Pub Date : 2025-04-18DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101919
Robert J. Sternberg
Intelligence in action, or as performance, is almost inevitably at a different level from intelligence as some theoretical level of competence. The article considers a metaphor of an obstacle race as illustrating how intelligence functions in everyday practice. Intelligence as performance always includes responses to the obstacles one confronts. The article opens with an introduction explaining the racetrack metaphor. The article then considers the various obstacles to the deployment of intelligence, including both primarily internal and primarily external obstacles. The article then considers three models for the relationship between intelligence as competence and intelligence as performance. Finally, the article draws some conclusions about intelligence as it acts in the everyday world.
{"title":"The other half of intelligence: An obstacle-racecourse performance-based model of intelligence in action","authors":"Robert J. Sternberg","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101919","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101919","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Intelligence in action, or as performance, is almost inevitably at a different level from intelligence as some theoretical level of competence. The article considers a metaphor of an obstacle race as illustrating how intelligence functions in everyday practice. Intelligence as performance always includes responses to the obstacles one confronts. The article opens with an introduction explaining the racetrack metaphor. The article then considers the various obstacles to the deployment of intelligence, including both primarily internal and primarily external obstacles. The article then considers three models for the relationship between intelligence as competence and intelligence as performance. Finally, the article draws some conclusions about intelligence as it acts in the everyday world.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"110 ","pages":"Article 101919"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143848083","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-04-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101909
Morten Nordmo , Tore Nøttestad Norrøne , Ole Christian Lang-Ree
Since 1954, the Norwegian Armed Forces have annually administered an unchanged general mental ability test to male cohorts, comprising figure matrices, word similarities, and mathematical reasoning tests. These stable and representative data have supported various claims about shifts in general mental ability (GMA) levels, notably the Flynn effect and its reversal, influencing extensive research linking these scores with health and other outcomes. This study examines whether observed temporal trends in scores reflect changes in latent intelligence or are confounded by evolving test characteristics and specific test-taking abilities in numerical reasoning, word comprehension, and figure matrices reasoning. Our findings, using multiple-group factor analysis and multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) models, indicate that while there was a general upward trend in observed scores until 1993, this was predominantly driven by enhancements in the fluid intelligence task, specifically figure matrices reasoning. Notably, these gains do not uniformly translate to a rise in underlying GMA, suggesting the presence of domain-specific improvements and test characteristic changes over time. Conversely, the observed decline is primarily due to decreases in word comprehension and numerical reasoning tests, also reflecting specific abilities not attributable to changes in the latent GMA factor. Our findings further challenge the validity of claims that changes in the general factor drive the Flynn effect and its reversal. Furthermore, they caution against using these scores for longitudinal studies without accounting for changes in test characteristics.
{"title":"Reevaluating the Flynn effect, and the reversal: Temporal trends and measurement invariance in Norwegian armed forces intelligence scores","authors":"Morten Nordmo , Tore Nøttestad Norrøne , Ole Christian Lang-Ree","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101909","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101909","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Since 1954, the Norwegian Armed Forces have annually administered an unchanged general mental ability test to male cohorts, comprising figure matrices, word similarities, and mathematical reasoning tests. These stable and representative data have supported various claims about shifts in general mental ability (GMA) levels, notably the Flynn effect and its reversal, influencing extensive research linking these scores with health and other outcomes. This study examines whether observed temporal trends in scores reflect changes in latent intelligence or are confounded by evolving test characteristics and specific test-taking abilities in numerical reasoning, word comprehension, and figure matrices reasoning. Our findings, using multiple-group factor analysis and multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) models, indicate that while there was a general upward trend in observed scores until 1993, this was predominantly driven by enhancements in the fluid intelligence task, specifically figure matrices reasoning. Notably, these gains do not uniformly translate to a rise in underlying GMA, suggesting the presence of domain-specific improvements and test characteristic changes over time. Conversely, the observed decline is primarily due to decreases in word comprehension and numerical reasoning tests, also reflecting specific abilities not attributable to changes in the latent GMA factor. Our findings further challenge the validity of claims that changes in the general factor drive the Flynn effect and its reversal. Furthermore, they caution against using these scores for longitudinal studies without accounting for changes in test characteristics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"110 ","pages":"Article 101909"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143748461","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101910
Dragos Iliescu , Samuel Greiff
{"title":"Rigorous science, reported with social responsibility: Not a contradiction, but a synthesis","authors":"Dragos Iliescu , Samuel Greiff","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101910","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101910","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 101910"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143759126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101907
Róbert Csányi , Gyöngyvér Molnár
The aim of this study was to investigate the role of test-taking effort in knowledge acquisition via problem exploration behaviour used in complex problem-solving (CPS) environments. The sample consisted of undergraduate students just starting their university studies (n = 1748). MicroDYN-based tasks with different levels of complexity were administered via the eDia online platform. Students' exploration behaviour was coded based on the VOTAT (vary-one-thing-at-a-time) strategy, and latent class analysis was used to identify students' behavioural and learning profiles. We identified four profiles: rapid learners, non-performers, proficient explorers and ineffective learners. Students' test-taking effort was measured based on the time they spent on the tasks. Results suggest a strong relation between VOTAT strategy use and test-taking effort. Rapid learners and proficient explorers displayed the greatest test-taking effort, followed by ineffective learners and non-performers. The results provide a new interpretation of previous analyses of the knowledge acquisition phase in CPS.
{"title":"Looking beyond students' exploration and learning strategies: The role of test-taking effort in complex problem-solving","authors":"Róbert Csányi , Gyöngyvér Molnár","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101907","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101907","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The aim of this study was to investigate the role of test-taking effort in knowledge acquisition via problem exploration behaviour used in complex problem-solving (CPS) environments. The sample consisted of undergraduate students just starting their university studies (<em>n</em> = 1748). MicroDYN-based tasks with different levels of complexity were administered via the eDia online platform. Students' exploration behaviour was coded based on the VOTAT (vary-one-thing-at-a-time) strategy, and latent class analysis was used to identify students' behavioural and learning profiles. We identified four profiles: rapid learners, non-performers, proficient explorers and ineffective learners. Students' test-taking effort was measured based on the time they spent on the tasks. Results suggest a strong relation between VOTAT strategy use and test-taking effort. Rapid learners and proficient explorers displayed the greatest test-taking effort, followed by ineffective learners and non-performers. The results provide a new interpretation of previous analyses of the knowledge acquisition phase in CPS.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 101907"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143550223","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-03-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101908
Khalid ALMamari, Mohamed Al Siyabi, Abdullah Al Shibli, Abdullah AlAjmi
Higher education admission policies typically prioritize Grade Point Average (GPA) as the primary criterion for college admissions, often overlooking the potential significance of specific academic achievements. This study contributes to the debate on the relative importance of general versus specific academic achievements in predicting college performance, an area less explored compared to the interplay between cognitive abilities and performance outcomes. This research analyzes twelfth-grade subject scores and college GPAs from four engineering programs (Aeronautical, System, Marine, and Civil) in Oman, as well as the combined sample. EFA and CFA results indicate that a bifactor achievement model, comprising general and two specific factors (Math-Science and Humanities-Social Sciences), adequately represents the twelfth-grade data. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) correlated these factors with college performance in the first, middle, and final years, separately for each program and the combined sample. The findings show that the Math-Science factor is the strongest predictor in the combined sample and Marine Engineering across all three years, while the general factor demonstrates broader but varying relevance in Aeronautical and Systems Engineering, especially in the middle and final years. The Humanities-Social Sciences factor has no significant impact at any level of study, and none of the factors predict performance in Civil Engineering. These results underscore the need to consider both general and specific academic achievements in admission predictive models, highlighting the dynamic interplay between program focus and student achievement profiles.
{"title":"Exploring the interplay of general and specific academic achievement in predicting college performance","authors":"Khalid ALMamari, Mohamed Al Siyabi, Abdullah Al Shibli, Abdullah AlAjmi","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101908","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101908","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Higher education admission policies typically prioritize Grade Point Average (GPA) as the primary criterion for college admissions, often overlooking the potential significance of specific academic achievements. This study contributes to the debate on the relative importance of general versus specific academic achievements in predicting college performance, an area less explored compared to the interplay between cognitive abilities and performance outcomes. This research analyzes twelfth-grade subject scores and college GPAs from four engineering programs (Aeronautical, System, Marine, and Civil) in Oman, as well as the combined sample. EFA and CFA results indicate that a bifactor achievement model, comprising general and two specific factors (Math-Science and Humanities-Social Sciences), adequately represents the twelfth-grade data. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) correlated these factors with college performance in the first, middle, and final years, separately for each program and the combined sample. The findings show that the Math-Science factor is the strongest predictor in the combined sample and Marine Engineering across all three years, while the general factor demonstrates broader but varying relevance in Aeronautical and Systems Engineering, especially in the middle and final years. The Humanities-Social Sciences factor has no significant impact at any level of study, and none of the factors predict performance in Civil Engineering. These results underscore the need to consider both general and specific academic achievements in admission predictive models, highlighting the dynamic interplay between program focus and student achievement profiles.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 101908"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143684434","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-02-07DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101892
Jeffrey M. Cucina
Cognitive ability tests that measure general mental ability (g-tests) are among the best predictors of academic, training, and job performance. One disadvantage of g-tests is the potential for adverse impact due to subgroup differences on general mental ability (g). For many years, psychologists have searched for high-validity low-adverse impact alternatives to traditional g-loaded cognitive ability tests (g-tests). This paper explores the mathematical possibility of developing such a test based on the known characteristics of g-tests. It was discovered that superior replacements to g-tests cannot mathematically exist. This is due to the fact that adverse impact and subgroup differences occur primarily on g rather than the specific factors and unique variance that cognitive ability tests measure. The reliable non-g variance in most g-tests is too small to offset the subgroup differences in g-test scores that is attributable to g.
{"title":"Reconsidering the search for alternatives to general mental ability tests","authors":"Jeffrey M. Cucina","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101892","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101892","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Cognitive ability tests that measure general mental ability (<em>g</em>-tests) are among the best predictors of academic, training, and job performance. One disadvantage of <em>g</em>-tests is the potential for adverse impact due to subgroup differences on general mental ability (<em>g</em>). For many years, psychologists have searched for high-validity low-adverse impact alternatives to traditional <em>g</em>-loaded cognitive ability tests (<em>g</em>-tests). This paper explores the mathematical possibility of developing such a test based on the known characteristics of <em>g</em>-tests. It was discovered that superior replacements to <em>g</em>-tests cannot mathematically exist. This is due to the fact that adverse impact and subgroup differences occur primarily on <em>g</em> rather than the specific factors and unique variance that cognitive ability tests measure. The reliable non-<em>g</em> variance in most <em>g</em>-tests is too small to offset the subgroup differences in <em>g</em>-test scores that is attributable to <em>g</em>.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 101892"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143350088","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-27DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101897
Joseph Lee Rodgers , Linda Wänström , Siew Ang
Previous research has demonstrated the existence of a Flynn effect in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth Children (NLSYC) responses to the PIAT-Math instrument. The PIAT-Math is at least partially linked to fluid intelligence, whereas other scales in the NLSYC – PIAT-Reading Recognition, PIAT-Reading Comprehension, the PPVT, and Digit Span – are primarily based on crystallized intelligence; these scales showed little or no Flynn effect in the NLSYC. We put the 84 PIAT-Math items “under the microscope” by evaluating the Flynn effect in relation to each item, and measured the Flynn effect by computing a slope across birth-year cohorts, using nine different age replications. Following, we use expert ratings of the items on eight different features – visual matching, recall/memory, computation/estimation, spatial visualization, real-world reasoning, manipulation of geometry, solving algebra, and counting – to identify what features are important in producing the Flynn effect. The highest correlations obtain for the links between the Flynn effect and the features real-world reasoning, counting and computation/estimation. There is a negative correlation between item-level Flynn effects and the features manipulation of geometry, solving algebra, and recall/memory. These results support previous findings ephasizing the role that fluid intelligence plays in relation to the Flynn effect.
{"title":"Putting the Flynn effect under the microscope: Item-level patterns in NLSYC PIAT-math scores, 1986–2004","authors":"Joseph Lee Rodgers , Linda Wänström , Siew Ang","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101897","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101897","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Previous research has demonstrated the existence of a Flynn effect in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth Children (NLSYC) responses to the PIAT-Math instrument. The PIAT-Math is at least partially linked to fluid intelligence, whereas other scales in the NLSYC – PIAT-Reading Recognition, PIAT-Reading Comprehension, the PPVT, and Digit Span – are primarily based on crystallized intelligence; these scales showed little or no Flynn effect in the NLSYC. We put the 84 PIAT-Math items “under the microscope” by evaluating the Flynn effect in relation to each item, and measured the Flynn effect by computing a slope across birth-year cohorts, using nine different age replications. Following, we use expert ratings of the items on eight different features – visual matching, recall/memory, computation/estimation, spatial visualization, real-world reasoning, manipulation of geometry, solving algebra, and counting – to identify what features are important in producing the Flynn effect. The highest correlations obtain for the links between the Flynn effect and the features real-world reasoning, counting and computation/estimation. There is a negative correlation between item-level Flynn effects and the features manipulation of geometry, solving algebra, and recall/memory. These results support previous findings ephasizing the role that fluid intelligence plays in relation to the Flynn effect.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"109 ","pages":"Article 101897"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143130567","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101880
Gilles E. Gignac
The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Mistral, along with specialized tools such as Google DeepMind's AlphaFold 3, is transforming the scientific discovery process. These advancements raise questions about attribution in scientific research, challenging traditional notions about the origins of discovery and the roles of human and machine collaboration. Anonymous surveys indicate that 50 to 70% of academics involved in research use AI tools. Yet, an analysis of 568 articles from three psychology Elsevier journals revealed that approximately 3.5% of these articles published since mid-2023 included an AI declaration. The reluctance of researchers to use or acknowledge AI tools can hinder scientific progress by promoting a culture wary of AI, slowing tool adoption, and limiting shared learning about their uses and limitations. Researchers are encouraged to use AI tools responsibly and detail such use in their acknowledgements to help foster a culture of transparency and innovation in scientific research.
{"title":"The AI attribution gap: Encouraging transparent acknowledgment in the age of AI","authors":"Gilles E. Gignac","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101880","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101880","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Mistral, along with specialized tools such as Google DeepMind's AlphaFold 3, is transforming the scientific discovery process. These advancements raise questions about attribution in scientific research, challenging traditional notions about the origins of discovery and the roles of human and machine collaboration. Anonymous surveys indicate that 50 to 70% of academics involved in research use AI tools. Yet, an analysis of 568 articles from three psychology Elsevier journals revealed that approximately 3.5% of these articles published since mid-2023 included an AI declaration. The reluctance of researchers to use or acknowledge AI tools can hinder scientific progress by promoting a culture wary of AI, slowing tool adoption, and limiting shared learning about their uses and limitations. Researchers are encouraged to use AI tools responsibly and detail such use in their acknowledgements to help foster a culture of transparency and innovation in scientific research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"108 ","pages":"Article 101880"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143180143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101879
Michael A. Woodley of Menie , Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre , Aurelio-José Figueredo , Geoffrey F. Miller , Thomas R. Coyle , Noah Carl , Fróði Debes , Craig L. Frisby , Federico R. Léon , Guy Madison , Heiner Rindermann
We make the case that Bird, Jackson Jr., and Winston's (BJ&W; 2024) policy proposals boil down to a rejection of Merton's (1942) traditional scientific norms of communality, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism, and a demand for anti-Mertonian norms to be imposed, top down, upon psychological science. Their anti-Mertonian norms (specifically secrecy, particularism, interestedness, and organized dogmatism) are at odds with the scientific ethos. We highlight problems with their argument that Racial Hereditarian Research (RHR) is uniquely "socially pernicious". We then discuss adverse effects that their imposition of anti-Mertonian norms would likely cause in relation to: 1) instances of research on racial and ethnic differences that have produced findings agreeable to egalitarianism, and which would be proscribed under their framework; 2) the fomenting of genuinely scientifically racist beliefs that are empirically at odds with RHR; and 3) the chilling effect on other areas of science whose findings have also been misused, including “mainstream human genetics”. Ultimately, we observe that BJ&W's anti-Mertonian policy prescriptions are unworkable in practice, and would be highly damaging to psychological science if widely enforced.
{"title":"Anti-Mertonian norms undermine the scientific ethos: A critique of Bird, Jackson Jr., and Winston's policy proposals and associated justification","authors":"Michael A. Woodley of Menie , Mateo Peñaherrera-Aguirre , Aurelio-José Figueredo , Geoffrey F. Miller , Thomas R. Coyle , Noah Carl , Fróði Debes , Craig L. Frisby , Federico R. Léon , Guy Madison , Heiner Rindermann","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101879","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101879","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We make the case that Bird, Jackson Jr., and Winston's (BJ&W; 2024) policy proposals boil down to a rejection of Merton's (1942) traditional scientific norms of communality, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism, and a demand for anti-Mertonian norms to be imposed, top down, upon psychological science. Their anti-Mertonian norms (specifically secrecy, particularism, interestedness, and organized dogmatism) are at odds with the scientific ethos. We highlight problems with their argument that Racial Hereditarian Research (RHR) is uniquely \"socially pernicious\". We then discuss adverse effects that their imposition of anti-Mertonian norms would likely cause in relation to: 1) instances of research on racial and ethnic differences that have produced findings agreeable to egalitarianism, and which would be proscribed under their framework; 2) the fomenting of genuinely scientifically racist beliefs that are empirically at odds with RHR; and 3) the chilling effect on other areas of science whose findings have also been misused, including “mainstream human genetics”. Ultimately, we observe that BJ&W's anti-Mertonian policy prescriptions are unworkable in practice, and would be highly damaging to psychological science if widely enforced.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"108 ","pages":"Article 101879"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143180676","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2024.101876
Tobias Edwards , Christopher T. Dawes , Emily A. Willoughby , Matt McGue , James J. Lee
Measures of intelligence predict socio-political attitudes and behaviors, such as liberalism, religiosity, and voter turnout. Little, however, is known about which cognitive abilities are responsible for these relationships. Employing several cohorts from the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research, we test the predictive performance of different broad abilities. Using multiple regression to compare verbal and performance IQ from Wechsler intelligence tests, we find verbal IQ more strongly predicts voter turnout, civic engagement, traditionalism, and measures of ideology. On average, the correlation between verbal IQ and our socio-political attitudes is twice as large as that of performance IQ. The same pattern appears after controlling for education and after performing the analysis within sibling pairs. This implies that the relationship cannot be entirely mediated through education, nor entirely confounded by upbringing. Positive and negative controls are employed to test the validity of our methodology. Importantly, we find verbal and performance IQ to be equally predictive of the ICAR-16, a distinct measure of general intelligence. The results imply that variation in cognitive abilities, which are orthogonal to general intelligence, influence socio-political attitudes and behaviors. The role of verbal ability in influencing attitudes may help to explain the ideological leanings of specific occupations. Its association with turnout and civic engagement suggests that those with a verbal tilt may have greater influence over politics and society.
{"title":"More than g: Verbal and performance IQ as predictors of socio-political attitudes","authors":"Tobias Edwards , Christopher T. Dawes , Emily A. Willoughby , Matt McGue , James J. Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101876","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.intell.2024.101876","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Measures of intelligence predict socio-political attitudes and behaviors, such as liberalism, religiosity, and voter turnout. Little, however, is known about which cognitive abilities are responsible for these relationships. Employing several cohorts from the Minnesota Center for Twin and Family Research, we test the predictive performance of different broad abilities. Using multiple regression to compare verbal and performance IQ from Wechsler intelligence tests, we find verbal IQ more strongly predicts voter turnout, civic engagement, traditionalism, and measures of ideology. On average, the correlation between verbal IQ and our socio-political attitudes is twice as large as that of performance IQ. The same pattern appears after controlling for education and after performing the analysis within sibling pairs. This implies that the relationship cannot be entirely mediated through education, nor entirely confounded by upbringing. Positive and negative controls are employed to test the validity of our methodology. Importantly, we find verbal and performance IQ to be equally predictive of the ICAR-16, a distinct measure of general intelligence. The results imply that variation in cognitive abilities, which are orthogonal to general intelligence, influence socio-political attitudes and behaviors. The role of verbal ability in influencing attitudes may help to explain the ideological leanings of specific occupations. Its association with turnout and civic engagement suggests that those with a verbal tilt may have greater influence over politics and society.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"108 ","pages":"Article 101876"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143180677","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号