Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace2010452414

Document Sample
Emotional Intelligence in the Workplace2010452414 Powered By Docstoc
					Tests of Cognitive Intelligence
    Common Characteristics of Individual
           Intelligence Tests
•   individually administered
•   administration requires advanced training
•   tests cover wide range of age and ability
•   examiner must establish rapport
•   immediate scoring of items
•   usually requires about one hour
•   allows opportunity for observation
    Two Main Individually Administered
            Intelligence Tests
Stanford-Binet
• He wanted to create a process for identifying
  intellectually limited children so they could
  be removed from the regular classroom and
  put in special education.

Wechsler Scales
• Developed in response to the perceived
  shortcomings of the Stanford-Binet
  Binet’s Principles of Test Construction
• Wanted tasks to measure judgment, attention, and
  reasoning.
• Guided by two major concepts: age differentiation
  and general mental ability.
• Age differentiation: Binet searched for tasks that
  could be completed by 2/3 to ¾ of the children in a
  particular age group & was completed by fewer
  younger children and more older children.
• General mental ability: measured only the total
  product of the various tasks. Judged value of task
  in terms of its correlation with the combined result
  of all other tasks.
                Early Binet Scales
1905: 30 items ordered by difficulty. Test lacked:
• adequate measuring units to express results (only used
  idiot, imbecile, and moron)
• adequate normative data (only used 50 subjects)
• evidence of validity

1908: Grouped items according to age level rather than
  simply increasing difficulty. Introduced concept of mental
  age.
• Increased norm group to 203.
• Criticized because it produced only one score almost
  exclusively related to verbal, language, and reading ability
  1916 Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale
• Lewis Terman increased size of standardization
  sample though it was only white native-California
  children.

• Introduced intelligence quotient concept to show
  subjects’ rate of mental development.
   –IQ = (MA/CA) x 100

• However, maximum mental age was 19.5. Had to
  set maximum chronological age, too, so set it at
  16.
                  1937 scale
• Extended age range down to 2 and up to 22 years,
  10 months.
• Scoring standards and instructions were improved
• Several performance items added
• Standardization sample improved to include 3184
  subjects from 11 states. Subjects selected
  according to their fathers’ occupations. Still,
  sample included only whites and mainly those
  from urban areas.
• Developed alternate form.
        Problems with 1937 Form
• Reliability higher for older subjects than for
  younger ones and for those in the lower IQ
  ranges
• Scores were most unstable for young
  children with high IQ.
• Each age group also had different standard
  deviations which made interpretation
  difficult
           1960 Stanford-Binet
• Used Binet’s principles to redo scale.
• Solved problem of differential variation in IQ
  by using the deviation IQ concept. Set mean
  at 100 with SD of 16. Could now compare
  scores of one age level with another.
• No new normative sample but did one in
  1972 that included non-whites and 2100
  children.
            Modern Binet Scale
• Totally revised in 1986 by Thorndike et al.
• Used Thurstone’s multidimensional model (1938):
  G made up of crystallized ability (verbal &
  quantitative reasoning), fluid-analytic abilities
  (abstract-visual reasoning) and short term
  memory.
• Used IRT (Rasch model) to determine proper order
  of the items
• Used routing test (Vocabulary) as attempt to adapt
  testing to specific ability level of each examinee
  without computer adaptive testing
           Structure of the SB-IV
• Verbal Reasoning included vocabulary test,
  comprehension test, absurdities test, and verbal
  relations test.
• Abstract-Visual Reasoning included pattern analysis
  test, copying test, matrices test, paper-folding and
  cutting test.
• Quantitative Reasoning included quantitative test,
  number series test, equation-building test.
• Short-term Memory included bead memory, memory
  for sentences, memory for digits, and memory for
  objects.
• Composite included all areas combined.
   Psychometric properties of SB-IV
• Standardization sample has 5000+ subjects in 47
  states and DC.
• Sample stratified based on 1980 census – geographic
  region, community size, ethnic group, age, and
  gender.
• Internal consistency reliability is .98 for composite and
  .93-.97 for area scores. Some individual test scores
  are lower: .73 for memory for objects is the lowest.
• Test-retest reliabilities for composite score were .91
  and .90 for 5 and 8-year-olds.
• Factor analysis supports the structure of the test.
• Correlations with other IQ tests are generally in the
  70s and 80s
               Wechsler Scales
• David Wechsler worked at NY’s Bellevue Hospital.
  He wasn’t happy with the Stanford Binet with it’s
  focus on children or on the production of a single
  score.
• In 1939, he created the Wechsler-Bellevue, later
  called the WAIS.
• In 1949, he created the children’s version, the
  WISC.
• In 1967, he added the WPPSI for children ages 2.5-
  7.
         Structure of the WAIS
• The WAIS yields separate verbal and
  performance IQs
• The WAIS-III has four index scores: Verbal
  comprehension, working memory,
  perceptual organization, and processing
  speed.
Verbal and Performance Tests on the WAIS

  Verbal:            Performance:
  • Vocabulary       • Picture completion
  • Similarities     • Digit symbol-coding
  • Arithmetic       • Block design
  • digit Span       • Matrix reasoning
  • Information      • Picture arrangement
  • Comprehension    • Symbol search
  • Letter-Number    • Object assembly
    Sequencing
    Scales and Norms for the WAIS
• Determine raw score for each subtest.
• Convert raw scores to standard scores, called scaled
  scores (M=10, SD=3)
• There are conversions for 13 age groups. This method of
  conversion obscures any differences in performance by
  age.
• Subtest scaled scores are added, then converted to WAIS-
  III composite scores.
• Three composite scores: verbal, performance, full scale,
  each with M=100, SD=15
• Four index scores: verbal comprehension, perceptual
  organization, working memory, processing speed
     Standardization of the WAIS
• Standardized on a stratified sample of 2,450
  adults representative of the US population
  aged 16-89.
• There were 200 cases per age group, except
  for the smaller numbers in the two oldest
  groups.
• Still difficult to know the effects of self-
  selection since participants had to be invited
  and accept to be included.
           Reliability of the WAIS
• Internal consistency and test-retest reliabilities are
  about .95 or higher for full scale and verbal scores.
• They’re about .90 for performance and three other
  index scores: perceptual organization, working
  memory, and processing speed.
• Internal consistency reliability for the subtests
  range from upper .70s to low .90s. Test-retest is
  about .83.
• Generally, performance reliabilities are lower than
  verbal reliabilities on the subtests.
            Validity of the WAIS
• Great deal of information on criterion-related and
  construct validity.
• Factors analyses support use of 4 index scores.
• Comparison studies show the pattern of WAIS-III
  scores for many special groups, e.g., Alzheimers’
  Disease, Parkinson’s, learning disabled, brain
  injury.
• Is the top test used today
                   WISC-III
• Is the most popular test for assessing
  intellectual ability of children ages 6 years, 0
  months to 16 years, 11 months.
• Similar to structure of the WAIS, with easier
  items
• Both tests yield verbal, performance, and
  full scale IQ and 4 index scores
• Most of the subtests are the same
   Psychometric Properties of the WISC-III

• Standardization program involved 2,200 cases
  selected to represent the US population of children
  aged 6-16.
• Composite scores generally have internal
  consistency reliabilities in the mid-.90s and test-
  retest reliabilities around .90.
• Subtest reliabilities are generally in the mid-.80s.
• Object Assembly and Mazes are problematic, with
  reliabilities in the .60s.
         Group Differences in IQ
• Psychological tests designed to measure
  differences among people.
• Test scores that demonstrate differences among
  people may suggest that people are not created
  with the same basic abilities.
• Biggest problem: Some ethnic groups obtain
  lower average scores on some psychological
  tests. On average African Americans score 15
  points lower than whites on IQ tests.
• Dispute is not whether differences occur but why
  they occur.—environment vs. biology
  Problems with Biology Argument
• IQ scores are improving (called the Flynn
  effect), more so for African Americans than
  whites.
• Victimization by stereotyping could affect
  test performance and grades.
• Construct of race has no biological meaning
  based on evidence from studies in
  population genetics, the human genome and
  physical anthropology.
     Criticisms Related to Content
                Validity
• Looking at specific items, it was thought that
  they might be biased because some children
  wouldn’t have the opportunity to learn the
  material
• Members of ethnic groups might answer
  some items differently but still correctly
• Scores affected by language skills
  inculcated as part of a white, middle-class
  upbringing foreign to inner city children
Responses to Content Validity Criticisms
• Test developers are indifferent to the opportunities
  people have to learn the information on the tests. The
  meaning they assign to the tests comes from
  correlations of test scores with other variables.
• Some evidence suggests that the linguistic bias in
  standardized tests does not cause the observed
  differences (Scheuneman, 1987).
• Elimination of biased items from a test didn’t change
  the test scores (Bianchini, 1976).
• Can’t find classes of items most likely to be missed by
  minority group members (Wild, et al., 1989)
    Other Ways of Thinking About
            Differences
• Maybe difference in test scores may reflect
  patterns of problem-solving that
  characterize different subcultures (e.g.,
  MBTI)
• R. D. Goldman (1973) proposed the
  differential process theory which maintains
  that different strategies may lead to effective
  solutions for many types of tasks.
  Strategies mediate abilities and
  performance.
                  Criterion Issues
• Most standardized tests are evaluated against other
  standardized tests. The criterion may be the same test
  dressed up differently or measuring test-wiseness on both
• IQ tests may be correlated with achievement tests.
  Achievement may be moderated by opportunity to learn.
• Goldman and Hartig (1976) found scores on the WISC to
  be unrelated to teacher ratings of classroom performance
  for minority children, but significant for non-minority
  children.
• Majority and minority children grow up in different social
  environments. Perhaps test scores accurately reflect the
  effects of social and economic inequality.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:8
posted:4/6/2010
language:English
pages:27