Article

"Psychometric intelligence" is not equivalent to "crystallized intelligence," nor is it insensitive to presence of brain damage: a reply to Russell.

Department of Neurology and Clinical & Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32610-0236, USA.
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (impact factor: 2.12). 06/2008; 22(3):524-8. DOI:10.1080/13854040701425445 pp.524-8
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Whether Halstead's (1947) distinction between biologic and psychometric intelligence and Cattell's (1963) theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence reflect the same underlying constructs is an interesting question and has heuristic value. To address that question experimentally, however, requires factor-analytic and other higher-order correlative analysis with careful clinical syndrome characterization. We argue that Halstead's and Cattell's characterizations of test attributes into distinct domains are not equivalent, and that the proposal of their equivalence cannot be properly evaluated based solely on test battery sensitivity to brain damage.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
11 Views
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.

Keywords

brain damage
 
careful clinical syndrome characterization
 
Cattell's characterizations
 
crystallized intelligence
 
Halstead's
 
heuristic value
 
higher-order correlative analysis
 
test attributes
 
test battery sensitivity
 

David W Loring