New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here

Individual Differences Study Guide Benchmark 2

by: Cimmi Alvarez

Individual Differences Study Guide Benchmark 2 PSY 345

Marketplace > University of Texas at Austin > Psychology (PSYC) > PSY 345 > Individual Differences Study Guide Benchmark 2
Cimmi Alvarez
GPA 3.8

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Intelligence and Personality, Theories and tests. Includes Selected readings that were not covered in Lecture.
Individual Differences
Elliot Tucker-Drob
Study Guide
Personality Psychology, intelligence, IQ, IQ Tests, Tests, factor, analysis, g, Models
50 ?




Popular in Individual Differences

Popular in Psychology (PSYC)

This 28 page Study Guide was uploaded by Cimmi Alvarez on Friday September 30, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PSY 345 at University of Texas at Austin taught by Elliot Tucker-Drob in Fall 2016. Since its upload, it has received 44 views. For similar materials see Individual Differences in Psychology (PSYC) at University of Texas at Austin.

Similar to PSY 345 at UT


Reviews for Individual Differences Study Guide Benchmark 2


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 09/30/16
Benchmark 2 Study Guide Readings: Detterman Chapter 2 Alfred Binet and Henri (1895)- article suggests how individual differences should be studied Intelligence as a set of independent but interconnected faculties 10 faculties memory, Images, Imagination, Attention, Comprehension, Suggestibility, Esthetical Sensibility, Moral Sensibility, Muscular Force, Observation Education: problem there was no standard for children with difficulty in school 1904 The Society (interested in Education, Binet president) Wants to solve 1. That in the primary schools, the children judged refectory to education, to teaching, or to discipline of the school should not be sent away without being submitted to a medico-pedagogical examination 2. That these children, if considered as educable challenged, should be grouped in a special class annexed to the school, or in a special establishment 3. That, as a demonstration, a special class for the educable be opened for present in one of the Paris Schools Ministry of Education accepts proposal Commission finds relationship between memory performance and teachers ratings of ability. Compared small number of children found large memory differences: Compare performance of children of the same chronological age. Damaye 1903- attempted grade intellectually ability of intellectually disabled 20 themes, each had a number of questions and graded on 1 to 5 scale, max score 100; subjective scoring 90 points- normal; (his language) moron 60-90; imbecile 50-60; idiots 10-20 Binet-Simon test 1905 3 scales: Psychological, Educational, and Medical Psychological- became known as Binet Intelligence Test (30 items) Educational- attempt to separate past learning from pure intellectual functioning’ determine if child had inadequate schooling. (31 items) Medical- medical and hereditary conditions, body measurements, vision, speech articulation, blood and strength 1906 Scale- The First Real Intelligence Test arranged by chronological age 3-13; items were assigned to the age where about half the children passed the item, half failed. Last age the child passed the items would be called mental age. IQ developed by Stern 1912 Mental age divided by chronological age multiplied by 100 Three Years:
Indicate eyes, mouth, nose
Name objects pointed to in picture
Repeat 2 digits
Repeat a sentence of 6 syllables
Give family name
 Seven Years
Find missing part in drawings
Count number of fingers
Copy a written sentence
Copy figures (diamond and triangle)
Repeat five digits
Describe a picture
Count 13 coins
Name 4 pieces of money
 Eleven Years
Explain absurdities in sentences
Make a sentence from three words
Name as many words as possible in 3 minutes (over 60 is passing)
Define three abstract words (charity, justice, kindness)
Make a sentence out of jumbled words Binet thought intelligence was dependent on memory and imagery, attention, or judgement 1911 Scale added five tests for 15 year olds and five for adults. Covered early childhood to adulthood Referred to as “the Binet Scale” Goodard Applied the Binet scale in schools immigration, and eugenics and war. Behaviorism: opposing force to intelligence testing. Developed by John B Watson Stiff opposition to anything that implied a hereditary explanation of human intelligence. Thought any intellectual disability was caused by inappropriate environmental contingencies Terman’s Stanford Revision of the Binet Simon Scale 2 1916 added and changed items first test to approach adequate standardization sample. (hallmark modern tests make results interpretable. Without them test scores have little meaning) Immigration 1912 Goddard Ellis Island testers pick out people thought to be intellectually disabled, some normal controls Picking out people thought disabled led to 1924 immigration act that proposed racial quotas. Not testing representative sample to show true proportions only the percentage that were picked correctly were known. Army Alpha and Beta Tests Bingham, Goddard, Haines, Terman, Wells, and Whipple Develop a test to be used for recruits and officers Five forms of a multiple choice tests, questions similar to Binet-Simon scale Army Alpha 8 tests: graded by either: Mental age, point system, or ranked scores from A to E Army Beta: picture test for illiterates Predicted success in military in things like officer training courses Cattel: mental tests Defining Intelligence Thorndike and Boring: Intelligence is what the tests test. Boring: intelligence was not only general intelligence like Spearman said but also special abilities measured by the tests Refinements Terman and Merrill revised the Binet scale in 1960 Wechsler-Belleve Intelligence Scale 1939 Called point scale because points awarded for each correct answer instead of months of mental age Grouped all items of a particular type together Vocabulary, digital span, block design, similarities Divided into Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) and Wechler Intelligence scale for Children (WISC) 3 Educational Testing Identify special needs children and exceptional children Ordinary level (O level) and advanced level (A level) determined wo would continue their education Intelligence test motivated by concern for appropriate educational opportunities SAT and other College Selection Tests James Bryant Conant (President Harvard)- change culture from wealthy going to college to everyone by determining scholarships looking for a way for students to be selected- Intelligence Tests Brigham developing Scholastic Aptitude Test and Conant chose that Correlates strongly with other intelligence tests- indicating is an intelligence test Army General Classification Test (AGCT) Developed from Army Alpha for WWII Inductees did better than their fathers had in WWI Tuddenham- increased level of education recommended tests be restandardized on a regular basis After war developed Armed Service Vocational Aptitude Batter (ASVAB) Flynn Effect- finding that test scores increase over generations. Rediscover by Flynn Behavior Genetics Data show size of correlation between relatives on intelligence test varied systematically by degree of genetic relationship Genetic component of intelligence Jenenism: position that differences in race might be partly genetic (highly controversial) Detterman Chapter 5- Mental Abilities: Structure and Explanations Galton’s Conception of g Intelligence was a general capacity, that could be applied to any skill or content area Spearman’s Big Idea 1904- way to quantify relationships among mental tests and statistically test if all variation in mental tests was due to a single underlying construct or latent variable How Correlations arise among tests Correlations arise because of a single underlying ability called general intelligence (g) Test thought of as having two components in different amounts 4 General intelligence (g) Error and variance specific to the test. Test correlate because they have a common component, g Tetrad Differences Developed by Spearman by multiplying two correlations together with the restriction that all of the subscripts are different. Tetrads contain all same subscripts as another tetrad should be identical-commutative law of multiplication If underlying single factor, g, then every possible tetrad difference should equal 0 4 tests all tetrads equal to each other; 5 or more not all equal Examples of Factor Analysis Eigenvalues: average correlation among variables Eigenvalue for factor should be above one for the factor extracted to be meaningful (only one factor should be retained) Factor Loadings: Correlations of the tests with the factor or latent variable Correlation matrix reproduced from these All test correlate with the first factor. Spearman called this g-loading The extent a test correlated with the underlying factor or latent variable Described latent structure of the data: defined a latent variable- variable that could not be directly observed but was revealed from the relationship between tests Othogonal factors- uncorrelated factors Example with Experimental Data Will always be as many factors extracted as tests, but not all factors retained because some my account for only a small portion of variance in set Communalities- the numbers that appear in the principal diagonal. Including reliably, or estimate of, for each test in principal diagonal, results of reliable variance test. Principal Component analysis: when 1.0 is included in principal diagonal Good for data reduction. No estimate of reliability has to be made and possible to exactly reconstruct the original data from this 5 Principal Axis Factor: when reliabilities are included in the principal diagonal Most factor analysis uses this because it excludes unreliable and specific test variance from the analysis. Number of Factors of Retained: can extract as many factors as there are variables. First factors generally account for the majority of the variance in the matrix and allow the most parsimonious explanation of underlying latent variables. Accounts for 40-60% variance. Remaining factors account for 10% or less. Most useful to retain fewer factors than the total number Rule: Retain all factors with eigenvalues above 1.0 Rotation: factor solution specifies point in multidimensional space (factor loading). Each axis represents a factor. Each test has a loading on each factor so each test can be plotted on these axes. Axes can be physically rotated to improve interpretability of results Varimax rotation: attempts to simplify the factors by maximizing each variable on a column. “smearing” test variance over variables Not appropriate for identifying a general factor but has been able to eliminate the general factor. Oblimin rotation: does not require factors to be uncorrelated or orthogonal. Two axes do not need to be at right angles. Displayed at right angle because the correlation with the higher order factor is removed. Way to get a clearer view of test loadings. Exploratory Factor Analysis: investigator attempts to explore the relationship among the variables without preconceived hypothesis Confirmatory Factor Analysis: investigator must specify values for a complete model before data are collected (Priori specification). Data then compared to proposed model and initial model is rejected or not. Failure to reject model strengthens support for the model originally proposed. Compare models to find which fits best. Powerful when two competing, a priori models can be tested see if one is better supported End up with a mathematical representation of latent variables that explain relationship among large portion of the variance of all tests included. Latent variables identified account for relationship among the larger number of observed variables. Latent variable is still ambiguous Factor scores for each latent variable using factor loadings possible to assign each person a factor score on each latent variable. This score represents expected score each person would obtain if there was a pure test of that latent variable. 6 Factor scores for g are measures of an unobserved variable. IQ is directly obtained from observed scored either by adding up items correct or summing subtest. Correlation of g and IQ scores highly correlated indication pervasiveness of g in all mental tests Orthogonal models: suggest mental ability can be characterized by a single latent variable or a set of latent variables that are uncorrelated. Spearman’s model is orthogonal- no other latent variables correlated with g. Other type of models identifies multiple correlated latent variables Orthogonal Models Spearman’s g G is the latent variable. Causing variance in each test. Does not explain why g exists Positive manifold: all mental tests are positively correlated with each other. Indifference of the indicator: does not matter what mental test used because they are all measuring the same thing-g. Mental test contain different amounts of g, but otherwise are the same. “Two Factor” theory g and s: g-general intelligence and s-error variance and variance unique to test After criticism spearman changed and admitted other factors subordinate to g representing more specialized mental abilities Cognitive system educes correlates from this educes relations. - deriving something new Spearman-Differences in general intelligence are due to differences in mental energy. Describes ME as physiological process sometimes, others as a psychical and physical process. Non-intellective factors that influence: General mental inertia (c) or lag- tendency to perseveration. Freedom from c- ability to change thought patters, quick original (creativity), Oscillation (o)- changes of mental functioning within individuals over time due to fatigue or other factors, will (w). Thurstone’s Model of Independent Factors Thought intelligence was a set of independent factors 13 exact factors, named 9 as primary mental abilities all orthogonal. Spatial (S), Perceptual (P), Numerical (N), Verbal (V), Memory (M)< Word Fluency (W), Inductive Reasoning (I), Arithmetical Reasoning (R), and Deduction (D), Using restricted range reduces the magnitude of correlations between tests: minimized the general factor and worked to the advantage of Thurstone’s hypothesis. The primary mental ability factors are correlated. 7 When retested each primary mental ability was composite of an independent primary factor and a general factor. Primary factors all shared a single general factor concluded “operates through each of the primary factors. Hierarchical model: latent traits cause other latent traits lower in the hierarchy. Top is g that acts through Turnstones primary mental abilities which are defined by tests. Guilford’s Structure of Intellect Model Largest number of independent factors of any model. 360 tests to be able to test Three dimensions: operations (cognition, memory, divergent production, convergent production and evaluation); Content (figural, symbolic, semantic, and behavioral); Product (classes, units, relations, systems, transformations, and implications); Each dimension added into every test: 5 (operations) X 4 (Content) X 6 (Product) – cube containing 120 blocks each block formed by intersection of Operation X Content X Product Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences Intelligence existed if it was absent in otherwise normal individual or culture or if it existed in isolation in individuals from a special population. Looking for abilities that could be found in isolation in some group 7 intelligences: Linguistic, Logical, Spatial, Musical, Bodily Kinesthetic, Intrapersonal, Interpersonal. Later added Naturalist, Spiritual, and Existential. Unless constructs of a theory can be measured, they are not admissible to scientific debate. Unless properly defined so they can be measured the theory cannot be tested All actually correlated underlying factor of g still here Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory Three components: analytical (general intelligence), creative, and practical (common sense). Theory of successful intelligence: person finds success according to their own personal standards and within their own culture. Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test (STAT): 36 multiple choice questions, 12 for each ability. 12 items further divided 4 items each representing 3 types of content: Verbal, Quantitative, and figural Little evidence of 3 separate factors. G still prevalent. Triarchic components have a common source of variance. Hierarchical Models Thurstone believe this account for his data 8 Series of repeated (iterative) factor analyses that continues until the majority of variation common to two or more tests is accounted for. Each new factor analysis produces a new level in the hierarchy. There can be any number of levels of latent variables but in practice there are no more than four. Vernon’s Hierarchical Model Four levels or strata of factors. Highest stratum was g. under g was v:ed and k:m each had minor factors at the next lower level. the lowest stratum included factors specific to only a few tests. v:ed subordinate factors important in formal education including attention, verbal and logical reasoning, numerical facility, and fluency k:m- spatial/mechanical factor and has subordinate factors like spatial ability, mechanical information, psychomotor coordination, reaction time. Each level defines a distinguishable source of variance that contributes to performance on a test. 40% variance accounted for g. 10% by next levels of factors and remaining 40% by test specific variance and error. Raymond Cattell’s Fluid and Crystallized Intelligence-the Cattell-Horn Model Structure of mental abilities changed as people get older and thought it was important to incorporate potential changes. Does not have a single g divides g into fluid and crystallized intelligences Fluid- hardware, how well the brain works. Asymptote and decline with age. More heavily controlled by genetic factors. Form of g crystallized is programming that occurs over time. things learned over life using fluid intelligence. Continue to increase with age Investment Theory- how fluid intelligence produces crystalized intelligence and how they interact Carroll’s Magnum Opus Carroll Three-Stratum Model: 3 strata levels of factors. Highest is stratum III and is g. Stratum II: 8 factors, fluid and crystallized general intelligence, general memory, broad visual perception, broad auditory perception. Broad retrieval ability, broad cognitive speediness, Processing speed. Stratum I: spatial relations and spatial scanning, speech and should discrimination, musical discrimination for auditory perception. Johnson and Bouchard’s VPR model Used confirmatory factor analysis to compare models of Vernoon, Cattell and Horn, and Carrol 9 None fit the data really well but Vernon model better. Modified Vernon model to produce a model that fit well. Called Verbal Perceptual Rotation (VPR) model Verbal similar to v:ed and Perceptual factor similar to k:m. added rotation ( ability to mentally manipulate images) Effect of higher correlations among low IQ persons is known as Spearman’s law of diminishing returns (SLODR) Low IQ more ability suggested by g while higher have less by g and more specific Abilities Bond or Sampling Theory Assumed that mental abilities were represented a large number of associations. Tests were samples of these bonds. TO the extent a test sampled a diverse sample of bonds it would be g-loaded. Tests correlate because they sampled common bonds. System Theory G is emergent characteristic of complex system and not a physical entity. Systems organized so relationship between parts of the system. Some parts central to system functioning. Complex system of processes that occur in the brain. Neural Networks G arises from differences in neural plasticity. Even slight differences in sensitivity could make substantial differences over developmental period, affect entire nervous system, affect acquisition of information in all areas Personality and the Predictions of Consequential Outcomes Three types of outcomes; individual (manifested by individual outside of a social context), interpersonal (involve other individuals), and social/institutional (impersonal, organizational, and societal-level process involving interactions with more generalized others). Individual Outcomes Do not depend on social process to give meaning to outcome variable Physical health, psychopathology, happiness, spirituality, and virtue Conscientiousness as a virtue and as a trait different but related Happiness and Subjective well being Personality dispositions strong predictor Demographic and contextual factors weakly to moderately correlated High in extraversion low in neuroticism see events and situations in a more positive light, less responsive to negative feedback, and tend to discount opportunities that are not available to them. 10 Moderated by culture individualistic societies. Self-esteem powerful mediator of the influence of extraversion, neuroticism and conscientiousness on SWB Relational esteem (satisfaction with relationships with family and friends) mediates influence of agreeableness and extraversion on SWB Spirituality and Virtues Cognitive orientation (perception and attitudes regarding spirituality), experiential/phenomenological (mystical, transcendental, and transpersonal experiences), existential well-being ( a sense of meaning, purpose, and resilience regarding’s one’s existence), paranormal beliefs (including ESP and other paranormal phenomena), and religiousness (religious practices) Religiousness and cognitive orientation predicted by agreeableness and conscientiousness Experiential/phenomenological and paranormal components were predicted by openness Existential well-being predicted by extraversion and low neuroticism Agreeableness facilitates compassion, conscientiousness facilitates perseverance, openness fosters creativity. Gratitude (extraversion and agreeableness) forgiveness (agreeableness and openness) inspiration (extraversion and openness) humor (low neuroticism and agreeableness) Physical Health and Longevity Positive emotionality (extraversion) conscientiousness predict longer lives. Hostility (low agreeableness predicts poor physical health and earlier mortality Neuroticism links to disease personality traits are associated with factors that cause disease. The hostility component of low agreeableness (i.e., anger, cynicism, and mistrust) is associated with sympathetic nervous system activation that is in turn associated with coronary artery disease personality may lead to behaviors that protect or diminish health. Extraversion is associated with more numerous social relationships and greater social support, both of which are positively correlated with health outcomes. Various unhealthy habits negatively correlated to conscientiousness Last, personality traits are related to the successful implementation of health-related coping behaviors and adherence to treatment regimens Agreeableness (e.g., hostility) seems to be most directly associated with the dis- ease processes, conscientiousness (e.g., low impulse control) is clearly implicated in health-risk 11 behaviors, and neuroticism (e.g., vulnerability and rumination) seems to contribute to disease by shaping reactions to illness. positive emotions and dispositions subsumed by the extraversion dimension lead to improved coping and the development of psychological skills and resources Psychopathology Substance abuse disorders predicted by higher openness and lower conscientiousness Anxiety disorders predicted by high neuroticism and depression linked to neuroticism and low extraversion Neuroticism strongest relationship with personality disorders, openness only modest relationship Self-Concept and Identity positive emotions and dispositions subsumed by the extraversion dimension lead to improved coping and the development of psychological skills and resources. relations between personality traits and Marcia’s (1980) four categories of identity development (achieved, moratorium, diffuse, and foreclosed) foreclosure (low openness), identity achievement (low neuroticism, conscientiousness, and extraversion) moratorium (neuroticism) diffusion (neuroticism, low agreeableness) openness most important personality traits in impact on identity development. Identity- openness, low neuroticism, and coconsciousness. Organized committed and flexible exploration of identity Interpersonal Outcomes Empathy (extraversion and agreeableness) and emotional regulation (low neuroticism) Peer and Family Relationships Agreeableness and extraversion best predictor of peer acceptance and friendship - childhood Low agreeableness and low extraversion associated with rejected peer status Agreeableness protects children from victimization. Relationships with parents negatively affected by neuroticism, low conscientiousness, and low extraversion Adults extraversion is related to popularity status, dating variety, and self-reported 12 attractiveness, and social acceptance. Neuroticism negative predictor of status among men only Romantic Relationships Neuroticism and low agreeableness consistently emerge as predictors of negative relationship outcomes such as relationship dissatisfaction, conflict, abuse, and ultimately dissolution relation between neuroticism and relationship dissatisfaction involves a reciprocal process such that negative emotions increase relationship distress, which in turn accentuates negative emotionality dissatisfaction multiple partners- neuroticism and low agreeableness Conscientiousness and agreeableness predicted satisfaction in dating couples, whereas extraversion predicted satisfaction in the married couples. Social/Institutional Outcomes Three outcomes: vocational interests, work satisfaction, and job performance Occupational Choice and Performance extraversion was related to social and enterprising occupational interests, agreeableness to social interests, and openness to investigative and artistic interests. Neuroticism was not related to any occupational interest. Conscientiousness related to conventional interests. Conscientiousness predicts performance, in all occupations and GPA. Predicts how well one does at work Extraversion important to some but not all occupations. Job satisfaction and organizational commitment, negatively related to wish to change jobs. How one feels at work Agreeableness relates to job performance when teamwork is used Job satisfaction- childhood conscientiousness, openness, and emotional stability Salary and authority- negatively related to agreeableness Emotional stability (negative emotionality) is most strongly related to financial security; agreeableness (positive emotionality-communion) is related to occupational attainment. Resource power and work involvement are predicted by extraversion Political Attitudes and Values openness is related to the content of social attitudes, with political conservativism and right-wing authoritarianism being negatively related. Negative association between openness and right-wing authoritarianism. low openness, low agreeableness, and conscientiousness related conservative political beliefs, 13 death anxiety, dogmatism–intolerance of ambiguity, and the needs for order, structure, and closure are positive correlates of conservativism, whereas negative correlates include openness to experience, uncertainty tolerance, and integrative complexity supporting more liberal candidates describe themselves and the candidates they prefer as higher on openness and agreeableness, whereas those who support more conservative candidates describe themselves and the candidates they support as more extraverted and conscientious Volunteerism and Community Involvement Prosocial behavior, other-oriented empathy scale – agreeableness. Helpfulness- extraversion, Extraversion and agreeableness predict who assumes a leadership role Criminality Antisocial behavior- low conscientiousness and neuroticism Trait Individual Outcomes Interpersonal Social institutional Outcomes Outcomes Extraversion Happiness: subjective well- Peer& family Occupational being; spirituality &virtues: relations: peers’ choice& existential well-being acceptance and performance: Gratitude, inspiration friendship social and Health: longevity, coping, (children and enterprising resilience adults); dating interests, Psychopathology: - variety, satisfaction, depression, -/+ personality attractiveness, commitment, disorders status (adults) involvement Identity: majority culture Romantic Community identification (for minorities relations: involvement: satisfaction volunteerism, leadership Agreeableness Spirituality & virtues: Peer and Family Occupational religious beliefs and relations: peers’ choice & behavior, gratitude, acceptance and performance: forgiveness, humor friendship social interests, job Health: longevity; - heart (children) attainment, - disease Romantic extrinsic success Psychopathology: -/+ relations: Community personality disorders Satisfaction involvement: Identity: ethnic culture (dating couples volunteerism, identification (minorities) only) leadership Criminality: - criminal behavior 14 Conscientiousness Spirituality & Virtues: Peer & family Occupational religious beliefs and behavior relations: family choice & Health: longevity, - risky satisfaction performance: behavior Romantic performance, Psychopathology: - substance relations: success abuse, -/+ personality satisfaction Political attitudes disorders (dating couples and values: Identity: achievement, ethnic only) conservatism culture identification (for Criminality: - minorities) antisocial and criminal behavior Neuroticism Happiness: - subjective well- Peer & family Occupational being relations: - family choice & Spirituality & virtues: - satisfaction, - Performance: - existential well being, - status (males), satisfaction, - humor Romantic commitment, - Health: - coping relations: financial security, - Psychopathology: anxiety, dissatisfaction, success depression, +/- personality conflict, abuse, Criminality: disorders dissolution antisocial behavior Identity: - identity integration/ consolidation Openness Spirituality & Virtues: Occupational existential/phenomenological Choice & concerns, forgiveness, performance: inspiration investigative and Psychopathology: substance artistic interests, abuse success Identity: - foreclosure, Political attitudes identify & values: - right- integration/consolidation, wing majority culture authoritarianism, identification (minorities) liberalism Lectures Intelligence and Personality- Historical and Contemporary Taxonomies Taxonomies- organize how we talk about constructs, and how we study them The Darwinian Revolution Natural selection is premised on the notion of individual variation Evolution- variability in all characteristics. Darwin focused on physiological characteristics 15 People pass on the genetic material that gives rise to these traits Most adapted pass on their gene more efficiently than the less adapted He predicts psychology will be about variation in mental powers and capacity Sir Francis Galton Father of behavioral genetics- how genes influence intergenerational influence of genes on psychology Wrote Hereditary Genius- what causes the “natural ability” Qualifications of intellect and disposition which lead to reputation Searched through handbooks of eminence found families of reputation tended to produce eminent offspring. Assumed people were successful because of their psychological abilities passed down through families. Eugenics- the way farmers breed animals for certain things. This could be applied to humans. Use natural selection to “make society better”. Many ethical issues based on this Founder of psychometrics and individual differences psychology Conceptualized IQ as falling along a normal distribution Alfred Binet Some caught up others did not always Government commissioned Binet and Simon to devise a test that would identify children who were “unable to profit from schools” 1905 new scale- different tests required different abilities, that could develop unequally in scores Intelligence could be determined by whether they could answer more or few questions than average students of the same age. Had different tests for different age groups Intelligence was reported at mental age: the at which the average score is equal to the score of the individual IQ= Mental age/ chronological age X 100 Do not use IQ in this way anymore Charles Spearman Father of factor analysis Curious to weather intelligence was really general and unitary Do well on one type of tests should do well on other types of tests. 16 Invented Factor Analysis to determine if correlations between test cold be correlated with ability. Positive manifold Matriz manifold – “positive manifold” Spearman’s Theory General intelligence, g, is a mental energy Specific abilities are the individual machines of the factory. Single Factor vs. Multiple Factors Single factor does not account for specific patters observed among many different. Louis L Thurstone Argued ability in on factor doesn’t have to do with others culture.. His factors Verbal comprehension, verbal fluency, number, memory, perceptual speed, inductive reasoning, spatial visualization Gf-Gc Theory The fluid and crystallized theory of intelligence. By Cattell Fluid intelligence- ability that operates whatever sheer perception of complex relations is involved. When you learn it Crystallized Intelligence- availability of diverse skills and knowledge that are acquired in a culture. Ingrains the knowledge from Fluid Declarative- knows medicine to give patient Procedural- know how to cut someone open-knows the procedure The acquisition of crystallized intelligence, learning, results from people investing their fluid abilities. Why Gf and Gc are correlated, because people with higher Gf learn more. The “Three Stratum” Hierarchical Factor Model The group factors are actually correlated because there is a general ability on the top There are fluid and crystalized tests and groups of processing. Gardener: Independent Multiple Intelligences Data doesn’t totally correspond Says everyone has abilities and they are independent if they are good at one thing they may not be good at something else. Each ability is not correlated with another 17 Toward Empirical Science of Personality: Galton 1884 Character which shapes our conduct is a definite and durable something, and therefore it is reasonable to attempt to measure it In emotional temperament 1915 Webb applies spearman’s factor analytic methods to personality Takes rating of student’s personality Include 40 character traits Character Traits that webb found to correlate with General Intelligence Controlling for Intelligence, Webb Finds second factor- “w” Character traits load on this factor defines them as “persistence of motive” Towards a Multifactor Taxonomy: The Lexical Approach To find major dimensions underlying all human personality (content validity) must start with pool of personality items representative of all possible aspects Brainstorm to create diverse pool of personality test items More comprehensive and systematic way to go through a dictionary to find all of the different words that can be used to describe personality-lexical approach Lexical Hypothesis To talk about recurrent features of characters, modern languages have developed adjectives Comes from Galton 1884 1936: Allport and Odbert Identify 17,953 Personality-Descriptive Words Based on Webster’s New International Dictionary 1925 Reduce list to 4,504 words judged to be descriptive of relatively permanent traits ‘40s Cattel Makes use of Allport-Odbert List eliminates synonyms and adds terms from existing psychological theories Arrives at a list of 171 words Collects data and factor analyzes them Identifies 23 factors, 16 most robust which he measures with his Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire 15 personality factors and 1 intelligence factor 18 general factors: dimensions correlate with each other Hans Eysenck Originally 1947 theorized 2 major dimensions to personality each of which were biologically determined Extraverted and Stale Those we know can fall on different areas on those two dimensions. Later ‘70s added Psychoticism Lacking empathy Facets Eysenck’s Major Personality Traits Not all personality fits in these traits but they are a broad trend Prototypical Personality Types Neurotic Worrier, trouble sleeping, psychosomatic symptoms (anxiety attacks, Twitching). Overreacts to situations Extravert Likes parties, many friends, enjoys company and conversation, likes practical jokes Psychotic Lack empathy, cruel, inhumane, Schadenfreude, Violent films, sexually manipulative Five Factor Model Allaying 22 of Cattell’s factors, Fiske ’49 identify higher order 5 factor structure Tubes and Chistanal ’61 replicated findings and named the factors: Surgency (extraversion), Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotion Stability, Culture 1992 became known because of Costa and McCrae- Marketed their personality test widely. It is most widely used. Characteristics big 5 Openness ( Intellect, Imagination) Conscientious: Organized, Neat, orderly, practical, prompt, meticulous Extraversion: Talkative, extraverted, Assertive, Forward, Outspoken Agreeableness: Sympathetic, Kind, Warm, Understanding, Sincere Neuroticism (emotional Stability): Moody Anxious, Insecure 19 Towards an Evolutionary Approach? Nettle If evolution is supposed to select for the best level why doesn’t everyone have the same personality traits Evolution hasn’t chosen the perfect level of each trait because some circumstances it is good and in others not so much Selection Methods and Job Performance Schmidt and Hunter 1998 Use personnel selection methods Give applicants individual differences test and predict how well the applicant would do at the job Choose the applicants that enable the company to make profits What is required to make a selection method useful? How much variability is there in job performance? If there is no variability, then it doesn’t matter who you take Look at things that are easily measurable. – card punches- how much productivity in an hour. Easy to quantify their efficiency How selective can you be? Only have as many people as openings apply, cant be selective. If take 5% of applicants, you can be very selective in who you take. What is the cost of using them? Can we select criterion be administered easily and cheaply? Can use it on anyone applying or only those with some level of experience? Cant apply it easily to general applicant pool, it does little good in helping to select between people. How well does selection method predict job performance? Back of the Envelope Calculations Job that pays $40,000, the SD of output is about $16,000 th That means the difference between a work at the 84 % produces $32,000 more in revenue than the one in the 16 % th Pros and Cons of Possible Tests General Mental Ability (Intelligence) Tests Cheap to administer Can be used for all jobs and all levels of seniority Requires no job specific background knowledge Work Sample Tests 20 Hands on simulation of the job being applied for Can only be used on applicants who already know the job Otherwise, applicants must first be trained Expensive, time intensive Predictive Integrity Test Personality tests reflective of conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability. Whether they do dugs or drink on job, steal, fight with other workers, sabotage equipment, and antisocial behaviors Tend not to correlate with General Mental Ability Pro Structures vs. Unstructured interviews Structured- ask everyone same questions Unstructured- come in and chat. Different people in different ideas. Personal but not everyone is evaluated the same way. Job Knowledge Tests Cheap, easy to administer Expected to know the job already. Specific things you have to know on the job- not good for entry level applicants Graphology Hand writing analysis The way you write determines the type of person you are Calling References Schmidt and Hunter Meta-Analysis Advocating old results from previously published studies Sometimes unpublished because of file-drawer problem Making sure that you get the same results again. Just because you got the answer once it could be a result by chance rather than valid results. Combine all results previous studies and hopefully it is representing what it is supposed to represent. Gist of Multiple Regression 21 Looking for things that give an extra prediction Predictor 2 that measures more than General mental abilities. Results: Job Performance Performance measured using supervisory ratings of job performance, but production records, sales records, and other measured were also used. Results: Job Related Learning Requires you know some part of the job but you learn how to do it. Why GMA good predictor of Job Performance Watch people acquire knowledge. More intelligence learn to do the job better. SES, SAT, GPA Does seriocomic Status explain relationship between admission tests and post- secondary academic performance On average SAT does okay job at predicting performance Park, Luinski, and Benbow Study of mathematically Precocious Youth Score in top 1% of Quantitative SAT by age 13 Followed up 25 years later. Ceiling effect- can’t do better than 800 though some could. But you aren’t tested on it. Using age 13 you are able to see these individual differences because they will be below 800 but by the time they would typically take it they would be higher than the ceiling -Graphs of these kids show that being a smart kid matters when it comes to publication and patents. The higher a person is in the one percentile the more successful they were Bringing it back to Personnel selection Want to make groundbreaking discoveries in company you want to pick the smartest of the smart. GRIT: Personality and Perseverance for Long Term Goals How much you stick to your goals and how you don’t give up Think about the past and how you are typically Personality test- Looks a lot like conscientiousness. West Point Looked at people starting at West Point 22 A lot of people end up dropping out Looked at their Grit Score and their Whole candidate score Candidate score- what they are choosing people by No matter what whole candidate score is there is a 6% chance drop Higher grit less likely to drop out Grittier you are the more likely you are going to stick to somethings 2005 Scripps National Spelling Bee Rounds reached in the spelling bee (Average Final Round Reached) Grit People in the top grit go the farthest. More predictive than IQ People getting to this level around the same IQ but different grit Results for Grit Grit and Big five-dimension correlation Conscientiousness- .77 Neuroticism- -.40 Agreeableness- .24 Extraversion- .20 Openness to experience- .06 In children the Overlap on different dimensions is higher than in adults 2 hypothesis kids don’t have a good handle on the language and its hard for them to distinguish between different behaviors during self-report Developmental- the dimensions become more distinct as you develop and start using your personality in different situations How does GRIT relate to how far you expect to go in school? UTGPA and Grit predict how far you want to go to school Self-Control Following same sample of participants from childhood until they were in their 30s 95% retention over the study period Average of how self-controlled they are between 3-11 years old Waited and reassessed at age 32 23 Checked Physical Health and Substance use More self-control they were between 3-11 The healthier they were and the less substance use SES, Income, Financial Planfullness (how much is saved for retirement, savings account) Higher SES, More Retirement, Less financial problems, More money High self-control Single Parent Child Rearing More self-control the less likely you are to be raising a kid on your own Criminal Conviction More self-control the less likely to be convicted Snare Hypothesis Start off making a few bad mistakes and has to live with the consequences for a long time Call these developmental snares Make one or two mistakes and they just stick with you Environmental Influences on Development How much does schooling affect intelligence? Ceci’s Year of completed Education and Intelligence More education people have the better they score on the tests Smarter people could go farther in school because they are smarter Correlation between .6 and .8 in Ceci’s data Summer Vacation and IQ Achievement IQ decrement (or slower growth) Occurs over summer vacation from school Longer in school do better. Longer out of school the lower their IQ scores are. In sociology use race to determine SES- different races, on average, have different SES condition. Minorities tend to be lower SES- Problematic Inequalities outside of school depending on SES are larger than the inequalities of schools. Outside inequalities widen the gap between different SES groups Intermittent School Attendance and IQ 24 Children who rarely/intermittently go to school Intelligence of children decrease from youngest to oldest. The older child has a lower IQ than the younger children Get this effect because: they miss the amount of school relative to children their age grows every year- they are more behind than other children their age Delayed onset of school on IQ WWII Holland’s elementary schools were closed IQ scores of children dropped by approximately 7 IQ points Because of Integration south closes schools and black students lost approximately 6 IQ points per year Early Termination of Schooling and IQ Compared Swedish men who dropped out of high school to those who finished. Matched on IQ, SES, and GPA at 13. Tested for mandatory military registration at 18 Each school year not competed, there was a loss of 1.8 IQ points, up to a maximum of 8 IQ points Changes in compulsory schooling in Norway Schooling in adolescence raises IQ scores. Norway makes laws that students have to go to school up until 9 th grade; in the past could drop out in 7 grade. th Allowed a period of time to implement the new law. Different regions complied at different times. Time of schooling in years went up .3 of a year. IQ went up 1.5 points Similarity of Aptitude and Achievement Test Scores Strong correlation between IQ tests and how well you do on Reading, writing, science, and math Correlation between cognitive ability and schooling is .81 How far people have gone in school and their academic achievement correlates with IQ. Cahan and Cohen Logic Birthday cutoffs for school entry occur in December. 25 You can compare a student with a birthday 1 day before the cutoff to on with a birthday 1 day after. For all intents and purposes, the students are the same age but they differ a full year of schooling. Young for your grade, doing the same work as the older kids and forced to keep up with it Older in grade, just missing cutoffs, miss an entire year of academic stipulation. Results Positive slope with discontinuities. The grades do not connect with the tails of the next. There is a jump- Caused by having an extra year of schooling because of the cutoff Verbal ratio 2.0 Verbal oddities 7.0 Fluid Tests closer for schooling and age Cognitive Recovery in Socially Deprived Young Children: The Bucharest Early Intervention Project Method Settings: Romania Groups: Kids in orphanages and those adopted Randomization vs. Observation Outcomes measured Bayley Scales of Infant Development Wechsler Preschool Primary Ethical Safeguards Approval from ethics board locally and here in the US Didn’t start testing these kids for the sake of science- did allow children who lost it then they could get adopted later. Still assigned to the not adopted group for the study though. Keeps it from being an observational study. Study didn’t hurt the kids any more than doing nothing would Principal of Clinical equipoise Ethical dilemma when researchers start seeing that one treatment is better than the other. As soon as it is clear that the treatment is working, Ethically stop the study and get as many people in the control group as possible the correct treatment. 26 They stopped the study once they saw IQ differences and tried to get as many kids adopted as possible Results Institutionalized group IQs in the 70s FCG started in orphanages then were adopted IQs in the 80s NIG with parents but parents similar to the others IQs over 100 Kids adopted. When you were adopted based on lottery (Random Assignment) 0-18 months: 94 IQ; 18-24 month: 89 IQ; 24-30 months-80 IQ; 30+ month-80 IQ Experimental Effects on Personality and Well-Being Inadequate Orphanage Care 50 years Later Chronic Illness Orphans more likely to have chronic illnesses Psychosocial Adaptation 50% orphans never married Orphans 50% don’t interact with other people Equally satisfied with life Suicidal thoughts more prevalent in Orphans Attempted suicide about 30% orphans Adaptation and set-point Model of Subjective Well-Being Set Point Theory People can adapt to almost any life event and that happiness levels fluctuate around a biologically determined set point that rarely changes Baseline phase then something happens and life satisfaction goes up for the reaction phase then life goes back to normal and adaptation phase is the new or back to the baseline From Germans- every year given a bunch of different studies, Had been followed since before the big event. Can see baseline before and after Marriage- takes 7years to get back to your set point Widowhood- decline and get better but never back to where you were before 27 Divorce- return toward baseline Unemployment, Disability, and Severe Disability- on average they don’t get back to where they were before. Recover but never recover back to baseline Do people React Differently to Marriage On average go up in life satisfaction from before engagement to marriage then go down a little until reaching baseline Some people gets supper happy and adapts partially but never goes back to baseline Some get unhappy before marriage Do people Adapt Differently to Marriage Some people get happier, some go back to baseline, others continue to get unhappier 28


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

50 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Kyle Maynard Purdue

"When you're taking detailed notes and trying to help everyone else out in the class, it really helps you learn and understand the I made $280 on my first study guide!"

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.