The effect of different types of perceptual manipulations on the dimensionality of automatically generated figural matrices

Abstract Two pilot studies (n1 = 155, n2 = 451) are presented in this article, which were carried out within the development of an item generator for the automatic generation of figural matrices items. The focus of the presented studies was to compare two types of item designs with regard to the effect of variations of the property “perceptual organization” on the psychometric properties and concurrent validity of figural matrices. The main results not only indicate a comparably high concurrent validity of the automatically generated figural matrices with regard to Raven matrices but also point to interesting differential effects of two kinds of implementations of perceptual organization. The conclusion of the two studies is that a more thorough understanding of the component processes of inductive reasoning and especially the impact of various item features on their difficulty and psychometric properties must be obtained.

[1]  Mari Sako,et al.  How The Japanese Learn To Work , 1989 .

[2]  J. L. Ellis,et al.  A Rasch analysis of Raven’s standard progressive matrices , 2000 .

[3]  E. B. Andersen,et al.  A goodness of fit test for the rasch model , 1973 .

[4]  A. Jensen,et al.  The g factor , 1996, Nature.

[5]  R. Sternberg,et al.  Transfer on Trial: Intelligence, Cognition and Instruction , 1993 .

[6]  R. Cattell.  Fluid and Crystallized Intelligence. , 1961 .

[7]  J. Horn.  CHAPTER 16 – Organization of Data on Life-Span Development of Human Abilities , 1970 .

[8]  Karl Josef Klauer,et al.  A process theory of inductive reasoning tested by the teaching of domain-specific thinking strategies , 1990 .

[9]  S. Embretson.  A cognitive design system approach to generating valid tests : Application to abstract reasoning , 1998 .

[10]  Ricardo Primi,et al.  Complexity of Geometric Inductive Reasoning Tasks: Contribution to the Understanding of Fluid Intelligence. , 2001 .

[11]  Randall W Engle,et al.  Working memory, short-term memory, and general fluid intelligence: a latent-variable approach. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[12]  Bernie Devlin,et al.  "Intelligence, Genes, and Success": Scientists Respond To The Bell Curve , 1997 .

[13]  A. Baddeley.  Human Memory: Theory and Practice, Revised Edition , 1990 .

[14]  Patrick C. Kyllonen,et al.  Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?! , 1990 .

[15]  G. Gittler,et al.  IRT-basierter Vergleich zweier Varianten automatisiert erstellter Matrizentestaufgaben , 2003 .

[16]  David J. Therriault,et al.  A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence , 2002 .

[17]  Georg Rasch,et al.  Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests , 1981, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[18]  R. Darrell Bock,et al.  Word and image: Sources of the verbal and spatial factors in mental test scores , 1973 .

[19]  M A Just,et al.  From the SelectedWorks of Marcel Adam Just 1990 What one intelligence test measures : A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test , 2016 .

[20]  Lee W. Gregg,et al.  Knowledge and cognition , 1974 .

[21]  R. Cattell,et al.  Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. , 1966, Journal of educational psychology.

[22]  I. W. Molenaar,et al.  Rasch models: foundations, recent developments and applications , 1995 .

[23]  H. R. Burke,et al.  Raven's Progressive Matrices: More on Construct Validity. , 1969 .

[24]  J. Flynn.  Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond Iq , 1991 .

[25]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory , 1997 .

[26]  R. Cattell,et al.  Age differences in primary mental ability factors. , 1966, Journal of gerontology.

[27]  J. Greeno,et al.  Transfer of situated learning , 1996 .

[28]  P. Baltes,et al.  Life-Span Developmental Psychology: Research and Theory , 1970 .

[29]  C. E. Bethell-Fox,et al.  Adaptive reasoning: Componential and eye movement analysis of geometric analogy performance ☆ , 1984 .

[30]  R. Cattell.  Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. , 1963 .

[31]  Kathy E. Green,et al.  Components of item difficulty of Raven's matrices , 1992 .

[32]  R. Sternberg.  Intelligence, Information Processing and Analogical Reasoning : The Componential Analysis of Human Abilities , 1977 .

[33]  Intelligence—Why It Grows, Why it declines , 1967 .

[34]  R. Herrnstein,et al.  The bell curve : intelligence and class structure in American life , 1995 .

[35]  C. Spearman.  The Abilities of Man their Nature and Measurement , 2020, Nature.

[36]  F. Baker,et al.  Item response theory : parameter estimation techniques , 1993 .

[37]  I. Rock,et al.  The legacy of Gestalt psychology. , 1990, Scientific American.

[38]  R. Hambleton,et al.  Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications , 1984 .

[39]  Mm. Liabre.  Standard Progressive Matrices , 1984 .

[40]  S. Vandenberg,et al.  Mental Rotations, a Group Test of Three-Dimensional Spatial Visualization , 1978, Perceptual and motor skills.

[41]  J. Carroll.  Human Cognitive Abilities-a sur-vey of factor-analytic studies , 1993 .

[42]  A. Wald.  Tests of statistical hypotheses concerning several parameters when the number of observations is large , 1943 .

[43]  A. Jensen,et al.  Social Class, Race and Psychological Development. , 1969 .

[44]  R. Glaser,et al.  Components of geometric analogy solution , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[45]  Ralf Schulze,et al.  Working-memory capacity explains reasoning abilityand a little bit more , 2002 .