV, 1 V), estimating client’s ability lvls , which determines use of following subtests
-Routing tests also estimate g/over all ability
-NV fluid reasoning first, then V know.
After routing tests:
-Remaining 4 NV tests given
-Then 4 remaining V tests
-Wechsler alternates NV & V tests
S-B5 Start point
-Based on age for routing tests
-Based on subsequent routing test performance
-Reverse rule for when items are too hard
-Goal: Est. basal lvl w/ inital items
*Items in order of diff., credit given for items below basal
S-B5 Stop Rule
Test stops when too hard, client misses several times
-Determines ceiling lvl
-Processing spd not relevent
*Some gifted children work slowly and carefully
S-B5 Subtests
Fluid reasoning
-NV (routing), V
-g(f) & g(c)
Knowledge
-NV, V (routing)
Quantitative Reasoning
-NV, V quantitative (math, train Qs) reasoning
Visual-Spatial Reasoning
-NV, V V-S processing, Candy Crush
Working Memory
-NV WM, V WM
S-B5 Reliability & Validity
Rel. Generally STR, results similar to Wechsler
-LGest composite scores are M reliable, Individual subtests good, L reliable
Val. corr. w/ corresponding scales on S-B4
-Corr. w/ similar scales on other COG, ability, & achievement tests
Wechsler series
Wechsler adult INT scale 4th ed (WAIS-IV, 2008)
-Ages 16-90&11m
-WAIS-V in process
W INT Scale for Children, 5th ed (WISC-V, 2014)
-Ages 6-16&11m, used by school psych
W Preschool & Primary Scale of INT, 4th ed (WPPSI-IV, 2012)
-Ages 2&6m-7&7m
Similarity in administration, scoring, & interpretation.
Origin of W Scale
1932, W worked at Bellevue Hospital, working w/ psych. patients
1939, W-B test publicized
-Test items borrowed from early tests like the Binet-Simon, Army-Alpha, & Army Beta
-Work w/ psych. patients, W aware of non-INT factors influence test performance
Why was the W-B test made?
To correct flaws from earlier ass. tests
-Appeals to adults
-L emphasis on V Qs & spd
-M emphasis on accuracy
-Mental age
-Deviation IQ: Scored compared to M performance of others the same age
IQ Constancy
IQ ~ stable w/ normal aging after early childhood
-Position may not change as self & peers learn w/ age
Different subtests on W-scale
Varying COG test, WISC-V has 21 subtests (8 are new)
-10 primary subtests commonly used b/c yields FSIQ & 5 Primary index scores
-6 secondary subtests provide boarder sampling of INT functioning
-5 Complimentary subtests to measure skills of ass. w/ learning diff.
General Feat. of W-test
Some subtests involve V & performance tasks
-Hands on, visual, NV
Not all subtests given if client has disability interfering w/ V or performance tasks
-Info gathered on phys., Lang., or sensory limits before administering test
General Feat. of W-test pt 2
Is hierarchical model
-Full scale IQ (M = 100, SD = 15)
-5 primary index scale
-Primary & 2ndary subtests (M = 10, SD = 3)
-Examiner can analyze profile of STR & WK instead of looking at just IQ
Across the 3 W-tests some subtests allow “apple to apple” comparison if client is retested through school
5 Primary Index
-Verbal comprehension
-Visual spatial
-Fluid Reasoning
-Working memory
-Processing spd
W-V comprehension index
Access and apply acquired knowledge
-Similarities & Vocab
W-Visual-Spatial index
Eval visual details & understand v-s relation to construct geo design model
-Block design & visual puzzle
W-Fluid Reasoning index
Detect underlying conceptual relationship in visual objects, use reasoning to ID, & apply rules
-Matrix reasoning & figure weights
W-Working Memory Index
Register, maintain, & manipulate visual & auditory info in conscious awareness
-Digit span & Pic span
W-Processing Spd Index
Spd & accuracy of visual ID and decision making & implement
-Coding & symbol search
-Sig. corr. w/ INT ability
-Sensitive to attnt & learning disorders
WISC-V
Can be done on paper or tablet
-AVG time to obtain FSIQ & 5PI ~65min
-AVG obtain FSIQ ~48min
-Partially depends on age, ability lvl, & test taking style
-Observer sits across from child to see bhvr
-Rapport build, avoiding “test”
WISC-V Start point
Determined by age of client if kid
-Demonstration items, practice samples, & teaching items (feedback) for some subtests
-Items INC in diff. to initially build success
-Reversal rule
-Basal lvl
WISC-V stop point
When failing scores occur in a row
-Discontinue if 0 remain
-Ceiling lvl: Client can’t get correct
Why add to old tests?
-Reflect advancements in field (5PI)
-Makes relevant to sample b/c culture bias
*Flynn Effect: IQ INC 3pts/decade
*AVG IQ w/ WISC-3 in ‘91 = ~100, WISC-4 in ‘03 = 100
Additions to older test
-L floor, H ceiling
-Improved items & art work, adding new subtests
-A test age rng INC, DEC spd & movement importance
Rel. of WISC-V
Full IQ better than subtests b/c is whole
-Primary & secondary L, but good
-SEM impact (~3pts FSIQ)
Validity of WISC-V
Yes on content, no for prediction
-Content Val: Items & subtests important in lit & expert review for broad COG rng
-Stat. tech. of factor analysis supports division of subtest into 5PI
-C & D Val: subtests measure similar COG domain corr. MT those not similar
*STR of corr. btwn WISC-5 & WISC-4, consistent w/ Flynn Effect
*Scores on 5 LT 4 b/c Flynn Effect
