Growth in literacy, cognition, and working memory in English language learners
Lee Swanson, H.; Orosco, Michael J.; Lussier, Catherine M.
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, Vol. 132 – 2015: 155 - 188
The Neural Correlates of Speech Motor Sequence Learning
Segawa, Jennifer A.; Tourville, Jason A.; Beal, Deryk S.; Guenther, Frank H.
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Vol. 27 Issue 4 – 2015: 819 - 831
Pathways to arithmetic: The role of visual-spatial and language skills in written arithmetic, arithmetic word problems, and nonsymbolic arithmetic
Zhang, Xiao; Lin, Dan
Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 41 – 2015: 188 - 197
I am pleased to announce the availability of my second video-PPT at IQ's Corner YouTube Channel. The first video can be found here. The current video is 20 minutes. You can skip the first three minutes if you don't want background "front matter" material regarding me (the narrator), etc.
This presentation places the power and value of intelligence testing into a big picture perspective which recognizes the strengths and limitations of intelligence testing. The goal is to encourage users and consumers of intelligence tests to better understand what these measures can and cannot do, and, more importantly, recognize the other personal and environmental characteristics that influence an individual's learning and development.
Be gentle. I am not a professional video producer and I do not have the time to edit out pauses, minor mistakes, etc.---- hey...this is FREE quality information. :)
Update 02-27-15. Thanks to Rueben Lopez for making the suggestion that I reduce the 3 minutes of the introductory "front matter." I have taken his advice (which I will incorporate into future videos) and have now posted the identical video with the very brief introduction. It can be accessed here.
For individuals who could not attend my NASP 2015 WJ IV mini-skills workshop, or those who did and who would like to view all slides shown (and those not shown) or others who want to know, you can now view the slides below that are posted at SlideShare. Enjoy. If you click on the SlideShare link you can view other PPT shows I have available for review.
Very good article that does not support Chuderski's research that had suggested a relationship between time on task (not the same as cognitive processing speed-Gs) and fluid reasoning or working memory. The current study reinforces the very high (but not 1.0) effect size from working memory to Gf. However, how much time an individual (at least for young adults) spends on working memory or fluid tasks does not explain the strong WM--Gf relation. Generalization to children and the elderly cannot be made without further research.
What I find particularly interesting is the authors hypothesis that one possible general mechanism explanation for the WM-->Gf link is temporal based processing of information. This is consistent with the temporal power resolution hypotheses (or temporal g) of Rammsayer and colleagues and a large body of research I have reported at the Brain Clock blog. If you visit that link, pay particular attention to the MindHub Pub2 that presents a three-level hypothesized model for understanding the IM effect. Note that at the lowest neurocognitive and biological level of intelligence research, I have hypothesized that temporal g (and not Jensen's reaction time g) may be one of the key domain-general mechanisms driving critical cognitive abilities, especially working memory and fluid intelligence.
As per the recent four-level reductionistic framework (see brief 10 minute video explanation) I have offered to organize intelligence related research (adapted from Earl Hunt's work), the current study links research at the psychometric, information processing, and neurocognitive and biological (neural efficiency) levels.
Fluid intelligence and working memory capacity: Is the time for working on intelligence problems relevant for explaining their large relationship?
Colom, Roberto; Privado, Jesús; García, Luis F.; Estrada, Eduardo; Cuevas, Lara; Shih, Pei-Chun
Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 79 – 2015: 75 - 80