Often the time lag between the completion of a scholarly manuscript and its formal publication is measured in years. During this time, the importance of the information often goes unnoticed (except among the “invisible university” of scholars who happen to exchange papers amongst themselves) by other researchers and practitioners.
With this post, I’m announcing another experimental IQ Blog feature..a feature I believe can help reduce this time-lag problem….the IQ PREPLOG (which stands for the dissemination of highlights of PRE-publication articles scholars would like to disseminate or “PLug” via the blOG---thus, PREPLOG…hey…..give me a few points for good Glr----some form of "acronym fluency" or creativity).
Vanessa Danthiir (and associates) in Germany have agreed to be the first guinnea pigs. This research group, which has been extremely active in contemporary CHC structural evidence research during the past decade, have recently completed two manuscripts (both “in press”) that focus on the structure of human cognitive processing speed (Gs, CDS, Gt). With the permission of the authors, below are the manuscript citations and abstracts. Interested readers are encouraged to contact Dr. Danthiir (firstname.lastname@example.org) for additional information and/or to inquire about receiving pre-publication versions of the manuscripts.
Also, according to the authors, the main findings reported in the paper-and-pencil mental speed measures (study) have since been replicated with computerised versions of the tasks. These results are currently being summarized in written form.
If other scholars have manuscripts that fit within the scope of this blog, and who are dying to get “the word out” regarding their forthcomming publications, and more importantly, want to connect with other intelligence scholars/practitioners via an internet-based invisible university structure, please contact me, the IQ Blogmaster, via my email (email@example.com). As editor (dictator?) of this blog, I have final decision-making power over what is posted......It is good to be king….at least within my small private professional sandbox.
Danthiir, V., Wilhelm, O., Schulze, R., & Roberts, R. (2005; in press). Factor Structure and Validity of Paper-and-Pencil Measures of Mental Speed: Evidence for a Higher-Order Model? Intelligence.
This study explored the structure of elementary cognitive tasks (ECTs) and relations between the corresponding construct(s) with processing speed (Gs) and fluid intelligence (Gf). Participants (N = 321) completed 14 ECTs, 3 Gs, and 6 Gf marker tests, all administered in paper-and-pencil format to reduce potential confounds evident when tasks are presented using different media. Factor analysis of the ECTs resulted in a general mental speed factor, along with several task-class specific factors. General mental speed was indistinguishable from Gs and highly correlated with Gf. Significant correlations were also found between Gf and variance specific to task-class speed factors. The findings point to the non-unitary nature of mental speed and the potentially important role of specific speed factors for examining the relationship between speed and fluid intelligence.
Danthiir, V., Wilhelm, O. & Schacht, A. (2005, in press). Decision Speed in Intelligence Tasks: Correctly an Ability? Psychology Science.
Relatively little is known regarding the broad factor of correct decision speed (CDS), which is represented in the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. The current study (N = 186) examined the possibility that distinct CDS factors may exist that are specific to the broad ability assessed by the tasks from which the correct response latencies are derived, in this instance fluid and crystallized intelligence (Gf and Gc) tasks. Additionally, the relationships between the correct response latencies and Gf, Gc, and processing speed (Gs) were investigated. Two distinct yet correlated factors of CDS were identified for Gf and Gc tasks, respectively. Both CDS factors were related to their ability factor counterparts, and CDSGc was lowly related to Gs. However, item difficulty moderated the relationships between CDS and the abilities. When item difficulty was considered relative to groups of participants differing in ability level, differences in the speed of responses were found amongst the ability groups. The pattern of differences in speed amongst the ability groups was similar across all levels of item difficulty. It is argued that this method of analysis is the most appropriate for assessing the relationship between ability level and CDS. The status of CDS as a broad ability construct is considered in light of these findings.