1315760
| Question | Answer |
| Intelligence definitions | No single definition - many ways, many researchers "whatever it is that intelligence tests measure" - BORING Ability to adapt to the environment - STERNBERG & DETTERMAN Capacity to learn or profit from experience - DEARBORN Ability to carry on abstract thinking - TERMAN |
| Intelligence tests | Should measure 'actual' aspects Some define intelligence 'operationally' therefore becoming what the test is testing - ie confirm own definition of intelligence Should include learning & adaptation - most DON'T |
| Intelligence & Attention | >Different attentional processes - divided, focused etc >Involved in all cognitive tasks - BUT not defined as component of intelligence >BURNS et al - separate attention processes from task processes: factor analysis = near perfect correlation of scores (0.977) >SCHWEIZER et al - Attentional measures correlate with intelligence scores: "1/3 variance of intelligence predicted by whole set of attentional measures" >Does this show intelligence is attentional processing? >OR that tests used were measuring this rather than 'intelligence'? |
| Intelligence & Memory | >R'ship: WM & cognitive ability - Central Executive reflects attention processes >SCHWEIZER & MOOSBRUGGER '04 - WM & attention predicted intelligence scores >Debate re extent of r'ship >KYLLONEN & CHRISTAL - WM capacity reflects ability to reason: suggests General Intelligence = WM capacity? >BUT >ACKERMAN et al - r'ship: WM & cognitive ability more complex: Meta analysis shows lower correlation so reject K&C >Previous results linked to tests req' WM; broader tests = lower correlations >g measured w/ one test BUT very complex suggest not likely to capture w/ single test! >Most tasks in cognitive ability rely on 'holding' info in one or more WM store - therefore not surprising that r'ships between WM & cognitive ability have been found (eg Kane & Engle '02) |
| Theory - Spearman | >1927 - correlations re performance on variety of intellectual tasks >Proposed 2 factory theory: >g - General, required for all kinds of mental tasks >s - specific factors req'd for just 1 kind of mental test g comprises 3 'qualitative principles of cognition': 1) apprehension of experience 2) eduction of relations 3) education of correlates >Person's test score depends on 2 things: 1) their specific ability (s) on the particular test 2) their level of g factor (general reasoning ability) |
| Intelligence - single construct? | with smaller dimensions? >BLAIR '06 - Beyond question that a single mathematical derived factor can be extracted from tests of diverse mental abilities" >BUT are such tests accurate?? >STERNBERG - General factor emerges when definitions and participant base are very narrow (Confirmation bias?) |
| Theory - Thurstone | >1938 >Opposed Spearman? (Eysenck later suggested 2nd factor analysis could be performed on Thurstone's factors - if the found 1 common factor then Spearman's g factor would be supported) >7 Primary Mental Abilities incl. Verbal Comprehension; Word Fluency; Number; Space >Some correlation between them - suggests 'g' |
| Theory - Cattell | >2 distinct components (factors) of g >Fluid Intelligence - primary reasoning ability: Ability to solve abstract relational problems that aren't taught & that are relatively free from cultural influences >Crystallised Intelligence - factual knowledge: Acquired knowledge & skills; ability to solve problems based on knowledge acquired from schooling & other life experiences |
| Intelligence - CHC Model? | >CATTELL-HORN_CARROLL (CHC) 1) Narrow abilities (70) 2) Broad cognitive abilities 3) g >CHC & Reading achievement - EVANS et al >CHC & Maths achievement - FLOYD et al >Highly influential - BUT McGREW ('09) suggests use CHC as framework to stimulate new research |
| Intelligence - multiple intelligences? (Gardner) | >GARDNER ('83) >neuropsychological basis >Linguistic >Logical-mathematical >Spatial >Musical >Bodily-kinaesthetic >Interpersonal >Intrapersonal >Influential in education >cross-cultural |
| Theory - STERNBERG | >Assessment thru lab testing cant demo nature of intelligence in real life >Triarchic Theory (1985) sub-theories: >Componential theory - critical & analytic thinking; plan & execute tasks; relates to internal world; individual cognitive processes; constant - no change >Contextual theory - socio-cultural settings; adapting, shaping & selecting environments; relates to external world; differs within & between cultures & societies >Experiential theory - based on past experience, incl. automatisation of skills; relates to experience - bridges gap between internal & external worlds; varies; mediates cognitive processes; ability to deal w/ novel situations (fluid) |
| Test - STERNBERG Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT) | >Access abilities not covered by traditional tests - eg creative & practical abilities >Use by diverse populations - BUT 'not culture fair' cant be as every test socially constructed >Test - 326 students - diverse backgrounds >Lower socioeconomic groups: Higher scores in practical & creative Lower scores in analytical >Upper middle class groups: Higher scores in analytical Lower scores in practical & creative >Reflect different childhood experiences - STERNBERG et al 1998 |
| Emotional Intelligence - definitions | MAYER & SALOVEY (1993): "A type of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one's own and others' emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one's thinking & actions" Incl. GARDNER's inter & intra personal intelligences >Concept of motivation & personal relevance in line with Sternberg's criteria for SUCCESS (related to goals - personal & multi-faceted) |
| Emotional Intelligence - Goleman | >Learned skills >Distinct from cognitive intelligence >Suggests other forms aren't emotional? >Mood & emotion can impact how info encoded, stored & retrieved |
| Emotional Intelligence - SALOVEY & MAYER | >1997 >Hierarchical 4 branch model >Continuum - combines cognitive processes w/ emotion >Lower level - fundamental (eg emotional perception) >Higher level (eg emotional regulation) >Suggests: if able to perceive emotions accurately & understand & regulate = highly aware of own & others' emotions & consequences of behaviour & emotional responses |
| Emotional Intelligence - MSCEIT | MAYER-SALOVEY-CARUSO-Emotional-Intelligence-Test >Individual differences Accurate measure of model concepts - MAYER et al ('08) >Scores increase w/ age - Abilities can be learned >McENRUE & GROVES - Predict range of outcomes eg stress & leadership potential >ZEIDNER et al - Very influential model of EI |
| Emotional Intelligence - criticisms of MSCEIT? | >Measures some factors better then others: PALMER ('05) No evidence for highest level = disparity in model & what's tested? >McENRUE & GROVES ('06) - External validity; different cultures, ages etc >Self-report - not cover social & interpersonal interaction = crucial aspects of model? |
| Difficulties inherent with Emotional Intelligence? | >Different ways to look @ EI: Some (incl. Goleman) too inclusive & vague - ie everything not in cog. intel. tests >BAR-ON ('05) - ability to perceive & manage emotion... suggests not agree with definition >Poorly defined >Lack of consensus re definition, theory & model >ZEIDNER et al ('08) - Review - EI similar to cog. intel. - becomes defined by measurement tools/tests >Doubtful single EI construct - multi-faceted & multi-dimensional >Emotion & mood shown to impact on several cognitive processes, incl. attention, perception, memory - all intrinsic to intelligence as shown previously |
| Emotional Intelligence - Personality & mental health | >EI & personality not clearly defined >SCHUTTE et al ('06) - meta analysis; positive r'ship health & EI; r'ship: psychosomatic health & EI; Low EI = poor emotional regulation; Trait measures more associate w/ mental health than ability measures >MALOUFF et al ('05) - Inverse r'ship EI & neuroticism >Suggest some overlap between EI & personality dimensions |
| Emotional Intelligence & Social Functioning | Few studies re EI in social context BRACKETT et al ('06) - Ps engage in social interaction w/ confederates & complete EI tests (MSCEIT & SREIS) Judges viewed video of interactions & rated Ps re social functioning Some r'ship between scores for men; none for women (social norms?) Overall - weak r'ship between scores - suggests they're different things? NB - generally weak r'ship between self-report & performance measures (what people say & what they actually do) |
| Emotional Intelligence & Workplace | DULEWICZ & HIGGS ('99) - claim EI scores better predictor of success PALMER ('01) - Role in effective leadership NIKOLAOU & TSAOUSIS ('02) - R'ship: occupation, stress & EI 3 groups of mental health professionals Higher EQ=lower stress & higher commitment scores Medical psychology staff = higher EI scores Suggest better @ regulating & managing emotion? Other factors? cultural; interpersonal; occupational - all not reported Issues: tests no a/c for cultural & social factors - SEARLE Global businesses - tests not applicable to different environments therefore of limited value |
| While there are many different definitions of intelligence, a broadly accepted definition would include two main factors: | 1) The ability to adapt to one’s environment (Sternberg and Detterman, 1986) 2) The capacity to learn from experience. |
| Issue with definitions that do exist for intelligence? | >Largely based on Western culture >Not so important for other cultures? eg African cultures place importance on social aspects (Sternberg and Kaufman, 1998) |
| Deary ('01) Human intelligence differences: towards a combined experimental-differential approach (extra paper) - main points? | >Summarises theory & research on cognitive components of general intelligence >Sternberg fractionated the processes (stages) of analogical reasoning emphasising WM component >Outlines Kyllonenen & Christal model - integrates WM & reasoning w/ psychometric intelligence >Summarises usefulness of procedures of Hick (choice RT); Sternberg (memory scanning); Posner (letter matching) - all show strong correlations w/ IQ but cognitive tasks underspecified >Inspection time tasks might generally reflect speed & efficiency of visual processing >Concludes - cognitive psych constructs can be integrated w/ models of psychometric intelligence - but underlying processes need detailed explanation >A 'cognitive reduction' of psychometric intelligence needs a basis in a valid cognitive architecture w/ valid constructs |
| Where do psychologists diverge in describing intelligence? | >The nature of intelligence & how it works >Some argue there is a general factor (intelligence) but no different subtypes >Others argue it is a series of abilities >Others adopt a combinative approach arguing there is general intelligence & also specific abilities (# of abilities dependent on which theory!) |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.