智商

出自維基百科,自由嘅百科全書
跳去導覽 跳去搵嘢
一條典型嘅 IQ 測試題目;條題目要受試者按啲圖形嘅規律,答下一個圖形應該係乜。

智商粵拼zi3 soeng1英文intelligence quotientIQ德文Intelligenzquotient)係泛指用嚟量度智能、由某啲標準化嘅測試得出嘅分數:智能係一種心理特性,大致上係指一個個體學習諗嘢嘅能力有幾勁[1];研究智能嘅科學家往往會用一啲架生嚟量度受試者嘅智能,而呢啲「量度智能嘅架生俾出、反映個個體嘅智能有幾高」嘅分數就係廣義上嘅智商[2]

舉個簡化例子,想像家陣要研究一位受試者嘅智能,「位受試者嘅智能」係一個冇得直接度嘅變數,於是研究者就俾佢做份測試,要佢答一拃題目;研究者有理由相信拃題目係同智能好大關係嘅,智能愈高嘅人就會答啱愈多題;受試者答完之後,研究者就睇吓位受試者响個測試度答啱咗幾多條題目,最後得出個分數,例如 130 分噉,用呢個分數嚟反映位受試者嘅智能-呢個分數就係智商,而設計嚟量度嘅智能、俾出智商數值嘅架生就係所謂嘅智商測試(IQ test)。喺廿一世紀初嘅認知科學上,智商測試嘅設計係一門大嘅學問,會用到好多統計學技巧[3][4]

智商測試呢家嘢相當有用:多份研究都表明,智商同好多方面嘅表現都有好強嘅統計相關,所以認知心理學上一路都相當關注智商呢個概念;而且喺教育等嘅實際應用上,智商測試仲可以攞嚟(例如)評估一個學生要點教[5]

定義[編輯]

舉世聞名嘅雕像思索者》;思考嘅能力一般都俾人認為係智能嘅重要指標之一[1]
睇埋:智能

智商建基於智能(intelligence)嘅概念。到咗廿一世紀頭,認知科學上對「智能」呢個詞應該點定義仲有相當嘅爭詏[6]。例如响 1994 年,52 位心理學家華爾街日報一齊發表咗份題為《主流科學論智能》嘅宣言,喺份宣言入面噉講[7][8]

英文原文:"... a very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings - "catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do."
粵文翻譯:(智能係)一個好普遍化嘅心智能力,包含咗做推理計劃解難抽象思考理解複雜嘅諗法、快速噉學習同埋由經驗學習嘅能力。(智能)唔淨只係書本上嘅學習、狹窄嘅學業能力、或者做試卷嗰陣嘅醒目,而係反映一個更廣同深入嘅了解我哋周圍環境嘅能力-「理解」、「明辨」啲嘢、或者「諗到」要做啲乜。

最基本上噉講,智能可以定義做「一個個體感知同推斷資訊、將呢啲資訊儲起同化為知識、並且用知識適應環境嘅能力」,包括諗嘢、對邏輯嘅運用、理解自我意識理性計劃創意解難等嘅認知功能一般都俾人認定係衡量智能嘅重要指標。智商測試(IQ test)就係指一啲按嚴格標準設計、可以用嚟量度智能嘅心理測驗,而一個個體做呢啲測試攞到、反映佢智能嘅數值就係廣義上嘅智商[3][4]

理論基礎[編輯]

內文:人類智能
睇埋:因素分析同埋心理建構

潛在變數[編輯]

內文:潛在變數

潛在變數(latent variable)係智商嘅一個基礎概念:到咗廿一世紀初,智能同智商都係潛在變數-即係冇得直接觀察、淨係有得由第啲實際觀察到嘅變數(可觀察變數)嗰度推斷;而定義上,智能同智商係主宰認知能力嘅潛在變數-各種嘅認知能力都會反映智能同智商,好似係記憶力理解嘅能力同創意... 呀噉都係由智能同智商掌控嘅;想像以下幅圖[9]

Congeneric measurement model.png

當中

  • 每個 都係其中一種認知能力「有幾勁」,即係 一個個體嘅記憶力、 = 一個個體嘅理解能力... 呀噉,
  • 係智能或者智商,

攞每個 嚟睇,

當中 係一啲數值固定嘅參數[10]

因素模型[編輯]

睇埋:一般智能因素同埋多元智能理論

確立咗潛在變數嘅概念之後,心理學家就要詏「智商由幾多個因素組成」( 因素嘅數量有幾多個?)噉嘅問題。到咗廿一世紀初,重要嘅智商模型有以下呢啲[11]

  • 一般智能因素g-factor,全名 general intelligence factor)-一個因素,源自 1904 年嘅最基本智商概念[12][13]
    • 唔同嘅認知作業要求唔同嘅認知功能-有啲作業講求邏輯推理,有啲講求工作記憶,有啲講求創意... 等等;但心理學研究發現,一個個體喺咁多種唔同認知作業上嘅表現有明顯嘅正相關-即係話喺某個認知功能上勁過平均嘅人,傾向(但唔一定)會喺第啲認知功能上都勁過平均,而喺某個認知功能上弱過平均嘅人,傾向(但唔一定)會喺第啲認知功能上都弱過平均
    • 於是有廿世紀嘅心理學家提出,一個人腦認知功能發生嘅主要場所)會具有一個所謂嘅一般智能因素,呢個因素獨力噉主宰住個人腦喺認知能力上嘅普遍表現。打後嘅心理學家做咗一大輪嘅心理測量研究,量度人類受試者喺唔同認知作業上嘅表現,知道每位受試者喺每件作業上嘅分數,並且對攞到嘅數據因素分析(factor analysis)等嘅統計分析;結果發現,人與人之間嘅唔同認知能力差異平均大約有成 40 至 50% 嘅都係源自一般智能因素上嘅差異嘅。呢柞研究確立咗一個諗法-人腦當中的確有某個因素,係能夠單獨噉反映個人「有幾聰明」嘅,而對智能有興趣嘅心理學家自然開始著手研究一般智能因素。
  • 流動智能同固定智能(fluid and crystallized intelligence)-兩個因素:流動智能同固定智能係源自 1940 年代嘅一個諗法;根據呢個諗法,智能同智商由兩大因素組成[14][15]
    • 固定智能)係指建基於知識而展現出嚟嘅有智能行為,例如兩個人 A 君同 B 君,兩個推理能力都一樣咁勁,但 A 君已有嘅數學知識多啲,所以如果兩個人齊齊做「由手上嘅數學知識推理出新知識」嘅話,A 君表現好啲-A 君嘅 高啲;
    • 相比之下,流動智能)係指唔使咩知識都可以展現得到出嚟嘅智能,例如兩個人 A 君同 B 君,兩個人嘅知識都一樣,然後兩個一齊一樣技能(例如係鬭木或者畫畫呀噉),發覺 A 君學得快啲-「唔靠先前知識」展示出嘅智能就係所謂嘅 。有好多人都認為, 係智商測試應該要集中量度嘅嘢,所以啲智商測試好多時都盡可能會設計到(例如)唔使用語言-一種前置知識-都可以作答,例子可以睇里墳氏標準推理測驗嘅設計噉(下面)。
  • 三層智能理論(three-stratum theory)-智能分三層:個理論建基於因素分析研究;研究者實際攞咗啲數據返嚟,用呢啲數據建立因素統計模型,主張一個三層嘅模型(下圖)[16][17]
Carroll three stratum model of human Intelligence.png
  • 多元智能理論(theory of multiple intelligences)係一套有關「智能分多個因素」嘅理論。呢套理論承認人類智能可以分做多個因素,而且仲對「點樣先至可以算係一個智能因素」有所著墨;根據多元智能理論,攞一個智能因素 要達到多條條件,先可以算係一個智能因素,條件包括[19][20]
    1. 喺個入面有特定嘅對應-要有可能搵到有個腦部份,係呢個腦部份一受損就會搞到個人 受損嘅;
    2. 扮演某啲進化上嘅功能(會提升人類祖先生存繁衍能力);
    3. 嘅存在受到心理測量研究支撐(好似係三層智能理論搵到 成一個因素);
    4. 會有所謂嘅學者(savant)-「學者」係指喺 上零舍出眾(但可能其他能力唔掂)嘅人;

... 呀噉。設計智商測試嘅過程通常都會用智能理論做起始點,俾研究者用嚟決定「個測試要用咩題目」等嘅嘢。

智商測試[編輯]

睇埋:心理測驗同埋鐘形曲線

測試設計[編輯]

睇埋:心理測量學

想像以下噉嘅過程:

  • 家陣有位心理測量學家阿 A,阿 A 搵咗 50 條題目返嚟,假設佢有充分嘅理由相信一個人喺拃題目上嘅表現(可觀察變數)係反映佢智能(潛在變數)嘅,跟住阿 A 再搵一大班受試者返嚟樣本),叫受試者做呢個測試,最後得出每位受試者喺個測試度嘅分數,即係攞到好似以下噉嘅數據[21]
    受試者 1:40 分
    受試者 2:36 分
    受試者 3:17 分
    ...
  • 另一方面,又有另一位研究者阿 B 做咗份噉嘅研究,都係 50 條題目,但啲題目同阿 A 嘅唔同,然後又有研究者阿 C 做咗份噉嘅研究,但佢份研究係用咗 100 條題目。噉問題嚟喇-到底佢哋要點樣比較佢哋啲數據呢?阿 A 話佢啲受試者平均得分係 40.5 分,阿 B 話佢啲受試者平均得分係 30.9 分,阿 C 話佢啲受試者平均得分係 67.1 分,不過因為佢哋根本冇共同嘅計量單位,就噉比較啲數值係冇意義嘅[22][23]
  • 心知呢一點,三位研究者就做以下嘅嘢:佢哋各自攞住自己嘅數據,計自己樣本入面嘅得分嘅平均值(mean)同標準差(SD),然後阿 A 話「我嘅第 13 位受試者喺智能上嘅表現,係比平均值高 1.2 個 SD 咁多」;噉樣就可以比較唔同受試者嘅能力-將三份研究擺埋一齊睇嘅話,每位受試者都有個值,表示佢喺智能上嘅表現「同平均值比,高或者低幾多幾多個 SD 咁多」。呢樣嘢就係實際應用上嘅智商,用數學方程式嚟表達嘅話如下[24][25]
    ,當中
    • 係位受試者嘅智商值;
    • 係位受試者喺個測試度攞到幾多分;
    • 係「整個測試嗰陣,啲受試者嘅平均值」;
    • 係「整個測試嗰陣,啲受試者嘅標準差」。
    -喺慣例上,平均值會設做 100 分(為咗方便睇),而(例如)130 分就係指個人得分比平均值高 2 個 SD 咁多[註 1]。用日常用語講嘅話,由呢啲測試得到嘅智商值查實反映咗以下嘅資訊[26][27]
相對於『整呢個測試嗰陣,啲受試者嘅平均值』,呢個人响智能上嘅表現有幾高?
  • 不過跟住班研究者又諗到一個問題:由日常觀察度經已可知,細路喺成長過程當中認知能力會提升;噉講即係話,如果一個樣本入面啲受試者有大人又有細路,噉「聰明過平均嘅細路」得分好可能會低過「冇平均咁聰明嘅大人」;於是佢哋就將啲受試者分組-唔攞 6 歲嘅受試者嚟同 7 歲嘅受試者比,亦都唔攞 15 歲嘅受試者嚟同大人比... 如此類推;喺每次測試一個人嘅智商嗰陣,淨係會攞佢嘅得分嚟同相同年齡嘅受試者嘅得分嘅 比較,計數嗰陣亦都淨係用同年受試者嘅 嚟計[註 2]。噉即係話最後得出個值反映嘅資訊係[24]
相對於『整呢個測試嗰陣,啲同年齡受試者嘅平均值』,呢個人响智能上嘅表現有幾高?

下圖係一條反映智商分佈嘅鐘形曲線(bell curve):X 軸表示智商值,Y 軸表示一個值出現得有幾密;實證研究顯示喺人類當中,出現得最密嘅智商值係平均嘅 100 分,得大約 2.5% [註 3]嘅人係智商去到 130 分(比平均高 2 個 SD 咁多)或以上,呢啲人就係所謂嘅資優[24][28]

IQ curve.svg

常用測試[編輯]

睇埋:里墳氏標準推理測驗

里墳氏標準推理測驗(Raven's Progressive Matrices)可以話係最出名嘅智商測試:呢隻測試會有 60 條題目,易嘅行先難嘅行後,最大嘅特徵係唔使靠語言,淨係要求受試者對啲圖形嘅規律作出推理-好似以下呢條題目噉,個測試要受試者觀察吓已知嗰啲圖形嘅規律,用條規律判斷個空格入面嘅圖形會係點嘅樣-由第一行同第二行睇得出,每個橫行都係「同一個形狀,個形狀分四橛,其中一橛黑色其餘嘅白色,由最左到最右會見到黑色嗰橛嘅位置順時針噉轉」;一般認為,一個人智能愈高,佢就愈能夠搵出現象背後嘅規律,所以理應會愈能夠正確噉答呢個測驗嗰啲問題[29][30]

Raven Matrix.svg

一般認為,里墳氏測驗係個好優良嘅智商測試-個測試唔靠語言,所以唔使憂翻譯或者文化差異嘅問題,而且個測試唔使咩知識都可以答到,更加啱嗮攞嚟量度流動智能(純粹係做推理同諗嘢、唔靠背景知識嘅智能)。除咗里墳氏測驗之外,廿一世紀初嘅心理學界仲有好幾款唔同嘅智商測試-出名嘅有史丹福-比奈智力量表韋查斯勒兒童智力量表同埋韋查斯勒成人智力量表呀噉。每款智商測試用嘅題目同理論基礎都唔係好同,而且心理學家好多時仲會詏「呢款測試係量度緊咩能力」同埋「呢款測試係咪充分噉反映到智能」噉嘅問題[31]

遺傳度[編輯]

內文:智商嘅遺傳度
睇埋:先天定後天

智商嘅遺傳度係智商研究上一條相當受關注嘅問題:遺傳度(heritability)係一個由 1 至 100% 嘅數值,簡化講反映一個特性(由身高體重以至智商噉)嘅人際差異有幾多係源於遺傳差異嘅;响廿世紀嘅先天定後天爭詏上,「智商遺傳度有幾高」相當受到關注-主流認為,智能對一個人「成就可以去到幾高」有深遠嘅影響[32],於是廿世紀嘅心理學界就有好多人出咗噉嘅疑問:

如果智商係由先天因素決定嘅,噉係咪表示一個人『成就可以去到幾高』都係由先天因素話事嘅呢?

廿世紀嘅心理學界做咗唔少有關遺傳度嘅研究,例如係孖胎研究噉。呢啲研究表示,喺咁多種心理特性裏面,智商算係遺傳度比較嘅:响 2015 年有研究者試過做咗份元分析(meta-analysis),分析咗打前嗰 50 年做過有關智商嘅孖胎研究,發現智商嘅遺傳度去到成 57% 咁高,而到咗 2020 年,心理學界基本上一致同意,智商係有相當高嘅遺傳度嘅[33][34]

查理斯·達爾文(Darwin;左)同佢個半表弟法蘭西斯·高爾頓(Galton;右)嘅相;達爾文對現代進化論作出咗重大貢獻,而高爾頓就俾人譽為心理測量學之父-兩表兄弟都係影響力重大嘅科學家,都係好聰明嘅人。佢哋家族係咪零舍有「聰明基因」呢?

年紀影響[編輯]

嚴格嚟講,智商遺傳度研究講嘅係,智商嘅遺傳度仲會隨年紀而上升,即係話成年智商主要取決於遺傳因素:

  • 有多份研究都發現,喺細路當中智商嘅遺傳度係 45% 左右,而到咗大人嗰陣,智商嘅遺傳度會去到成 75% 咁高[35]
  • 如果係睇 g 因素嘅話,細路嘅 g 因素遺傳度係 40% 左右,喺大人當中會係大約 90% [36][37]
  • 呢啲研究亦都有考慮兄弟姊妹之間嘅遺傳差異會點影響佢哋喺智商上嘅相似度-到咗成年期嗰陣,兄弟姊妹(冇血緣關係)喺智商上嘅統計相關係 0 咁滯-是但搵對養兄弟姊妹,兩個人都係大人,佢哋之間喺智商上嘅相似性多數唔會高過「是但搵對陌生人,兩個人之間嘅智商相似度」,而相比之下,成年期親生兄弟姊妹喺智商上嘅統計相關會去到成 0.6 咁高(算係幾高嘅數值),而成年、自細分開咗嚟養嘅同卵孖胎(喺遺傳上一樣咁滯)喺智商上統計相關仲有成 0.74 咁高;同時細個嗰陣養兄弟姊妹嘅智商相似性高啲,而同卵孖胎嘅智商相似性冇咁高。

... 呀噉。呢樣發現對智商研究有重大啟示:上述嘅發現表明,成年期嘅智商好大程度上取決於先天因素,理論上就算一個細路做咗某啲嘢提高自己智商,佢大個咗之後都好可能會返去原本嘅智商-即係例如一個智能平均嘅 10 歲細路做咗啲嘢,令自己嘅智能變成「高過平均少少」,大個咗好有可能會變返平均咁高嘅智能[34][38];事實係有唔少心理學家都試過嘗試搵方法提升啲細路嘅智商,但往往都係「啲細路智商係提高咗,但一大個咗智商就返去原本數值」噉嘅情況[39]

相關概念[編輯]

呢個表反映身高同 IQ(假設啲人冚唪唥都用同一個版本嘅測試,而唔係各自用返自己年代嘅版本嘅測試)喺 1954 至 2002 年間嘅變化。
睇埋:認知心理學人腦認知同埋神經科學同智能
  • 弗林效應(Flynn effect):廿世紀以嚟發現嘅一種現象,指啲人嘅智商一代一代噉慢慢提升-喺心理學界,每次啲人設計新版本嘅智商測試嗰陣,都會將「啲受試者喺呢個測試上攞到嘅平均得分」設做 100 分智商(平均嘅智能);而實證嘅研究表明,啲人嘅智商係噉升緊-如果俾班普通人做個最新版本嘅智商測試,佢哋嘅平均得分會係 100 分,但如果俾佢哋做打前啲版本(用前人做受試者嚟設計)嘅智商測試,佢哋嘅平均值會明顯高過 100 [註 4]。呢種現象由廿世紀尾起經已吸引咗心理學家注意,不過對「弗林效應成因係乜」呢條問題,廿一世紀初嘅心理學界仲係眾說紛紜[40][41]
  • 資優天才:最基本上係指「智商異常咁高嘅人」;資優嚴格嘅定義係「智商高過 130」 -表現高平均 2 個 SD 或以上[24],仲可以按「智商高成點」細分做幾種[註 5];天才就係一個比較含糊啲嘅詞-泛指智能極高(表示智商理應都極高)成就極大嘅人,例如對現代物理學貢獻重大嘅愛因斯坦就成日俾人話係天才,但廿一世紀初嘅心理學上並冇對「天才」一詞作出具體嘅定義[42]
  • 腦容量:指一隻動物嘅大細,可以用重量或者容量等嘅指標量度;喺人類當中,同年嘅人响腦容量上可以相差成倍咁多,實證嘅研究經已表示,腦大嘅人傾向智商高啲-腦容量同智商有頗強嘅正相關,相關值係 .30 至 .40 左右[43];有神經造影研究指,腦大啲嘅人唔係所有腦區都大啲-腦大啲嘅人傾向額頂葉網絡相關腦區擴張得犀利啲,但邊緣系統以及感官運動控制相關腦區擴張得冇咁犀利[44]
  • 工作記憶(working memory):指一個人暫時將啲資訊儲喺記憶裏面嘅能力;認知心理學研究已知,人同人之間响工作記憶容量上有差異-有啲人可以同時喺個腦入面處理大量嘅資訊,有啲人冇咁擅長做呢樣嘢;研究指,工作記憶容量同智商有正相關,尤其係流動智能-喺大人當中,智商同工作記憶容量嘅相關數值估計去到成 0.70 至 0.80 咁高[45]
  • 管控功能(executive function):泛指一個人管控自己嘅思維情緒行為嚟達到目的嘅能力,例如係有個人好想要某樣嘢,但心知如果郁手去偷嗰樣嘢會有後果,所以施展自控壓抑「郁手去攞嗰樣嘢」嘅衝動[46];管控功能對一個人適應社會嚟講好緊要,而且同智商有正相關[47]
  • 創造力(creativity):指一個人諗出又新又有用嘅諗法嘅能力;創意可以透過好多方法展現-可以係喺科學上諗新理論解釋研究緊嘅現象、可以係諗出新發明更有效噉解決工程學上嘅問題、又可以係喺文學藝術上創造新又娛樂到人嘅作品[48][49];研究指,創意同流動智能有顯著嘅正相關[50]
  • 高智商學會(high IQ society):指一啲淨係俾智商有返咁上下高嘅人加入嘅組織,通常都係要求一個人智商 130 或以上先至准加入,有啲甚至仲嚴到淨係准智商 140 或以上嘅人加入;當中門薩學會(Mensa)可以話係最出名最歷史悠久嘅高智商學會,喺 1946 年創辦[51]

睇埋[編輯]

註釋[編輯]

  1. 統計學嘅行話嚟講,即係話 IQ 係一種次序量度
  2. 正式用嘅 IQ 測試仲會分埋唔同版本,俾唔同年齡嘅受試者用。
  3. 呢個數值可能會隨地區而有些微嘅差異。
  4. 弗林效應同「智商主要係天生嘅」並冇矛盾-假設智商測試會係噉更新,智商反映嘅係一個個體相對於「同期嘅人嘅平均智能」嘅位置。
  5. 智商測試同任何類型嘅量度架生一樣,要量度極高或者極低嘅數值嗰陣會開始唔準。睇埋外推

文獻[編輯]

  • Anastasi, Anne; Urbina, Susana (1997). Psychological Testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Ardila, A., Pineda, D., & Rosselli, M. (2000). Correlation between intelligence test scores and executive function measures (PDF). Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 15(1), 31-36,呢篇文發現廿世紀嘅智商測試唔係咁量度到管控功能
  • Binet, Alfred; Simon, Th. (1916). The development of intelligence in children (The Binet-Simon Scale). Publications of the Training School at Vineland New Jersey Department of Research. Vol. 11. Translated by E. S. Kite. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.
  • Borsboom, Denny (September 2006). "The attack of the psychometricians" (PDF). Psychometrika. 71 (3): 425-440.
  • Carroll, John B. (1998). "Human Cognitive Abilities: A Critique". In McArdle, John J.; Woodcock, Richard W. (eds.). Human Cognitive Abilities in Theory and Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 5–23.
  • Conway, A. R., & Kovacs, K. (2015). New and emerging models of human intelligence (PDF). Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(5), 419-426.
  • Deary, Ian (2001). Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Jensen, Arthur R. (10 July 2006). Clocking the Mind: Mental Chronometry and Individual Differences. Elsevier. ISBN 978-0-08-044939-5.
  • Jensen, Arthur R. (2011). "The Theory of Intelligence and Its Measurement". Intelligence. 39 (4): 171-177.
  • Johnson, Wendy (2012). "How Much Can We Boost IQ? An Updated Look at Jensen's (1969) Question and Answer". In Slater, Alan M.; Quinn, Paul C. (eds.). Developmental Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. Psychology: Revisiting the Classic Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  • Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2.
  • Kaufman, Scott Barry (1 June 2013). Ungifted: Intelligence Redefined. Basic Books.
  • Reardon, P. K., Seidlitz, J., Vandekar, S., Liu, S., Patel, R., Park, M. T. M., ... & Raznahan, A. (2018). Normative brain size variation and brain shape diversity in humans (PDF). Science, 360(6394), 1222-1227,呢篇文指出腦大嘅人零舍傾向額頂葉網絡相關腦區擴張得犀利啲。
  • Wechsler, David (1939). The Measurement of Adult Intelligence (1st ed.). Baltimore, MD: Williams & Witkins. LCCN 39014016.
  • Wechsler, David (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
  • Wechsler, David (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
  • Weiner, Irving B.; Graham, John R.; Naglieri, Jack A., eds. (2 October 2012). Handbook of Psychology, Volume 10: Assessment Psychology. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-89127-8.

[編輯]

  1. 1.0 1.1 Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2013). Myside bias, rational thinking, and intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(4), 259-264.
  2. Paulhus, D. L., Lysy, D. C., & Yik, M. S. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful as proxy IQ tests?. Journal of personality, 66(4), 525-554.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Wechsler, D (1944). The measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
  4. 4.0 4.1 Kanazawa, S. (2004). General intelligence as a domain-specific adaptation. Psychological review, 111(2), 512.
  5. Sameroff, A. J., Seifer, R., Barocas, R., Zax, M., & Greenspan, S. (1987). Intelligence quotient scores of 4-year-old children: Social-environmental risk factors. Pediatrics, 79(3), 343-350.
  6. Legg, S., & Hutter, M. (2007). A collection of definitions of intelligence. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and applications, 157, 17.
  7. Gottfredson & 1997777, pp. 17-20.
  8. Gottfredson, Linda S. (1997). "Mainstream Science on Intelligence (editorial)" (PDF). Intelligence. 24: 13-23.
  9. Gottfredson L.S. Where and why g matters: not a mystery. Human Performance, 2002, 15:25-46.
  10. Child, Dennis (2006), The Essentials of Factor Analysis (3rd ed.), Continuum International.
  11. Conway, A. R., & Kovacs, K. (2015). New and emerging models of human intelligence 互聯網檔案館歸檔,歸檔日期2022年2月8號,. (PDF). Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(5), 419-426.
  12. Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). (2002). The general factor of intelligence: How general is it?. Psychology Press.
  13. Colom, R., Jung, R. E., & Haier, R. J. (2006). Distributed brain sites for the g-factor of intelligence. Neuroimage, 31(3), 1359-1365.
  14. Cattell, R. B. (1963). "Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment". Journal of Educational Psychology. 54: 1-22.
  15. Lubinski, David (2004). "Introduction to the Special Section on Cognitive Abilities: 100 Years After Spearman's (1904) "'General Intelligence,' Objectively Determined and Measured"". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 86 (1): 96-111.
  16. J. B. Carroll (1993), Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA.
  17. J. B. Carroll (1997), "The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities" in D. P. Flanagan, J. L. Genshaft et al., Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues, Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA, pp. 122-130.
  18. Wasserman, John D. (2019-07-03). "Deconstructing CHC". Applied Measurement in Education. 32 (3): 249-268.
  19. Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (1983).
  20. Davis, Katie; Christodoulou, Joanna; Seider, Scott; Gardner, Howard (2011), "The Theory of Multiple Intelligences", in Sternberg, Robert J.; Kaufman, Barry (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence, Cambridge University Press, pp. 485-503.
  21. Gottfredson, Linda S. (2009). "Chapter 1: Logical Fallacies Used to Dismiss the Evidence on Intelligence Testing". In Phelps, Richard F. (ed.). Correcting Fallacies about Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  22. Mussen, Paul Henry (1973). Psychology: An Introduction. Lexington, MA: Heath. p. 363. ISBN 978-0-669-61382-7. "The I.Q. is essentially a rank; there are no true "units" of intellectual ability."
  23. Truch, Steve (1993). The WISC-III Companion: A Guide to Interpretation and Educational Intervention. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. p. 35. ISBN 978-0-89079-585-9. "An IQ score is not an equal-interval score, as is evident in Table A.4 in the WISC-III manual."
  24. 24.0 24.1 24.2 24.3 Stevens, S. S. (1946). "On the Theory of Scales of Measurement". Science. 103 (2684): 677-680.
  25. Resing, W. C. M., & Blok, J. B. (2002). The classification of intelligence scores. Proposal for an unambiguous system. The psychologist, 37, 244-249.
  26. Bartholomew, David J. (2004). Measuring Intelligence: Facts and Fallacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-521-54478-8. Lay summary (27 July 2010). "When we come to quantities like IQ or g, as we are presently able to measure them, we shall see later that we have an even lower level of measurement—an ordinal level. This means that the numbers we assign to individuals can only be used to rank them—the number tells us where the individual comes in the rank order and nothing else."
  27. Mackintosh 1998, pp. 30–31 "In the jargon of psychological measurement theory, IQ is an ordinal scale, where we are simply rank-ordering people. ... It is not even appropriate to claim that the 10-point difference between IQ scores of 110 and 100 is the same as the 10-point difference between IQs of 160 and 150"
  28. Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing, 2nd ed. Harper.
  29. Bilker, Warren B.; Hansen, John A.; Brensinger, Colleen M.; Richard, Jan; Gur, Raquel E.; Gur, Ruben C. (2012-09-01). "Development of abbreviated nine-item forms of the Raven's standard progressive matrices test". Assessment. 19 (3): 354-369.
  30. Raven, J., Raven, J.C., & Court, J.H. (2003, updated 2004) Manual for Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
  31. Urbina, Susana (2011). "Chapter 2: Tests of Intelligence". In Sternberg, Robert J.; Kaufman, Scott Barry (eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 20-38.
  32. Paulhus, D. L., Lysy, D. C., & Yik, M. S. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful as proxy IQ tests?. Journal of personality, 66(4), 525-554.
  33. Polderman, Tinca J. C.; Benyamin, Beben; de Leeuw, Christiaan A.; Sullivan, Patrick F.; van Bochoven, Arjen; Visscher, Peter M.; Posthuma, Danielle (2015). "Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies" (PDF). Nature Genetics. 47 (7): 702–709.
  34. 34.0 34.1 Bouchard, T. J. (2013). The Wilson effect: the increase in heritability of IQ with age. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 16(5), 923-930.
  35. Neisser, Ulrich; Boodoo, Gwyneth; Bouchard, Thomas J.; Boykin, A. Wade; Brody, Nathan; Ceci, Stephen J.; Halpern, Diane F.; Loehlin, John C.; et al. (1996). "Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns". American Psychologist. 51 (2): 77–101.
  36. Bouchard, Thomas J. (7 August 2013). "The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age". Twin Research and Human Genetics. 16 (5): 923-930.
  37. Panizzon, Matthew S.; Vuoksimaa, Eero; Spoon, Kelly M.; Jacobson, Kristen C.; Lyons, Michael J.; Franz, Carol E.; Xian, Hong; Vasilopoulos, Terrie; Kremen, William S. (March 2014). "Genetic and environmental influences on general cognitive ability: Is g a valid latent construct?". Intelligence. 43: 65-76.
  38. Segal, Nancy L. (1997). "Same-age unrelated siblings: A unique test of within-family environmental influences on IQ similarity". Journal of Educational Psychology. 89 (2): 381-390.
  39. Bidwell, Allie (13 December 2013). "Study: High Standardized Test Scores Don't Translate to Better Cognition". U.S. News & World Report.
  40. Ulric Neisser; James R. Flynn; Carmi Schooler; Patricia M. Greenfield; Wendy M. Williams; Marian Sigman; Shannon E. Whaley; Reynaldo Martorell; et al. (1998). Neisser, Ulric (ed.). Rising Curve: Long-Term Gains in IQ and Related Measures. APA Science Volume Series. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  41. Flynn, James R. (1984). "The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932 to 1978". Psychological Bulletin. 95 (1): 29-51.
  42. Robinson, Andrew. "Can We Define Genius?". Psychology Today. Sussex Publishers, LLC. Retrieved 25 May 2017.
  43. Mcdaniel, M (July 2005). "Big-brained people are smarter: A meta-analysis of the relationship between in vivo brain volume and intelligence". Intelligence. 33 (4): 337-346.
  44. Reardon, P. K., Seidlitz, J., Vandekar, S., Liu, S., Patel, R., Park, M. T. M., ... & Raznahan, A. (2018). Normative brain size variation and brain shape diversity in humans (PDF). Science, 360(6394), 1222-1227.
  45. Kane, M.J.; Hambrick, D.Z.; Conway, A.R.A. Working memory capacity and fluid intelligenceare strongly related constructs: Comment on Ackerman et al. Psychol. Bull. 2005, 131, 66-71.
  46. Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 24, 167-202.
  47. Laporta-Hoyos, O., Pannek, K., Ballester-Plané, J., Reid, L. B., Vázquez, É., Delgado, I., ... & Pueyo, R. (2017). White matter integrity in dyskinetic cerebral palsy: relationship with intelligence quotient and executive function. NeuroImage: Clinical, 15, 789-800.
  48. Mumford, M. D. (2003). "Where have we been, where are we going? Taking stock in creativity research". Creativity Research Journal. 15 (2-3): 107-120.
  49. Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity (PDF). Creativity research journal, 24(1), 92-96.
  50. Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity?. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 287.
  51. "Mensa Information". Mensa International. Archived from the original on 15 October 2009. Retrieved 21 November 2006.

[編輯]