Developmental differences in reactivation underlying self-derivation of new knowledge through memory integration

In this article, recent developments in the assessment and diagnosis of child psychopathology are discussed with an emphasis on standardized methodologies that provide data that can be scored on empirically derived groupings of problems that tend to co-occur. Assessment methodologies are highlighted that especially take account of the following three basic characteristics of child psychopathology: (1) the quantitative nature of child psychopathology; (2) the role of developmental differences in the occurrence of problem behaviors, and (3) the need for multiple informants. Cross-cultural research is needed to test the applicability of assessment procedures across different settings as well as the generalizability of taxonomic constructs. Assessments of children in different cultures can be compared or pooled to arrive at a multicultural knowledge base which may be much stronger than knowledge based on only one culture. It is essential to avoid assuming that data from any single source reveal the significance of particular problems. Instead, comprehensive assessment of psychopathology requires coordination of multisource data using a multiaxial assessment approach.

Download Full-text

Investment Traits and Intelligence in Adulthood

Journal of Individual Differences ◽

10.1027/1614-0001/a000101 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 34 (2) ◽

pp. 82-89 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Sophie von Stumm

Keyword(s):

Individual Differences ◽

Personality Traits ◽

Fluid Intelligence ◽

Need For Cognition ◽

Openness To Experience ◽

Intelligence Tests ◽

Crystallized Intelligence ◽

New Knowledge ◽

The Relationship ◽

Over Time

Intelligence-as-knowledge in adulthood is influenced by individual differences in intelligence-as-process (i.e., fluid intelligence) and in personality traits that determine when, where, and how people invest their intelligence over time. Here, the relationship between two investment traits (i.e., Openness to Experience and Need for Cognition), intelligence-as-process and intelligence-as-knowledge, as assessed by a battery of crystallized intelligence tests and a new knowledge measure, was examined. The results showed that (1) both investment traits were positively associated with intelligence-as-knowledge; (2) this effect was stronger for Openness to Experience than for Need for Cognition; and (3) associations between investment and intelligence-as-knowledge reduced when adjusting for intelligence-as-process but remained mostly significant.

Download Full-text