Intelligence, race, and psychological testing

This chapter has two main goals: to update philosophers on the state of the art in the scientific psychology of intelligence, and to explain and evaluate challenges to the measurement invariance of intelligence tests. First, we provide a brief history of the scientific psychology of intelligence. Next, we discuss the metaphysics of intelligence in light of scientific studies in psychology and neuroimaging. Finally, we turn to recent skeptical developments related to measurement invariance. These have largely focused on attributability: Where do the mechanisms and dispositions that explain people’s performance on tests of intelligence inhere – in the agent, in the local testing environment, in the culture, or in the interactions among these? After explaining what measurement invariance is in the context of intelligence testing, we explore the phenomenon of stereotype threat as a challenge to measurement invariance, as well as more recent work on overcoming or buffering against stereotype threat

The Vehicle, Fall 2003

Table of Contents Blame It on My BirthsignMichael Doizanpage 4 Like a BanjoKaitlyn Kingstonpage 6 A BubbleMaria Santoyopage 7 UntitledLiz Toyntonpage 8 She Said It Was Stuck in the FenceGreg Holdenpage 11 Thanksgiving Table CharactersKrystal Heringpage 12 This Is My LandKorah Winnpage 13 Bleeding HeartsKaitlyn Kingstonpage 14 SoldierEmily Rapppage 17 HomelessLaTasha Harrispage 18 InfinitiLindsey Nawojskipage 19 Gone Until ForeverAndy Whytepage 20 On My WayKristin Bornpage 27 GloryJay Popepage 28 Untitled (1)Trevor Moorepage 29 Nature\u27s MoratoriumMatt McCarthypage 29 Untitled (2)Trevor Moorepage 30 Eternal ChildAmy Towerypage 31 FingersJosh Sopiarzpage 31 She Likes JazzMario Podeschipage 32 Back Alley FarmsScott E. Lutzpage 33 Biographiespage 35https://thekeep.eiu.edu/vehicle/1078/thumbnail.jp

EXPLORING COGNITIVE AND NON-COGNITIVE FACTORS IN STEREOTYPE THREAT EFFECTS: AN INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES APPROACH

Stereotype threat effects occur when stigmatized individuals are primed with a negative stereotype and underperform relative to a control group. During such situations the pressure of performing coupled with evaluative anxiety may cause even the most capable students to “choke.” This dissertation examines ways stereotype threat effects may be different from one student to the next. Chapter 1 lays the foundation for exploring stereotype threat in a novel way, considering individual differences from cognitive and non-cognitive perspectives—examining the effect beyond the group level. As a cognitive factor, working memory capacity (WMC) has been implicated. Here, the role of WMC is investigated as a mediator and/or moderator of stereotype threat for gender and ethnicity. Chapters 2-4 reveal a general lack of evidence for the threat effect in the form of a performance decrement compared to control. Chapters 2-3 reveal evidence that trait WMC moderates the effect of stereotype threat for ethnicity such that higher WMC is associated with higher predicted scores on standardized tests under threat. Higher scores on non-cognitive factors of mindset, grit, and/or conscientiousness have been suggested to aid performance during threatening academic situations but effects of these generally were not found. Chapter 3 provides no strong evidence that more malleable mindsets are associated with higher predicted scores on standardized tests. Chapter 4 presents evidence that under threat for gender identity participants performed better, revealing no differential effect of malleable versus fixed mindsets under stereotype threat. General discussion considers replication issues within the stereotype threat literature as well as the implications of the present results for future work in this area

Brief Mindset Intervention Changes Attitudes but Does Not Improve Working Memory Capacity or Standardized Test Performance

There has been extensive research conducted on mindset and grit, involving both experimental and observational methods. However, the findings in the literature remain mixed. This should give educators and researchers pause from an intervention perspective—if we still do not have a good understanding of how mindset works, then more research is needed. We implemented a mindset intervention with undergraduate women to improve cognitive performance measures relevant to academic performance—working memory capacity and standardized test performance in math. To better understand how mindset interventions work, we also examined self-report measures (e.g., pertaining to academic attitudes and belonging) as well as post-intervention behavior. We expected the growth mindset intervention to significantly improve cognitive performance and to cause more positive academic attitudes and attitudinal change. The mindset intervention did change students’ beliefs about ability and also caused students to report higher grit overall (no condition difference), and to feel less belonging in terms of connection to their university—which was not in line with our hypotheses. We also found that the growth mindset intervention had no significant effects on improving WMC or standardized test performance. We discuss the implications of these findings and make suggestions for future work in this area

Intelligence Can Be Used to Make a More Equitable Society but Only When Properly Defined and Applied

In the US, undeniable evidence shows that socioeconomic inequities explain a high proportion of individual differences in school achievement. Although not all countries show this same effect due to socioeconomic status, it is consistently found that social inequities lead to achievement gaps. These achievement gaps then manifest into trajectories that set some individuals on a path of lower incomes, poorer health and higher mortality, lower wellbeing, and other poor adult outcomes. Like Flynn (1999) so handily reminded the scientific literature that achievement gaps are explainable by environmental factors, the inequities we see around the world are based on environments some children are exposed to. In the same work, Flynn stated his belief that the suppression of scientific work on intelligence would continue to lead to social inequities. We wish to take this idea and move it forward. We believe that the scientific construct of intelligence plays a key role in helping create a more equitable society through science. We also believe that the poor perception of intelligence, rooted in historical realities, means that it will continue to be misunderstood, feared, and misused, limiting how effective it could be in helping to close gaps in achievement and in creating a more equitable society

Modern Assessments of Intelligence Must Be Fair and Equitable

Historically, assessments of human intelligence have been virtually synonymous with practices that contributed to forms of inequality and injustice. As such, modern considerations for assessing human intelligence must focus on equity and fairness. First, we highlight the array of diversity, equity, and inclusion concerns in assessment practices and discuss strategies for addressing them. Next, we define a modern, non-g, emergent view of intelligence using the process overlap theory and argue for its use in improving equitable practices. We then review the empirical evidence, focusing on sub-measures of g to highlight the utility of non-g, emergent models in promoting equity and fairness. We conclude with suggestions for researchers and practitioners

Intelligence can be used to make a more equitable society but only when properly defined and applied

In the US, undeniable evidence shows that socioeconomic inequities explain a high pro-portion of individual differences in school achievement. Although not all countries show this same effect due to socioeconomic status, it is consistently found that social inequities lead to achievement gaps. These achievement gaps then manifest into trajectories that set some individuals on a path of lower incomes, poorer health and higher mortality, lower wellbeing, and other poor adult outcomes. Like James Flynn so handily reminded the scientific literature that achievement gaps are explainable by environmental factors, the inequities we see around the world are based on environments some children are exposed to. In his work, Flynn stated his belief that the suppression of scientific work on intelligence would continue to lead to social inequities. We wish to take this idea and move it forward. We believe that the scientific construct of intelligence plays a key role in helping create a more equitable society through science. We also believe that the poor perception of intelligence, rooted in historical realities, means that it will continue to be misunderstood, feared, and misused, limiting how effective it could be in helping to close gaps in achievement and in creating a more equitable society

Evidence for a Cultural Mindset: Combining Process Data, Theory, and Simulation

The goal of the present work is to build a foundation for understanding cognition and decision-making processes in innovative assessment contexts. Specifically, we will assess students’ Cross-Cultural Competence (3C: see Thomas et al., 2008) through a social simulation game. The present work will use Mindset (i.e., individuals beliefs about whether ability is fixed or changeable, see Dweck, 2006) to ground the project in theory because it has been shown to be a powerful motivator for decision-making and behavior in learning and achievement (Dweck & Leggett; 1988; Dweck, 1999), and in cross-cultural contexts (Dweck, 2012). The novel contribution of this paper is to apply Mindset theory to social situations requiring 3C, thus proposing the notion of cultural mindsets—defined here as the set of beliefs including affect, cognition, and behavior people bring to cross-cultural contexts. In cultural mindset, affect and cognition govern the ease with which people adapt, learn, and update cultural information. Additionally, we argue that cultural mindsets are important mechanisms involved in navigating cross-cultural situations effectively and should be considered more in future research. In order to understand how cultural mindset affects student performance, we will apply a computational cognitive modeling approach using Markov decision process (MDP) models. The MDP approach is appropriate for sequential decision-making in non-deterministic environments—as actions are chosen as part of a plan to achieve goals with the knowledge that some action effects will be probabilistic

Toward inclusive and identity safe learning for supporting racialized student achievement

Students racialized as Black often experience forms of marginalization and encounter unique obstacles in their educational paths. As a result, more inclusive and tailored forms of support should be developed. Working to better support Black students should be initiated through two complementary sides--through that of the instructor and the scientist. First, we consider the importance of identity-safety and detail identity-based barriers Black students experience in their learning environments. We then define the notion of cognitive universals and discuss how it limits the effectiveness of science and its translation to more inclusive practices. We argue that to strengthen tailored forms of student support, we must move beyond focusing only on cognitive universals and more carefully consider heterogeneity of effects. To support our argument, we present evidence-based strategies from cognitive and learning science and educational interventions research to combat identity-based barriers and boost learning gains. Overall, we urge instructors and scientists to consider a variety of techniques to create more identity-safe and inclusive learning environments for Black students

Socioeconomic status and response to a reading intervention: A quantile regression approach

In response to inadequate response to instruction in reading, interventions are often implemented to address deficiencies in component skills associated with reading performance. However, there are factors that influence how children respond to these interventions. Specifically, socioeconomic status (SES) is a well-known correlate of academic achievement, and we hypothesized that family-SES would be associated with response to reading intervention. We explored the estimated associations between SES (free and reduced lunch status) and the distribution of response to intervention (residualized gain scores on the decoding and expressive vocabulary subtests of the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement) using the quantile regression approach in a diverse sample of elementary students (N = 1,651). Results indicated that higher family-SES was more strongly associated with greater responsiveness to intervention for both the decoding and expressive vocabulary skills measured. We conclude with a call to more thoroughly consider predictors of individual differences in response to intervention