Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
L8–Puttingitalltogether(measuringpersonality&intelligenceinscience)ReliabilityvsValidity
• deVaus(2002):Avalidmeasurealwayshitsthetargetassessedconstruct);areliablemeasurealwayshitsthesameplaceonthetarget
• Reliabilityisanecessarybutnotsufficientconditionforvalidity• Attheconceptuallevel,avalidmeasureisalwaysreliable• Inpractice,thedistinctionbetweenreliabilityandvalidityisratherfuzzy:
o Cronbach’salphascanbeanindexofinternalconsistencyreliabilityorinternalconsistencyvalidity(relatedtoconstructvalidity)
o Byassessingparallel-formsreliabilitywearealsoassessingconcurrentvalidity(criterion-relatedvalidity)andtoadegreeconvergencevalidity
o Assessmentofinter-raterreliabilityiscloselyrelatedtocontentvalidityo Finally,test-retestreliabilitycanbeusedasanindexofexternalvalidity
Maximisingpsychometricvalues
• Increasesamplesizeo SEMisinverselyproportionatetothesquarerootofsamplesize
• Allowforsufficient(item/participant)meaningfulvariabilityo Q(respondent-centred)vsR(stimulus-centred)analysis
§ Non-discriminatingitems/responses–Discriminability(invariableresponses,itemdifficultyorclarity,ceiling/flooreffect)
§ Minimisationofserialeffects§ Participant-wiseinvariable,random,acquiescentresponses
ú Homogenousandinverselykeyeditemstendtoincreasereliability
ú E.g.“Itendtobesociable”vs“Itendtobesolitary”• Conceptually&empiricallyvaliddimensionality
o Shouldmakepsychologicalsense• Developa“sane”researchdesign/methodology
o Dataanalysiscannot(always)accountfor(fix)designerrors§ E.g.constantmeasurementscannot(really)bestatisticallyanalysed
• Aconstantprocess:o Constructs(re)defined
(Theoretical/Operational(re)assessment)o Measurementscreated&refined
(empiricalstandardization)o Latentstructure(dimensions)expanded/clarified
BeyondCTT
• GeneralisabilityTheory(Cronbachetal.,1972)o Focusonhowwellandunderwhatconditionscantest(observed)scoresbe
generalisedo Attemptstounderstandthevariabilitycomponentsofthescoresandpredict
thescores’valuesundervariouscircumstanceso Itaddssystematicerrorintheobservedscoresandattemptstomapitand
eliminate(control)it• ItemResponseTheory(IRT)
o Mathematicallymapsthecharacteristicsofmeasurementitems(e.g.difficulty,discrimination),andmodelsthemagainstparticipants’ability(latentattribute)onastudyconstruct
o Canbeusedto“accurately”predictresponse-patternsinagivenmeasurement,andthusevaluateandrefinethepsychometricpropertiesofthatinstrument
Measurementstandardisation&normativescores
• Theprocessofpsychometricevaluationcan(should)leadtomeasurement(andbyextensionconstruct)standardisation
o Itisassumedthatstandardisedmeasurementshaveidentifiedthevaluesofthetruescores(±SEM)inagivenpopulationorsetting(seealsoConfidenceIntervals)
o Standardornormativescoresareuniversallyunderstoodunitsintests(e.g.percentiles)thatallowfortherelativeevaluation(profiling)ofaperson’sperformance/attributedonagivenconstruct
ProfilingandPsychography(summingupthewholeperson)
• Criminalpersonalityprofiling“Thecrimesceneis,inessence,apersonalityprojection”(Turco,1990)
o Eliminatingsuspectso Usedwithunusualcrimeso Adaptiveinterrogationtechniqueso Identifyunknownoffenders
• Psychography,psychobiography,&psychohistoryo Identifyandexplainissuesandthemesthroughoutaperson’slifefroma
psychologicalperspective• Freud(1910)laidthefoundationsthroughhis“proscriptiveguidelines”thatallowfor
theassessmentofvalidityandreliabilityelementsinpersonology• ErikEriksongreatlycontributedtopsychographythroughhistriplebookkeeping
approach(Body-Ego-Family/Culture)
v MainReading:- Ch.6,p.79-83
Somepsychographical/profilingarticles(notneededforthecourse):
- Capps,D.(2004).ApsychobiographyofJesus.InE.H.,Harold&W.G.,Rollins(Eds),Psychology&theBible:Anewwaytoreadthescriptures(Vol.4,FromJesustoChrist,pp.59-70).Westport,CT:PraegerPublishers.
- Cribb,C.&Gregory,A.H.(1999).Stereotypesandpersonalitiesofmusicians.JournalofPsychology,133,104-114.
- Grivet-Shillito,M.L.(1999).CarlGustavbeforehebecameJung.JournalofAnalyticalPsychology,44,87-100.
- Kaufman,J.(2001).TheSylviaPlatheffect:Mentalillnessineminentcreativewriters.JournalofCreativeBehavior,35,37-50.
- McDermott,J.(2001).EmilyDickinsonrevisited:Astudyofperiodicityinherwork.AmericanJournalofPsychiatry,158,686-690.
- Preti,A.,DeBiasi,F.,&Miotto,P.(2001).Musicalcreativityandsuicide.PsychologicalReports,89,719-727.
- Runyan,W.M.(1981).WhydidVanGoghcutoffhisear?Theproblemofalternativeexplanationsinpsychobiography.JournalofPersonality&SocialPsychology,40,1070-1077.
- Therivel,W.A.(1999).WhyMozartandnotSalieri.CreativityResearchJournal,12,67-76.
- Young,M.S.,&Pinsky,D.(2006).Narcissismandcelebrity.JournalofResearchinPersonality,40,463-471.
L15–AlbertBandura:SocialCognitiveTheoryIOutline
1. Introduction• Bandura’s(1925-)theoryisoneofthemostwidelyaccepted• Banduraintegratedandclarifiedconceptsfrompreviouspsychologicalforces• Personalityismouldedbyaninteractionofbehaviour,personalfactors
(especiallycognition),andtheenvironment.2. AssumptionsofSocialCognitiveTheory
• Directandvicariouslearning• Peoplenotonlythink,butarecapableofthinkingaboutthinking
(metacognition)• ReciprocalDeterminism
o Banduraput‘cognition’andthe‘person’backintopersonality3. Observationallearning
• Thecoreofobservationallearningismodelling• Factorsthatdeterminewhetherwewilllearnfromamodel
4. Bandura’sfour-stepmodelofobservationallearning• Attend• Remember• Reproduce• Motivationbecauseofreinforcement
5. RelatedResearch:• Aggressionissociallylearnt(Bandura,Ross,&Ross,1963;Paik&Comstock,
1994)• Higherorderformssuchasmoraljudgementsaresociallylearnt(Banduraand
McDonald,1963;Bandura,1991;Cowan.Langer,Heavenrich&Nathanson,1969)
Bandura(1925-)&theadvantageofhindsight
• Integrateandclarifyconceptsfrompreviouspsychologicalforces• Freud’sdescriptionoftheidentificationprocessandtheimportanceof
parentalauthoritywasmadetestable• Banduraarguedthattheeffectsofcontingentrewardsandpunishments
arecognitivelymediated,andisthusmorereadilyacceptableasatheoryofpersonality.
DifferencesbetweenradicalbehaviourismandtheSocialCognitiveapproach
AssumptionsofBandura’sSocialCognitiveTheory
1. Vicariouslearning• Wecananddolearnthingsthroughdirectexperience,butmuchofour
behaviourisshapedthroughtheobservationofothers.Bandura(1986,p.19)statedthat“virtuallyalllearningphenomena,resultingfromdirectexperience,canoccurvicariouslybyobservingother’sbehaviouranditsconsequencesforthem”.
2. Theimportanceofcognition• “Peopleformbeliefsaboutwhattheycando,theyanticipatethelikely
consequencesofprospectiveactions,theysetgoalsforthemselves,andtheyotherwiseplancoursesofactionthatarelikelytoproducedesiredoutcomes”(Bandura,1991,p.248).
3. Reciprocaldeterminism• Herebehaviour(and/orpersonality)ismouldedbythereciprocalinteractionof
personalfactors(especiallycognition),environmentaleventsandourbehaviour.Thepersonisseenasawholeentityforwhompreviouslearninghistory,expectationsofmastery(efficacy),andcurrentinterpretationsoftheworldallinteracttoregulatebehaviour.
Bandura’s(1994)conceptofreciprocaldeterminism
Bandura’s(1994)conceptofreciprocaldeterminism:Appliedexample
Factorsthatdeterminewhetherwewilllearnfromamodel
1. Thecharacteristicsofthemodel:wearemostlikelytomodelhighstatusindividuals,competentindividuals,andpowerfulpeople
2. Thecharacteristicsoftheobserver:peoplewholackstatus,skillorpoweraremostlikelytomodel,i.e.,childrenandnovices
3. Consequencesofbehaviour:thegreaterthevaluethattheobserverplacesonthebehaviour,themorelikelythatthebehaviourwillbelearned
Bandura’sfour-stepmodelofobservationallearning
1. Attendtothemodel2. Rememberwhatisseenandheard3. Reproducethememoryduringimitation4. MotivationbecauseofReinforcementofaccurateperformanceoftheobserved
behaviour5. Todemonstratethatobservationallearninghasoccurred,theimitatedactionmust
consistofanewlyorganisedpatternofbehaviouralresponsesnotpreviouslyintheobserver’srepertoire.
Reciprocaldeterminismistriatic.Personalfunctionarisesfrommutualinteractionbetweenthreeinterlockingfactors:1.Person(P):Thecognitiveandemotion/affectivesystem2.Behaviour(B):Theindividual’sbehaviour3.Environment(E):PhysicalandpersonalenvironmentEachofthesefactorscausallyinfluencestheother,withdifferentinfluencesoccurringindifferentcontext
Thestrengthofthesefactorsneednotbeallequal/allmakeanequalcontributionTheawarenessoftheB-Erelationshipalsoinfluencesthecomplexityofyourpersonality
Mediationmodel
RelatedResearch:Aggressionissociallylearnt
• Bandura,RossandRoss(1961;1963)testedthisideaamongst4-5yearoldswhowatchedamaleandfemaleadult(model)playwithapopularinflatedBobdoll.Therewerefourconditions:live;videotape;cartoon;control.
Numberofaggressiveacts(Bandura,Ross,&Ross,1963)
• PaikandComstock(1994)conductedameta-analysisonover200
studiescompletedduring1957and1990.Theyfoundthat10viewersout100wouldbeaffectedbytheviolencetheyseeonTVorfilm.
Relatedresearch:Higherorderforms(moraljudgement)aresociallylearnt
• BanduraandMcDonald(1969)foundamongst5-to-11-yearchildrenathighandlowlevelsofmoraljudgmentexposedtoadultmodelsshowedasubstantialchangeintheirmoraljudgementlevel.Thischangeinmoraljudgementpersisted(2weekslater)whentheadultmodelwasnolongerpresent.
• Oneofthemostcogentargumentsagainstsociallearningastheprimevariableinthelearningofmoraljudgementsisthefactthatlowerlevelsofmoraljudgementspredominateatearlierages.
v Furtherreadings:
- Bandura,A.(1986).Socialfoundationsofthoughtandaction.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice-Hall.
- Bandura,A.(1999).Socialcognitivetheoryofpersonality.InD.Cervone&Y.Shoda(Eds.),Thecoherenceofpersonality:Social-cognitivebasesofconsistency,variability,andorganization(pp.185-241).NewYork:GuilfordPress.
- Caprara,G.V.,&Cervone,D.(2000).Personality:Determinants,dynamicsandpotentials.USA:CambridgeUniversityPress.
L35–AgeDifferencesinIntelligenceOutline
• TheScottishMentalSurveys• StabilityvsChange• Longitudinalvscross-sectionalmethods
o Evidencefromcross-sectionalstudieso EvidencefromlongitudinalStudies
• DomainspecificknowledgeandexpertiseLearningOutcome
• Befamiliarwithsomeofthekeylargedatabasesusedinlifespanresearch• Abilitytoevaluatethestrengthsandweaknessesofcross-sectionalvslongitudinal
research• Knowhowgroupfactors/aspectsofintelligenceprogressacrossthelifespan
StudyingIntelligenceOverTime:TheScottishMentalSurveys(SMS)
• SMS1932:o ALL87,498childrenborn1921takeMorayhousetesto +1000followedupwithSB;followedintoadulthood
• SMS1947o ALL70,805childrenbornin1936testedo +36-daysample(social/demographicinfo)o +6-daysample(SB2,followedfor16years)
• Laterfollow-ups:o AberdeenBirthCohort1921(from1997)o LothianBirthCohort1921(from1999)o AberdeenBirthCohort1936o LothianBirthCohort1936
MorayHouseTest#12Exampleitems:12.Finistofishaswingisto:
a. Featherb. Airc. Birdd. Saile. Herring
36.“Tragu”ischeaperthan“vashol,”and“vashol”isdearerthan“spongop.”Whichisthedearest?42.Underlinethe“different”wordin:eye,pen,nose,chin,ear
• Originalpurpose:selectionintohighschool(1925)o ~45minslongo 71itemso maxscore=76
DoesIntelligenceChangeOverTime?“Stability”vs“Change”
• Stability=Therank-orderofpeoplestaysthesame
o EMPIRICALTEST:Correlationsb/wintelligenceattime1versustime2o THEORETICALMEANING:Intelligenceisstableovertime
• Change=Theabsolutelevelofatraitdifferso EMPIRICALTEST:Changestointelligencemeansattime2comparedtotime1o THEORETICALMEANING:Intelligencechanges/develops/declinesovertime
• NOTE:Testscoresmayremainconsistent(i.e.,rank-orderisthesame)evenaslevelsmaychange(i.e.,scoresforthewholegroupincreaseordecreaseovertime)
Example1:Stablewithchange
• 5peopletakeanIQtest• Theytakeit20yearslater• IQchangesforeveryone
o Mean(T1)=104o Mean(T2)=110
• IQisperfectlystableo r=1.00
Example2:Unstable,nochange
• 5peopletakeanIQtest• Theytakeit4yearslater• MeanIQdoesnotCHANGE
o Mean(T1)=104o Mean(T2)=104
• IQisNOTstableo r=0.06
GodfreyThomson DeveloperoftheMorayHouseTests
IntelligenceTestScoresareStable
Butwhataboutveryyoungchildren?
v Mackintosh(2012).IQandHumanIntelligence(2ndEd).NewYork,OxfordUniversity
Press.
LifespanResearch:Methods
Cross-SectionalResearch:TheWechsler-BellevueScales(1939)
• DeclineonbothverbalandperformanceIQ• HUGEdifferencesforperformanceIQ(>25IQpointslostbyage47!!)
v Mackintosh(2012).IQandHumanIntelligence(2ndEd).NewYork,OxfordUniversity
Press.
Cross-SectionalResearch:WAIS-R(1981)
• DifferencesonWAIS-RPerformanceo 10IQpointslostbyage45o 30IQpointslostbyage72
• DifferencesonWAIS-RVerbalo Nolossbyage45o ~7-pointlossbyage72
v Mackintosh(2012).IQandHumanIntelligence(2ndEd).NewYork,OxfordUniversity
Press.Cross-SectionalResearch:AgeDifferencesGf/Gctheoryabilities
v Horn,J.,Cattell,R.B.(1967).Agedifferencesinfluidandcrystallizedintelligence.ActaPsychologica,26,107-109.
v Park,D.C.,Lautenschlager,G.,Hedden,T.,Davidson,N.S.,Smith,A.D.,&Smith,P.K.(2002).Modelsofvisuospatialandverbalmemoryacrosstheadultlifespan.PsychologyandAging,17,299-320.
Whydoweseesuchlargedecreases??
• IQdropsfrom100to73fromage16-47[Wechsler-Bellevue]
o Anaverage16-year-olddeclinessomuchthattheyarementallyretardedby47?
• Whathasgonewrong?• ΔAGEconfoundedwithΔYEARBORN• Differenceineducation:
o <20%finishHS1970;~60%finishHS2010
• Flynneffect:3IQpointsperdecadeo 45yoscore74becausetheyare45
VSo Thegroupof45-year-oldswould
alwayshavescored74(evenwhentheywere16)?
COHORTEFFECTS
Cross-SectionalvsLongitudinalResearchCross-Sectional
• CohortDifferenceso Educationo Technology/complexityo Particularevents(e.g.,1930sdepression;WW1
conscriptionetc.)o Flynneffecto Test/testingfamiliarityo Ageofretiremento %ofwomeninworkforceo #ofchildrenperfamilyo Maternalage
CompareLongitudinalvsCross-Sectional
• Cross-SectionalResearchOver-EstimatesCognitiveDecline• BUTdifferentsizesfordifferentcohorts
SOLONGITUDINALMUSTBEABETTERRESEARCHDESIGN?
• SEATTLESTUDY:N=50020-80yoin1956• Followedevery7years;+newcohortevery7years
v Schaie,K.W.(2005).Developmentalinfluencesonadultintelligence:TheSeattle
LongitudinalStudy.Oxford,OxfordUniversityPress.Whydon’twejustlookatlongitudinal?Longitudinal
• Updatedtests/measures• Retesteffects• SelectiveAttrition• Takesalifetimetodo…
• Retest–likelyinflatesscoresathigherages(alsoboredom/motivation)
o under-estimatescognitivedecline• Selectiveattrition–intelligencerelatestohealth/death,incarceration,geographic
mobility,etc.o under-estimatescognitivedecline
Shouldwebeworriedabouttheagingworkforce?Worldpower-brokersaregenerallyover60
• Roleofdomainspecificknowledge• Domainspecificknowledgeincreasesacrossthelifetime• Roleofexpertise• Deliberatepracticeof10,000hoursormore• Strategiesforsuccessfulperformanceshifttodomain
specificknowledgeandexpertise
v Ackerman,P.L.(1996).Atheoryofadultintellectualdevelopment:Process,Personality,Interests,andKnowledge.Intelligence,22,227-257.
v FurtherResources:- Deary,I.J.(2012).Intelligence.AnnualReviewofPsychology,63,453–482.
[Agingsectionfromp.470]- Mackintosh(2012).IQandHumanIntelligence(2ndEd).NewYork,Oxford
UniversityPress.[Ch8;TheStabilityofIQandtheRiseandFallofIntelligence]
SampleQuestions:Q1.
• Namethetworesearchdesignsthatcanbeusedtostudyagedifferencesinintelligence.
• Brieflydescribeeachofthesedesigns.• Brieflystatetheresearchfindingsonagedifferencesinintelligenceforeach
ofthesedesigns.• Criticallyevaluatethestrengthsandweaknessesandeachofthesedesigns.
Q2.
• Definestabilityandchangeastheyapplytoindividualdifferencesinintelligence.
• Whatevidenceistherethatintelligencechanges?• Whatevidenceistherethatintelligenceisstableovertime?
Q3.
• Brieflydescribecross-sectionalandlongitudinalmethodsforexaminingagedifferences.
• Whataretheweaknessesofcross-sectionalresearch?• Whataretheweaknessesoflongitudinalresearch?• Howdothemajorgroupfactorsofintelligencechangeacrossthelifespan?