1 / 26

310 likes | 835 Vues

Human Abilities. I: Structure. Reading. Start with Ch. 7 in Cooper (1998) Or Brody (1992) Or Cooper (1999 ch. 1 & 2) & pp. 55–9. Learning Objectives. Following the lecture & reading you should be able to:– Show an understanding of the nature of human abilities & attainments

Télécharger la présentation
## Human Abilities

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.
Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only.
Download presentation by click this link.
While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

**Human Abilities**I: Structure**Reading**• Start with Ch. 7 in Cooper (1998) • Or Brody (1992) • Or Cooper (1999 ch. 1 & 2) & pp. 55–9**Learning Objectives**• Following the lecture & reading you should be able to:– • Show an understanding of the nature of human abilities & attainments • Evaluate the models of Spearman & Thurstone, & hierarchical models • Comment on some other approaches (Guilford, Gardner, Howe)**Definitions**• Mental ability • Attainments • IQ**Spearman’s model**Spearman (1904) • Gave several ability tests to children • Factor-analysed the correlations • 3 possibilities • All the skills are uncorrelated (1 factor) • All the skills are correlated (no factors) • Certain "groups" of skills correlate together (>1 factor)**Spearman ctd**• Spearman found that ONE FACTOR was needed to describe these data. • He called it g (general ability) • So a child’s performance on any test is attributable to • g • specific variance • random error**Thurstone (1931/8)**• Did much the same but found not one but NINE factors • Primary Mental Abilities (PMAs) • Verbal comprehension vocabulary , analogies • Word Fluency anagrams, spelling • Numerical Ability • Memory • Induction (e.g., number series)**PMAs ctd**• Spatial Ability (visualising shapes) • Perceptual Speed (comparing strings) • Mechanical Knowldge & ability • Deductive Reasoning (applying a logical rule) • There is a HUGE number of potential PMAs • Which you find depend on what you assess! Use a v. broad range of tests.**Why the difference?**• More homogeneous (student) sample • More tests • Newer methods of factoring • Simpler tests. • Spearman gave (e.g.,) a maths test comprising addition, geometry etc. • Thurstone treated addition, geometry etc. as seperate tests.**Hierarchical models**• It was found that Thurstone’s factors were themselves correlated. • Factor analyse the correlations between these factors and get g at the ‘second order’?**Horn & Cattell (1976)**• Developed tests to measure 20+ PMAs • Factored the correlations between these PMAs: Obtained 6 “second order” ability factors.**the Horn-Cattell Second-Order Abilities**• fluid intelligence (reasoning) • crystallised intelligence (requires knowledge) • visualisation (of shapes) • retrieval (memory) • fluency (speed of creating new ideas/associations) • cognitive speed (speed of processing)**Horn & Cattell: ctd**• When these 6 second-order abilities were factored, found g at the third-order • g was very similar to fluid ability • Gustaffson’s (1981) model is highly similar. So is Carroll’s (1993) 3-stratum model. • Investment theory - fluid/crystallised ability.**Guilford’s (1967) SI model**(Structure of Intellect)**Guilford’s (1967) Structure of Intellect (SI) model**• Not based on factor analysis • Assumes 5 basic mental operations (cognition, memory, convergent thinking, divergent thinking, evaluation) • 4 contents (figural, symbolic, semantic, behavioural) • 6 products (units, classes, relations, systems, changes, implications) • So 5 x 4 x 6 =120 distinct abilities**Howard Gardner’s (1983/1993) theory of multiple**intelligences**Gardner’s model**• Eschewed factor analysis on the basis of criticisms made by Gould (1981) • Performed literature search to identify “multiple intelligences” • These he assumed to be independent of each other... • ...which is odd, given the evidence for g!**Gardner’s abilities are bundles of behaviours which...**• disappear/are retained following damage to some area of the brain • are found together in prodigies/idiots savant • be related to a particular stimulus - e.g. pitch perception or imitation • show a clear developmental trend • interfere/transfer together (so common neural mechanism) • each have a system of symbols for concepts**Gardner’s intelligences**• linguistic • musical • logical/mathematical • spatial • kinaesthetic/bodily • integrity of self-concept • quality of interactions with others**Issues...**• Are these all cognitive? • Is the list exhaustive? Why no ‘sexual intelligence’ for example? • Why assume they are independent, rather than test it empirically? • Popular with teachers who are eager to view children as having unrelated abilities: ‘play to strengths’.**1. Factor analysis is useless**• “there may be a number of alternative patterns to be discerned, and factor analysis does not identify any one pattern that is uniquely present in the data” • ?? • Simple-structure rotation does find a unique solution**2. Twin studies are flawed**• ...so no evidence for biological mechanisms • But he only considers • separated identical twins, and • certain post-hoc objections which he claims over-estimate genetic influences; others which over-estimate environmental influences are ignored!**3. Biological correlations are trivial in size**• see next lecture. • Are correlations of 0.4 really so small that they can be ignored?**Summary**• You should now be able to:– • Show an understanding of the nature of human abilities & attainments • Evaluate the models of Spearman & Thurstone, & hierarchical models • Comment on some other approaches (Guilford, Gardner, Howe)

More Related