Placekeeping Ability as a Component of Fluid Intelligence: Not Just Working Memory Capacity

2019 ◽  
Vol 132 (4) ◽  
pp. 439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Burgoyne ◽  
Hambrick ◽  
Altmann
Intelligence ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 101627
Author(s):  
Chenyu Li ◽  
Xuezhu Ren ◽  
Karl Schweizer ◽  
Tengfei Wang

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander P. Burgoyne ◽  
Cody Mashburn ◽  
Jason S. Tsukahara ◽  
Zach Hambrick ◽  
Randall W Engle

A hallmark of intelligent behavior is rationality—the disposition and ability to think analytically to make decisions that maximize expected utility or follow the laws of probability, and therefore align with normative principles of decision making. However, the question remains as to whether rationality and intelligence are empirically distinct, as does the question of what cognitive mechanisms underlie individual differences in rationality. In a large sample of participants (N = 331), we used latent variable analyses to assess the relationship between rationality and intelligence. The results indicated that there was a common ability underpinning performance on some, but not all, rationality tests. Latent factors representing rationality and general intelligence were strongly correlated (r = .54), but their correlation fell well short of unity. Indeed, after accounting for variance in performance attributable to general intelligence, rationality measures still cohered on a latent factor. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that rationality correlated significantly with fluid intelligence (r = .56), working memory capacity (r = .44), and attention control (r = .49). Structural equation modeling revealed that attention control fully accounted for the relationship between working memory capacity and rationality, and partially accounted for the relationship between fluid intelligence and rationality. Results are interpreted in light of the executive attention framework, which holds that attention control supports information maintenance and disengagement in service of complex cognition. We conclude by speculating about factors rationality tests may tap that other cognitive ability tests miss, and outline directions for further research.


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 1333-1339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander P. Burgoyne ◽  
David Z. Hambrick ◽  
Erik M. Altmann

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 ◽  
pp. 18-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishneil A. Singh ◽  
Gilles E. Gignac ◽  
Christopher R. Brydges ◽  
Ullrich K.H. Ecker

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanna Hartung ◽  
Benjamin Goecke ◽  
Ulrich Schroeders ◽  
Florian Schmitz ◽  
Oliver Wilhelm

In contrast to measures of working memory capacity, tests for fluid intelligence are elusive in their psychometric properties. Somewhat surprisingly, fluid intelligence is not as tractable as often conceived. We studied Latin Square Tasks (LSTs) as a group of indicators that supposedly can improve measurement of fluid intelligence. In four studies (N > 3,300), we compared competing theoretical accounts that differ in the cognitive processes proposed for successfully completing items. To this end, the cognitive demand was operationalized by two key requirements that decisively influence the task difficulty: a) processing of information with differing complexity and b) memorizing steps to the final solution. Confirming predictions, the underlying processes of LSTs are independent of stimulus type and rotation of the matrices. Relations with reasoning confirmed the validity of the novel Latin Square Tasks. Working memory capacity was a limiting resource that determined performance, however more precise predictions of item difficulties might be possible when further item characteristics will be considered. From a theoretical perspective, we discuss the superiority of a perspective on LSTs inspired by the binding hypothesis compared to relational complexity theory.


Author(s):  
Gidon T. Frischkorn ◽  
Klaus Oberauer

AbstractThere is a strong relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory capacity (WMC). Yet, the cognitive mechanisms underlying this relationship remain elusive. The capacity hypothesis states that this relationship is due to limitations in the amount of information that can be stored and held active in working memory. Previous research aimed at testing the capacity hypothesis assumed that it implies stronger relationships of intelligence test performance with WMC for test items with higher capacity demands. The present article addresses this assumption through simulations of three theoretical models implementing the capacity hypothesis while systematically varying different psychometric variables. The results show that almost any relation between the capacity demands of items and their correlation with WMC can be obtained. Therefore, the assumption made by previous studies does not hold: The capacity hypothesis does not imply stronger correlations of WMC and intelligence test items with higher capacity demands. Items varying in capacity demands cannot be used to test the causality of WMC (or any other latent variable) for fluid intelligence.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason S. Tsukahara ◽  
Randall W Engle

We found that individual differences in baseline pupil size correlated with fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. Larger pupil size was associated with higher cognitive ability. However, other researchers have not been able to replicate our 2016 finding – though they only measured working memory capacity and not fluid intelligence. In a reanalysis of Tsukahara et al. (2016) we show that reduced variability on baseline pupil size will result in a higher probability of obtaining smaller and non-significant correlations with working memory capacity. In two large-scale studies, we demonstrated that reduced variability in baseline pupil size values was due to the monitor being too bright. Additionally, fluid intelligence and working memory capacity did correlate with baseline pupil size except in the brightest lighting conditions. Overall, our findings demonstrated that the baseline pupil size – working memory capacity relationship was not as strong or robust as that with fluid intelligence. Our findings have strong methodological implications for researchers investigating individual differences in task-free or task-evoked pupil size. We conclude that fluid intelligence does correlate with baseline pupil size and that this is related to the functional organization of the resting-state brain through the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document