1 / 19

Working memory and intelligence, looking at its relationship through Brunswik‘s lens

Working memory and intelligence, looking at its relationship through Brunswik‘s lens. Werner W. Wittmann University of Mannheim, Germany Symposium „Working memory and intelligence: Controversy or consensus?“ organized by Phillip L. Ackerman, Georgia Institute of Technology

kipp
Download Presentation

Working memory and intelligence, looking at its relationship through Brunswik‘s lens

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

Presentation Transcript

  1. Working memory and intelligence, looking at its relationship through Brunswik‘s lens Werner W. WittmannUniversity of Mannheim, Germany Symposium „Working memory and intelligence: Controversy or consensus?“ organized by Phillip L. Ackerman, Georgia Institute of Technology Presented at APS - 15th Annual ConventionAtlanta, GA - May 29– June 1,2003

  2. Validity (achievement), Criterionscore Clinician‘sprediction Empirical validity of cues, Cue utilization by clinician, Input data (cues) Clinical prediction paradigm schematized by Brunswik‘s lens model(After Hammond, Hursch, and Todd, 1964)

  3. Thank you Egon and congratulations to your 100th anniversary Egon Brunswik 1903-1955 (Photo courtesy of Department of Psychology,University of California, Berkeley)

  4. CR1 CR1 PRB PRA CR2 CRA CR2 CR3 CR3 CRg PRg CR4 CR4 CR5 CRB CR5 CR6 CR6 THE HIERARCHICAL BRUNSWIK LENS MODEL PREDICTOR AREA CRITERION AREA

  5. CONTENT The Berlin Model of Intelligence (BIS) OPERATION Each parcel is build as an aggregate of three z-scored tasks, e.g.:Sparcel1 = (ZBD + ZTG + ZXG)

  6. What predicts and explains intelligence SINGLE TASKLEVEL(BIS-4) CELLLEVEL LEVEL OF GROUP FACTORSOF INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVEAND CONTENTMODE LEVEL OFGENERALINTELLIGENCE MF F ? MN ? Content Factorgc ? ? N MV ? SF V SN ? ? ? g SV WORKING MEMORY M CF ? ? CN ? S Operative Factorgf ? CV C ? ? RF R RN ? RV Intelligence and many unanswered questionsBerlin Model of Intelligence (BIS-4 test)

  7. Working Memory Capacity The set of working memory tasks in the WMC95-study verbal Reading spanVerbal span Contents Spatial-figurative Spatial WMPattern Transform.MU Spatial STM Alpha SpanVerbal Coord numerical TrackingSpatial CoordSpatial IntegrationMU spatial STM Spatial STM Comp. SpanBackward digit spanMU numericalMath span Switching verbalCategory gen. Storage &Processing Switching figurativeRandom gen. MU numerical Coordination GaußSwitching numericalStar counting Functions Supervision

  8. WORKING MEMORY MODEL (WMC_95) BERLIN MODEL OF INTELLIGENCE LEVEL OF GENERAL WORKING MEMORY FACTOR LEVEL OF ORTHOGONALIZED WORKING-MEMORY GROUP-FACTOR SINGLE WORKINGMEMORY TASK SINGLE TASKLEVEL(BIS-4) CELLLEVEL LEVEL OF GROUP FACTORSOF INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVEAND CONTENTMODE LEVEL OFGENERALINTELLIGENCE MF F Short TermMemory (F) MN Content Factorgc ? .860 N WMC-SPAT MV Memoryupdating (F) .656 .670 SF .890 V Spatial (F)coordination SN WMC-g g ReadingSpan (V) SV .846 M .600 WMC-NV CF Computation Span (N) .829 CN S Operative Factorgf ? .588 Memoryupdating (N) CV .438 C RF Switching (N) .592 WMC-Switching R RN .845 Switching (V) .814 RV Switching (F)

  9. REAS CREA MEM EQS Summary StatisticsMethod: = MLChi-Square: = 11.64df = 9pvalue = 0.2345BBNFI = 0.942 BBNNFI: = 0.966CFI: = 0.985Set-R2 = 0.834N = 131 SPEED Relating the three WMC-group factors to the operative factors (WMC95_study) WORKING MEMORY GROUP FACTORS BIS-OPERATIVE GROUP FACTORS E 4 .74 .33* WMC-NV R2=0.45 .33* .48* -.39* .24* E 5 .97 R2=0.06 -.48* WMC-SPEED .25* -.30* E 6 .93 .26* R2=0.13 .20* .49* WMC-SPAT -.17* E 7 .83 R2=0.31

  10. REAS CREA MEM SPEED Relating the BIS-operative group factors to the three WMC-group factors (WMC95_study) BIS-OPERATIVE GROUP FACTORS WORKING MEMORY GROUP FACTORS .37* WMC-NV E 1 .80 R2=0.35 .28* .48* .36* .47* WMC-SPEED E 2 .23* .81 R2=0.35 .17* -.44* .28* .19* .49* WMC-SPAT E 3 .81 .16* R2=0.34

  11. Facet Taxonomy for Working Memory Tasks WMC_97 study Notes: The first column represents the hypothesized components involved in the tasks. CRT = choice reaction time task.

  12. MEM REAS SPEED EQS Summary StatisticsMethod: = MLChi-Square: = 5.81df = 9pvalue = 0.7592BBNFI = 0.961 BBNNFI: = 1.058CFI: = 1.000Set-R2 = 0.682N = 131 CREA Relating the three WMC-group factors to the operative factors (WMC97_study) WORKING MEMORY GROUP FACTORS BIS-OPERATIVE GROUP FACTORS E 1 .92 .40* WMC 97-SP R2=0.16 .30* -.27* .24* -.18* E 3 .77 R2=0.41 .52* WMC 97-CO -.26* -.22* .18* E 4 .92 R2=0.15 -.21* -.23* .21* WMC 97-PROC E 2 .98 R2=0.03

  13. Schmid-Leiman models for working memory and intelligence (WMC_97) .61 CO1V ROP1 E 1 .36 .51 Co_res REAS_res CO1N .57 ROP2 E 2 .58 .39 .24 .38 COF2 ROP3 D 4R2=1.00 E 3 .60 MOP1 SPV E 5 .29 .30 1.00 g wmcg MEM_res MOP2 SPN E 6 MOP3 SPF2 E 7 .40 .54 PROCV SOP1 E 8 .59 .59 Pro_res PROCN Speed_res SOP2 .45 E 9 .66 .68 .42 .17 PROCF2 SOP3 E 11 Chi sq.=184,71 P=0.00 CFI=0.95 RMSEA=0.06

  14. Disentangling (Cor)relationships in the Brunswik-Symmetry framework WMC95-study MF Factors NON-R used as THEORY-DERIVED SUPPRESSORS MN MV WMC-NV SF M g SN S SV WMC- g WMC-SPAT Operative Factor gf? C CF CN R CV WMC-SPEED RF RN RV

  15. PREDICTOR WMC-gBIS-SBIS-CBIS-M PREDICTOR WMC-NVWMC-SPATWMC-SPEEDBIS-SBIS-CBIS-M * * Experimenting with theory derived suppressors in the Brunswik-symmetry framework Reasoning and WMC-g R = .648 R2= .419 adj. R2= .415 Reasoning and WMC-gwith non-Reas (*) factors as suppressors R = .712 R2= .507 adj. R2= .492 Increment dR²= .088 Reasoning and WMC group factors R = .669 R2= .447 adj. R2= .435 Reasoning and WMC group factors with non-Reas (*) factors as suppressors R = .724 R2= .524 adj. R2= .502 Increment dR2= .077 N = 135 PREDICTOR WMC-g STD COEF .648 STD COEF .803-.234-.173-.175 PREDICTOR WMC-NVWMC-SPATWMC-SPEED STD COEF .495.422.155 STD COEF .581 .494 .269-.207-.184-.171 All beta-weights p<.01 The results demonstrate higher symmetry at a lower level of generality. This tool is very helpful for differential-correlational research in explaining and understanding relationships between constructs.

  16. Testing working memory and intelligence at „real-life“ criteria Model of performances in complex computer based business gamesopi_g: General problem solving capacity General(g) and not(g) factors as intelligence as process factors from the WMC95_study Chi sq.=18.68 P=0.95 CFI=1.00 RMSEA=0.00

  17. Testing Ackerman‘s PPIK-theoryWMC95_study Chi sq.=28.51 P=0.87 CFI=1.00 RMSEA=0.00

  18. Reasoning is a little bit more than working memory capacity?!Wmc97_study Chi sq.=52,76 P=0.12 CFI=0.98 RMSEA=0.04

  19. Summary and conclusions • The relationship between working memory and intelligence is close but not identical. • It depends pretty much on what is defined as a working memory task and as an intelligence task. • Experimental cognitive research too often uses a single task only, thus the problem of level of generality is rarely visible and dealt with, odds for mismatch and asymmetry are high and the generalization of results is heavily endangered. • Differential cognitive researchers favorite g-factor at one level of generality easily can be a more circumscribed group factor at a more general level. • Principles of Brunswik-symmetry can help in improving prediction and explanation while searching for better understanding of construct validity. Symmetry is a key concept in all successful sciences.Thank you Egon Brunswik!

More Related