西班牙的代际智力测验成绩变化:我们问对问题了吗?

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.intell.2023.101772
Roberto Colom, Luis F. García, Pei Chun Shih, Francisco J. Abad
{"title":"西班牙的代际智力测验成绩变化:我们问对问题了吗?","authors":"Roberto Colom,&nbsp;Luis F. García,&nbsp;Pei Chun Shih,&nbsp;Francisco J. Abad","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2023.101772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Generational intelligence test score gains have been documented worldwide in the twentieth century. However, recent evidence suggests these increased scores are coming to an end in some world regions. Here we compare two cohorts of university freshmen. The first cohort (<em>n</em> = 311) was assessed in 1991, whereas the second cohort (<em>n</em><span> = 349) was assessed thirty years later (2022). These cohorts completed the same intelligence battery including eight standardized speeded and power tests tapping reasoning (abstract and quantitative), language (vocabulary, verbal comprehension, and verbal meanings), rote calculation, and visuospatial relations. The results revealed a global gain of 3.5 IQ points but also upward and downward changes at the test level. The 2022 cohort outperformed the 1991 cohort on reasoning (abstract and quantitative), verbal comprehension, and vocabulary, whereas the 1991 cohort outscored the 2022 cohort on rote calculation, visuospatial relations (mental rotation and identical figures), and verbal meanings. These findings are thought to support one key claim made by James Flynn: generational changes on the specific cognitive abilities and skills tapped by standardized tests should be expected without appreciable or substantive changes in the structure of the intelligence construct identified within generations. This main conclusion is discussed with respect to theoretical causal implications putatively derived from current intelligence psychometric models.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generational intelligence tests score changes in Spain: Are we asking the right question?\",\"authors\":\"Roberto Colom,&nbsp;Luis F. García,&nbsp;Pei Chun Shih,&nbsp;Francisco J. Abad\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.intell.2023.101772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Generational intelligence test score gains have been documented worldwide in the twentieth century. However, recent evidence suggests these increased scores are coming to an end in some world regions. Here we compare two cohorts of university freshmen. The first cohort (<em>n</em> = 311) was assessed in 1991, whereas the second cohort (<em>n</em><span> = 349) was assessed thirty years later (2022). These cohorts completed the same intelligence battery including eight standardized speeded and power tests tapping reasoning (abstract and quantitative), language (vocabulary, verbal comprehension, and verbal meanings), rote calculation, and visuospatial relations. The results revealed a global gain of 3.5 IQ points but also upward and downward changes at the test level. The 2022 cohort outperformed the 1991 cohort on reasoning (abstract and quantitative), verbal comprehension, and vocabulary, whereas the 1991 cohort outscored the 2022 cohort on rote calculation, visuospatial relations (mental rotation and identical figures), and verbal meanings. These findings are thought to support one key claim made by James Flynn: generational changes on the specific cognitive abilities and skills tapped by standardized tests should be expected without appreciable or substantive changes in the structure of the intelligence construct identified within generations. This main conclusion is discussed with respect to theoretical causal implications putatively derived from current intelligence psychometric models.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289623000533\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289623000533","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在20世纪,世界各地都有记录表明,代际智力测试成绩的增长。然而,最近的证据表明,在世界上的一些地区,这种增长的分数正在结束。这里我们比较了两组大学新生。第一组(n = 311)在1991年进行评估,而第二组(n = 349)在30年后(2022年)进行评估。这些人完成了同样的智力测试,包括8项标准化的速度和能力测试,涉及推理(抽象和定量)、语言(词汇、口头理解和口头意义)、死记硬背计算和视觉空间关系。结果显示,总体而言,他们的智商增加了3.5分,但测试水平也有上下变化。2022年出生的人在推理(抽象和定量)、语言理解和词汇方面的表现优于1991年出生的人,而1991年出生的人在死记硬背的计算、视觉空间关系(心理旋转和相同的数字)和口头意义方面的表现优于2022年出生的人。这些发现被认为支持了詹姆斯·弗林(James Flynn)提出的一个关键观点:标准化测试所揭示的特定认知能力和技能的代际变化应该是预料之中的,而不会在几代人之间确定的智力结构发生明显或实质性的变化。这一主要结论是讨论了相对于理论的因果影响,从目前的智力心理测量模型推定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Generational intelligence tests score changes in Spain: Are we asking the right question?

Generational intelligence test score gains have been documented worldwide in the twentieth century. However, recent evidence suggests these increased scores are coming to an end in some world regions. Here we compare two cohorts of university freshmen. The first cohort (n = 311) was assessed in 1991, whereas the second cohort (n = 349) was assessed thirty years later (2022). These cohorts completed the same intelligence battery including eight standardized speeded and power tests tapping reasoning (abstract and quantitative), language (vocabulary, verbal comprehension, and verbal meanings), rote calculation, and visuospatial relations. The results revealed a global gain of 3.5 IQ points but also upward and downward changes at the test level. The 2022 cohort outperformed the 1991 cohort on reasoning (abstract and quantitative), verbal comprehension, and vocabulary, whereas the 1991 cohort outscored the 2022 cohort on rote calculation, visuospatial relations (mental rotation and identical figures), and verbal meanings. These findings are thought to support one key claim made by James Flynn: generational changes on the specific cognitive abilities and skills tapped by standardized tests should be expected without appreciable or substantive changes in the structure of the intelligence construct identified within generations. This main conclusion is discussed with respect to theoretical causal implications putatively derived from current intelligence psychometric models.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
期刊最新文献
Vitamin B12: prevention of human beings from lethal diseases and its food application. Current status and obstacles of narrowing yield gaps of four major crops. Cold shock treatment alleviates pitting in sweet cherry fruit by enhancing antioxidant enzymes activity and regulating membrane lipid metabolism. Removal of proteins and lipids affects structure, in vitro digestion and physicochemical properties of rice flour modified by heat-moisture treatment. Investigating the impact of climate variables on the organic honey yield in Turkey using XGBoost machine learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1