共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 250 毫秒
1.
斯-欧非言语智力测验是一套以非文字形式测量个体流体智力的测验,包含类比、拼板、归类和连线等多个分测验,可以用于评估特殊群体的智力与认知发展水平.与其他测试听障、学障及智障等特殊群体智力的测验相比,该测验有着独特的优势,其测评内容全面,施测程序新颖,常模精确且易于理解. 相似文献
2.
情绪智力对于人的发展起着重要作用。因此,许多心理学家致力于情绪智力的研究,特别是情绪智力测验的研究。目前,国内情绪智力测验研究的内容主要集中在对国外情绪智力测验的研究,包括介绍测验、实证检验、修订测验三个方面,另外本土化情绪智力测验的探索也是主要内容之一。研究存在的主要问题是：测验适用范围窄,研究多集中于某一特殊人群,未对测验进行标准化,以及测验的检验不严谨。未来的研究需探索多样化的测量模式,并在修订国外测验的基础上编制本土化问卷。在编制和验证问卷时,应将高级统计方法应用其中,增加测验的应用性研究,以及横向与纵向相结合的研究。 相似文献
3.
略论当代智力测验的发展趋势 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
智力是心理学的重要研究领域之一,智力测验的发展迄今也有近百年的历史。当代的智力测验,由于受智力概念演变、智力理论和测验理论发展的影响,产生了一些新趋向。 相似文献
4.
智力理论的发展对韦克斯勒测验方法的影响 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
祁乐瑛 《青海师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2004,(3):105-107
韦克斯勒智力测验是继比纳-西蒙智力量表后的又一个重要的智力测验,在世界上广泛使用,测验所得到的智商也有通用性,但是随着现代智力理论的新发展,韦克斯勒智力测验也受到了一定的影响,显现了两个不足之处:测验编制的理论基础不全面,测量误差的控制不完善。 相似文献
5.
6.
韦氏儿童智力测验第四版的修订及其对智力测验开发的启示 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
陈海平 《宁波大学学报(教育科学版)》2008,30(6):37-42
根据韦氏儿童智力测验第四版（WISC—IV）的重要变动,分析其修订的动因,探讨其对智力测验开发的意义。韦氏儿童智力测验是世界上应用最广泛的儿童智力个别测验,WISC-IV是它的最新版。它的修订源于弥补其理论基础的先天不足,源于临床应用对心理测验结果加强理论解释和实践指导的需要,而新近提出的Cattelt—Hom—Carroll theory智力理论及跨系列测评（Cross-Battery assessment）技术为修订提供了基础。韦氏儿童智力测验的发展表明,心理测验的使用价值和理论基础对其发展和完善都至关重要。 相似文献
7.
现有的智力测验受到来自两个方面的批评,一是测验本身缺少理论基础;二是测验内容片面,即过分强调智力的某些成分而忽略另一些成分。我们如何对当前的智力测验进行改进和提高?将来的智力测验的形式和内容是什么?美国著名的心理学家施顿伯格目前正领导一批心理学家编制一套“施顿伯格三重能力测验”,以测量从幼儿到成人的智力水平。 一、成分亚理论 三重智力理论的成分亚理论是处理智力与内部世界的关系,它要说明的是构成智力思维基础的心理加工、策略和表征。根据成分亚理论,智力的成分可以分为三种:①元成分或执行过程,用于计划、监控和评价一个人对问题的解决;②操作成分或非执行过程,用于完成元成分的指令;③知识获得成分或非执行过程,用于学会如何首次解决问题。 相似文献
8.
智力测验发展至今,再次受到了来自心理学学术界和大众百姓充满疑惑的审视。来自心理学学术界的审视源于借着认知革命的潮涌崛起的,以!"#"斯腾伯格和#"$"戴斯的理论为代表的新的智力理论的冲击,而来自大众的审视则源于因个别不称职的心理测验使用者的失误而得出的测验结果对受测学生造成心理伤害的少数案例和新闻媒体对之的炒作。这种对智力测验的疑惑心态必然会反映在教育科研和实践中对智力测验的使用上,影响人们对智力测验,特别是传统智力测验及相关研究结果的信心。为了使教育科研和教育实际工作者能以科学、求实的态度对以比奈智力… 相似文献
9.
10.
不少人在婴幼儿时期测验的智商很高,但他们成人后的学业成绩和未来成就并不突出。相反,有些人在婴幼儿时期测验的智商一般,但入学后的学业成绩和未来成就却很突出。这说明根据早期智商不能可靠地预测今后的学业成绩和未来成就。这是为什么呢?造成这种现象的因素有很多,主要有以下几种。一、智商不完全等于智力智力是一种潜在的综合性能力,是取得成就的必要前提。智商是智力测验得出的反映智力高低的分数,智商越高说明智力越好。但智商并不完全等于智力,因为智力测验只 相似文献
11.
Kurt F. Geisinger 《教育实用测度》2019,32(3):193-197
ABSTRACTThis brief article introduces the topic of intelligence as highly appropriate for educational measurement professionals. It describes some of the uses of intelligence tests both historically and currently. It argues why knowledge of intelligence theory and intelligence testing is important for educational measurement professionals. The articles that follow in this special issue will provide readers with considerable information about the history of intelligence theory and testing, and especially of the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of testing and its implementation. The following articles will also provide a well-reasoned approach to the way science should work in evaluating tests and the models on which they are based. 相似文献
12.
Philip A. Vernon 《教育心理学家》2013,48(3-4):293-304
Little attention has been paid to biological or physiological correlates of mental ability in the development of theories or tests of intelligence. A number of such biological correlates exist, however; some showing a pronounced relationship with performance on standard intelligence tests. Given the magnitude of the correlations that exist between behavioral intelligence and such measures as averaged evoked potentials, nerve conduction velocity, and cerebral glucose metabolic rate, it is proposed that an appropriately weighted combination of these and other physiological processes could provide a reliable, culture-fair estimate of intelligence that could be administered in the same manner to persons of almost any age or level of ability. Biological approaches to the measurement of intelligence may not replace traditional assessments, but the information that they can provide deserves greater attention than typically has been the case. 相似文献
13.
《Learning and individual differences》2006,16(3):235-253
Practical intelligence as measured by tacit-knowledge inventories generally has shown a weak relation to other intelligence constructs. However, the use of assessments capturing specialized, job-related knowledge may obscure the generality of practical intelligence and its relation to general intelligence. This article presents three studies in which three new everyday tacit-knowledge inventories are examined. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the factor structure of each inventory and their measurement equivalence across samples. In addition, a single-factor model was tested for its fit to the covariance among the three new tacit-knowledge inventories and the Practical subscale from the Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test. The relation between a higher-order practical intelligence factor emerging from this analysis and fluid and crystallized intelligence also was investigated. The results indicate that the new tacit-knowledge inventories are reliable and valid assessments of practical intelligence across diverse samples. The results also support the conclusion that practical intelligence and general intelligence are not the same construct, though some overlap was found. 相似文献
14.
张澜 《辽宁师范大学学报(社会科学版)》2003,26(1):46-48
加拿大名的教育心理学家戴斯等人，为揭示智力的本质，提出了智力的PASS理论，强调从认知过程来重构智力概念，系统地阐述了计划、注意、同时性一继时性加工过程在智力活动中的作用，为智力的理论研究和智力测量提供了新的视角。 相似文献
15.
Measurement invariance with respect to groups is an essential aspect of the fair use of scores of intelligence tests and other psychological measurements. It is widely believed that equal factor loadings are sufficient to establish measurement invariance in confirmatory factor analysis. Here, it is shown why establishing measurement invariance with confirmatory factor analysis requires a statistical test of the equality over groups of measurement intercepts. Without this essential test, measurement bias may be overlooked. A re-analysis of a study by Te Nijenhuis, Tolboom, Resing, and Bleichrodt (2004) on ethnic differences on the RAKIT IQ test illustrates that ignoring intercept differences may lead to the conclusion that bias of IQ tests with respect to minorities is small, while in reality bias is quite severe. 相似文献
16.
Preliminary factor analyses of predictor tests in advantaged and disadvantaged groups is recommended as a way of forming a priori expectations concerning validities of the predictors to guide both use and research. Factor analyses of Project Talent ability measures are reported for groups defined by top and bottom quartile placement in intelligence and socio-economic status. There are no important differences in results associated with differences in socio-economic status, but there are fairly numerous differences in loadings for individual measures in groups defined by level of intelligence. Most of these differences can be explained by the characteristics of the scales of measurement. For a small number of measures, however, there is evidence for differences in loadings as a function of the intellectual level of the subjects per se. These latter measures would be expected to have differential validities for similarly selected intelligence groups, but not for socio-economic groups. 相似文献
17.
Robert J. Sternberg 《Educational Measurement》1986,5(3):19-22
Though the most widely used "intelligence" tests have changed little in the last half century, Dr. Stern-berg predicts a variety of new influences of future intelligence testing, ranging from the ways we conceptualize intelligence, to the manner in which we pose problems to assess it. 相似文献
18.
The all purpose intelligence test ought to be a thing of the past. Psychology does not need another battery of tests; rather, it needs an armory of tests, each suited for a different purpose. The armory should contain tests based on three different views of intelligence: (a) intelligence as a general reasoning ability, (b) intelligence as a collection of domain-specific skills (with emphasis on verbal and visual-spatial domains), and (c) intelligence as an information-processing concept. Measurement procedures derived from each of these views are discussed. Comments are made about the kinds of research required to further the concept of an armory of tests, rather than a battery of tests. 相似文献
19.
Janet E. Davidson 《教育心理学家》2013,48(3-4):337-354
Many of us are frustrated with the overuse of intelligence tests. But intelligence tests have become so entrenched in our society that it is hard to imagine how they realistically could be replaced. Schools would be without a well-established screening device, and intelligence research would be without an external measure of validity. But what if we started over and imagined thinking about intelligence without the benefit (some would say hindrance) of Binet? What would theories and tests of intelligence look like? The articles in this special issue address this topic; here, I discuss the articles. The discussion is divided into three sections. The first section deals with definitional issues: How can intelligence be operationally defined, and can a single definition capture cognitive abilities of individuals at all ages? The second section briefly summarizes and evaluates each of the seven theories: How intelligent are these theories of intelligence? The final section focuses on the implications of the theories and theory-based tests reported in this issue: How can future research and educational practices benefit from the views presented here? 相似文献
20.
The purpose of this study was to verify, through the application of confirmatory factor analysis, Guilford's formulation of social intelligence as a multidimensional concept. O'Sullivan, Guildford and Demille (1965), using exploratory factor analysis, found six factors of cognitive social intelligence. Using LISREL, we reanalyzed their data and tested two distinctly different factor models: (1a) the orthogonal six‐factor model proposed by O'Sullivan et al., (1b) the same six‐factor model except that the factors were allowed to intercorrelate, and (2) a single‐factor model. The orthogonal six‐factor model did not fit the data and, although the oblique variant of this model was an improvement, the single‐factor model fitted the data better in addition to being more parsimonious. This suggests that Guilford's concept of social intelligence is unnecessarily complicated and exposes a weakness in his Structure of Intellect Model. On the positive side, measurement of cognitive social intelligence should be more straightforward and our findings indicate which of Guilford's recommended tests are the best to use. 相似文献