Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Spearman's two-factor theory proposes that intelligence has two components: general intelligence ("g") and specific ability ("s"). [7] To explain the differences in performance on different tasks, Spearman hypothesized that the "s" component was specific to a certain aspect of intelligence.
Third, arguments based on Spearman's hypothesis have been criticized. Some have argued that culturally caused differences could produce a correlation between g-loadings and group differences. Flynn (2010) has criticized the basic assumption that confirmation of Spearman's hypothesis would support a partially genetic explanation for IQ differences.
Despite Spearman arguing that g was what emerged from a large battery of tests, i.e., that it was not measured perfectly by any single test, the fact that g-theory suggested that much of ability could be captured in a single factor, and his suggestion that "the eduction of relations and correlates" underlay this general factor led to the quest ...
The g factor [a] is a construct developed in psychometric investigations of cognitive abilities and human intelligence.It is a variable that summarizes positive correlations among different cognitive tasks, reflecting the assertion that an individual's performance on one type of cognitive task tends to be comparable to that person's performance on other kinds of cognitive tasks.
The g Factor was reviewed favorably by Canadian psychologist J. Philippe Rushton, who called it "an awesome and monumental exposition of the case for the reality of g." [3] Robert Sternberg was more critical in his review, writing that "there is a great deal of evidence of various kinds that the general factor does not do what Jensen claims."
Vernon preferred factor analysis for research and applied this approach to intelligence. At the top of his hierarchical model was Spearman's g and then there were two major group factors; verbal-educational ability (v:ed) and practical-spatial-mechanical abilities (k:m) which could always be
He used g, and contrasted it to s, which he described as a specific factor. This was his two factor theory. The modern understanding of g, typified by Jensen’s and Carroll’s description, is in terms of factor analysis. It is sometimes called the "g factor," or "Spearman's g" (in deference to Spearman).
Spearman's hypothesis asserts a correlation between the g-loadedness of IQ tests and measures of their hereditability, a concept put to work in Arthur Jensen's discussion of black—white race differences from the 1980s. Schönemann regarded this work as resting on a conceptual confusion. Schönemann argued for the non-existence of psychometric g.