Validating Rules: A non-verbal free fluid intelligence test

IF 3.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Sofie Van Cauwenberghe , Stijn Schelfhout , Elisabeth Roels , Jordi Heeren , Lieve De Wachter , Wouter Duyck , Nicolas Dirix
{"title":"Validating Rules: A non-verbal free fluid intelligence test","authors":"Sofie Van Cauwenberghe ,&nbsp;Stijn Schelfhout ,&nbsp;Elisabeth Roels ,&nbsp;Jordi Heeren ,&nbsp;Lieve De Wachter ,&nbsp;Wouter Duyck ,&nbsp;Nicolas Dirix","doi":"10.1016/j.intell.2025.101923","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Intelligence is one of the strongest predictors of academic achievement. Fluid intelligence is one part of the construct, that can be measured by deductive and inductive reasoning. We set up a validation study of a free, non-verbal fluid intelligence test (Rules) in the context of study orientation. In this study, we investigate the reliability, distribution and structural validity of Rules, consisting of 28 items. Evidence from confirmatory multidimensional item response theory models suggests structural validity of the non-verbal reasoning test. For construct validity, a cross-validation between Rules and Raven's 2 Progressive Matrices in a sample of 235 last-year secondary school students resulted in a correlation of 0.62. Furthermore, we analyzed the predictive validity of the non-verbal reasoning test, which was administered to 32,585 last-year secondary school students. A standardized mathematics and language test were administered as a proxy for academic achievement scores. The results confirmed the predictive validity of the non-verbal reasoning test for cognitive achievement, with correlations of <em>r</em> = 0.61 for mathematics and <em>r</em> = 0.41 for language. Findings support the use of Rules in psychological practice, in particular for large-scale study exploration tools and low-stakes testing as a proxy for cognition or fluid reasoning.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13862,"journal":{"name":"Intelligence","volume":"111 ","pages":"Article 101923"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intelligence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000261","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intelligence is one of the strongest predictors of academic achievement. Fluid intelligence is one part of the construct, that can be measured by deductive and inductive reasoning. We set up a validation study of a free, non-verbal fluid intelligence test (Rules) in the context of study orientation. In this study, we investigate the reliability, distribution and structural validity of Rules, consisting of 28 items. Evidence from confirmatory multidimensional item response theory models suggests structural validity of the non-verbal reasoning test. For construct validity, a cross-validation between Rules and Raven's 2 Progressive Matrices in a sample of 235 last-year secondary school students resulted in a correlation of 0.62. Furthermore, we analyzed the predictive validity of the non-verbal reasoning test, which was administered to 32,585 last-year secondary school students. A standardized mathematics and language test were administered as a proxy for academic achievement scores. The results confirmed the predictive validity of the non-verbal reasoning test for cognitive achievement, with correlations of r = 0.61 for mathematics and r = 0.41 for language. Findings support the use of Rules in psychological practice, in particular for large-scale study exploration tools and low-stakes testing as a proxy for cognition or fluid reasoning.
验证规则:非语言自由流体智力测试
智力是学术成就最有力的预测因素之一。流动智力是这个结构的一部分,可以通过演绎推理和归纳推理来衡量。我们在学习取向的背景下建立了一个自由的、非语言的流体智力测验(规则)的验证研究。在本研究中,我们研究了由28个条目组成的规则的信度、分布和结构效度。来自验证性多维项目反应理论模型的证据表明非言语推理测试具有结构效度。在构念效度方面,以235名初中生为样本,对规则与Raven’s 2递进矩阵进行交叉验证,相关系数为0.62。此外,我们分析了非语言推理测试的预测效度,该测试对32,585名高三学生进行了测试。一项标准化的数学和语言测试作为学业成绩的代表。结果证实了非语言推理测试对认知成就的预测有效性,数学和语言的相关性r = 0.61和r = 0.41。研究结果支持在心理学实践中使用规则,特别是在大规模研究探索工具和低风险测试中作为认知或流动推理的代理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Intelligence
Intelligence PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
64
审稿时长
69 days
期刊介绍: This unique journal in psychology is devoted to publishing original research and theoretical studies and review papers that substantially contribute to the understanding of intelligence. It provides a new source of significant papers in psychometrics, tests and measurement, and all other empirical and theoretical studies in intelligence and mental retardation.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信