introduction
play

Introduction CHC Theory and its Foundations - PDF document

Slide 1 ___________________________________ Are we Over- Interpreting Students ___________________________________ Performance on Tests of Intelligence? A Re-Analysis of the Foundations of CHC ___________________________________ Theory


  1. Slide 1 ___________________________________ Are we Over- Interpreting Students’ ___________________________________ Performance on Tests of Intelligence? A Re-Analysis of the Foundations of CHC ___________________________________ Theory Nicholas F. Benson Alexander A. Beaujean ___________________________________ Ashley Donohue Hailin Chi ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 2 ___________________________________ Agenda • Intro to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory and its foundations ___________________________________ • Need for Study • Our method and results • Theoretical implications ___________________________________ • Practical implications ___________________________________ TASP 2016 2 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 3 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Introduction CHC Theory and its Foundations ___________________________________ TASP 2016 3 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

  2. Slide 4 ___________________________________ Cattell-Horn Gf - Gc Theory Second-Order Abilities ___________________________________ Processing Fluid Crystallized Short-Term Long-Term Visual Auditory Quantitative Speed Intelligence Intelligence Memory Memory Processing Processing Knowledge ___________________________________ ( Gf ) ( Gc ) ( Gsm ) ( Glr ) ( Gv ) ( Ga ) ( Gq ) ( Gs ) ___________________________________ Intelligence represents effects and interactions of numerous abilities working in concert. Gf and Gc viewed as more general abilities that support the others, g is not in the model. . TASP 2016 4 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 5 ___________________________________ Carroll’s Three -Stratum Theory • Strata distinguished by generality (breadth) and abstraction of ___________________________________ abilities • Direct hierarchical (bifactor) structure (Beaujean, 2015) • g and group factors have direct effects on measured abilities • g and group factors are orthogonal ___________________________________ • Provides the corpus of evidence for CHC theory • Frequently cited as empirical basis for interpreting lower strata abilities ___________________________________ TASP 2016 5 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 6 ___________________________________ Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory • Integration of Gf - Gc and Three-Stratum theories • 3 strata, more broad abilities than Three-Stratum theory ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 6 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

  3. Slide 7 ___________________________________ Gc Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory Gkn Grw ___________________________________ Gq Gf Gsm g ___________________________________ Glr Gs Gt ___________________________________ Gv Ga TASP 2016 7 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 8 ___________________________________ Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory • Higher-order, mediational structure in which g has indirect effects on ___________________________________ measured abilities via second-order abilities • Emphasis on lower strata, interpretation of g is optional based on theoretical orientation (Schneider & McGrew, 2012) ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 8 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 9 ___________________________________ Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory • Dominant theory guiding the contemporary, applied assessment of ___________________________________ intelligence • WJ-IV • DAS-2 • KABC-II ___________________________________ • SB-5 • WISC-V ___________________________________ TASP 2016 9 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

  4. Slide 10 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Need for Study ___________________________________ TASP 2016 10 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 11 ___________________________________ Limitations with Carroll’s Analyses • Relied on exploratory factor analysis (EFA) with Schmid-Leiman (SL) ___________________________________ transformations, which did not allow for true bi-factor rotations • “SL can only be accurate when certain, highly unlikely, conditions exist (perfect cluster structure, proportionality) and the sample is large enough so that the correlation matrix reflects the population” (Mansolf & Reise, 2016, p. 17) • Condition 1: Perfect item structure (items load exclusively on g and a single group factor) ___________________________________ • Condition 2: Proportionality (ratio of general and group factor loadings is the same for all mental tasks associated with a group factor) ___________________________________ TASP 2016 11 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 12 ___________________________________ Limitations with Carroll’s Analyses • Carroll compared EFA and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) results ___________________________________ for the Gustaffson (1984) and Palmer, Macleod, Hunt, and Davidson (1985) studies • Results differed in important ways • Carroll argued that the two methods (EFA & CFA) should be used in combination (Carroll, 1995). ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 12 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

  5. Slide 13 ___________________________________ Limitations with Carroll’s Analyses • Carroll’s placement of abilities into Stratum I or Stratum II was largely ___________________________________ a qualitative decision based on re-analysis of 467 studies • No single sample has been administered a sufficient range of mental tasks to allow for testing of a model containing all purported abilities • Carroll only identified >2 second-order factors in 18 data sets ___________________________________ • Vast majority (16) of these studies had 3 second-order factors • Maximum number of second-order factors identified = 5 ___________________________________ TASP 2016 13 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 14 ___________________________________ Limitations with Carroll’s Analyses • According to Carroll (1993),“Many factors remain inadequately ___________________________________ specified, and many aspects of the three-stratum theory need to be tested and refined” (p. 688). ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 14 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 15 ___________________________________ Research Questions 1. Did Carroll over-factor the datasets he analyzed and identify factors ___________________________________ that are non-replicable or explain trivial percentages of common factor covariance? 2. To what extent are identified factors sufficiently reliable for clinical interpretation? ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 15 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

  6. Slide 16 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Method and Results ___________________________________ TASP 2016 16 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 17 ___________________________________ Selection of Data Sets • Focused on 10 studies from which Carroll extracted the most ___________________________________ second-order factors • Selected to maximize the possibility of identifying Stratum II abilities ___________________________________ ___________________________________ TASP 2016 17 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________ Slide 18 ___________________________________ Analysis-Study A • Re-analysis with two methods ___________________________________ • Jennrich and Bentler’s EFA bi-factor rotation • Higher-order EFA with orthogonal transformation • Comparisons • Jennrich and Bentler’s criterion for bi-factor structure, Q( ). Smaller values ___________________________________ indicate better bi-factor structure (i.e., loadings on g and 1 other factor). • Model-based reliability estimates for each factor • C oefficient omega (ω) • Omega hierarchical ( ωh ) ___________________________________ TASP 2016 18 ___________________________________ ___________________________________ ___________________________________

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend