Crystallized intelligence is to _____________, as fluid intelligence is to _____________.

2.1 Age-related Changes in Cognition

A well-established approach to the study of adult cognitive ability has been the examination of higher-order dimensions of psychometric mental abilities, particularly fluid and crystallized intelligence (Horn and Hofer 1992). Fluid intelligence refers to abilities needed for abstract reasoning and speeded performance whereas crystallized intelligence refers to knowledge acquired through one's culture including verbal ability and social knowledge (Schaie 1996).

Longitudinal research examining cognitive development has revealed that mental abilities vary in their developmental trajectories across adulthood (e.g., the Seattle Longitudinal Study: Schaie 1996, the Berlin Aging Study: Smith and Baltes 1999). A substantial body of research in the USA has demonstrated that fluid abilities, such as inductive reasoning, peak in early middle adulthood rather than in adolescence as previously thought. Fluid abilities remain stable in middle age and first show reliable decline in the mid-sixties. In contrast, crystallized abilities, such as vocabulary, do not peak until middle age and show reliable decline later in the mid-seventies (Schaie 1996). Similar developmental trajectories in abilities have been reported in Canadian and European longitudinal research (Backman 2001).

Decline in cognitive ability prior to age 60 is usually considered to be associated with ensuing pathological changes, and universal decline on all markers of intelligence in normal elderly is not evident even by the eighties (Schaie 1996). Findings from Swedish longitudinal study demonstrate that even the oldest-old (i.e., a sample of individuals aged 84 and older), who do not exhibit cognitive impairment at baseline assessment, demonstrate relative stability over a two-year period on several markers of cognitive ability (Johansson et al. 1992).

Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT; Kaufman & Kaufman, 1993, 1997)

The KAIT was developed as an individually administered intelligence test for persons between the ages of 11 and 85 years and older. It was based on an integration of the fluid and crystallized intelligence model (Horn & Cattell, 1966, 1967; Horn, 1985, 1989), as well as aspects of Piaget's theory of formal operations (Piaget, 1972) and Luria's neuropsychological concepts of planning ability (Luria, 1980). The integration of multiple theories of intelligence and cognitive processing lends considerable appeal to this measure.

The KAIT yields Fluid, Crystallized, and Composite IQs with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. A 60-minute Core Battery may be administered, or additional data (including delayed recall) may be obtained by administering a 90-minute Expanded Battery. The Expanded Battery is typically recommended for use with older adults, given the presence of the additional neuropsychological components in the battery. The normative sample consisted of 2000 adolescents and adults between the ages of 11 and 94 years. The upper age group includes 100 persons between the ages of 75 and 94 years (65 females and 35 males), a group that spans nearly two decades. The lack of more age-specific normative data in the upper end of the age spectrum is potentially problematic. Nevertheless, age-related differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence across the lifespan are observed in the normative data for the KAIT (Kaufman & Kaufman, 1997). Crystallized intelligence abilities increased or remained the same through 50 years of age and did not begin to decline until ages 75 and older. Fluid intelligence abilities reached a peak around 20 years of age followed by a plateau between 20 and 50 years of age, and ending with a drop in ability after 55 years of age.

The subtests of the KAIT are generally quite novel and are unlike many cognitive measures routinely used in clinical practice. The Crystallized IQ scale is made up of four subtests: Definitions; Auditory Comprehension; Double Meanings; and Famous Faces. The Definitions subtest assesses knowledge of word meanings. It presents several letters of the target word, along with blanks indicating several other missing letters. In addition, a clue about the word's meaning is presented, and the examinee must use the configuration of the word along with the clue to identify the target word. Auditory Comprehension requires listening to a recording of a news story and then answering questions about the story. Double Meanings presents two sets of word clues, and the examinee must find a word that is closely related to both word clues. Famous Faces, an alternate subtest, involves identifying the names of famous individuals based on a photograph and a verbal clue.

The Fluid Scale includes four subtests. Rebus Learning requires the examinee to associate a word or concept with various rebus drawings. “Sentences” of rebuses are then presented, and the examinee must interpret the sentence using only the rebuses. Logical Steps involves logical reasoning skills based on visual and auditory premises. Based on the premises given, the examinee must respond to a series of questions by applying logical reasoning skills. Mystery Codes requires the examinee to identify specific codes associated with a picture and then deduce a code for a novel picture based on the preceding codes and pictures. This task involves a timed component. Memory for Block Designs is an alternate subtest for the Fluid Scale. An abstract design is briefly presented to the examinee and subsequently removed. The examinee must recall the design and reproduce it using six cubes. This measure is also timed.

Additional subtests include Rebus Delay Recall and Auditory Delayed Recall. These measures assess the ability to recall the previously learned rebuses after 45 minutes and the ability to recall the previously presented news story after 25 minutes, respectively.

Despite its excellent initial normative data, there do not appear to be revised normative data available to reflect changing census demographics. The measure consists of a number of novel, theoretically based tests, but unfortunately, relatively few research studies have employed the KAIT. The integration between assessment of both intellectual and neuropsychological abilities is highly appealing, particularly for older adults. Updated normative data and/or a revised version of the KAIT may enhance its utility in the future. Nevertheless, consideration should be given to the KAIT in research settings where assessment of fluid and crystallized intellectual skills are of interest.

Results and Comments

Much of the work employing confidence ratings to assess online judgments of accuracy has been carried out with cognitive tests. In our empirical work, we have employed virtually all types of cognitive tests used in studies of fluid (Gf) and crystallized (Gc) intelligence (see Carroll, 1993). These included measures of higher mental processes, such as memory, creative and critical thinking, and perceptual tests from visual, auditory, tactile, kinesthetic and movement/sport, olfactory and gustatory modalities. Perceptual tests, like the Line Length test (Kleitman & Stankov, 2001; Stankov, Pallier et al., 2012) can be used in studies of developmental changes during childhood since measures of Gf and Gc may be much more sensitive to age-related changes during childhood.

Although psychometric properties of online measures of confidence are satisfactory, some educational psychologists have been reluctant to embrace their use. A common reason appears to be the perceived close temporal proximity between the cognitive activity of solving a problem and confidence in the accuracy of the solution itself. It seems that those holding such views fail to appreciate empirical evidence showing that typical correlations of .40 to .60 between accuracy and confidence are similar in size to the correlations between measures of fluid and crystallized intelligence and that a separate confidence factor has been repeatedly reported (e.g., Stankov, 2000).

Below we present two scale examples employing different online measures of confidence. The first, the Proverbs Matching Test – a subtest of the Stankov Test of Cognitive Ability (STOCA) battery that measures both crystallized and fluid intelligence – uses a discrete, categorical, numerical scale (Stankov & Dolph, 2000). The second, the Future Life Events Scale (Kleitman, 2008; Kleitman & Stankov, 2007), employs a discrete verbal scale based on Sureness, rather than confidence itself. The sureness scale is presented here in order to illustrate that cognitive processing may be minimal, and yet the validity of the Sureness scale is comparable to the online assessment used in the Proverbs Matching Test.

Proverbs Matching Test

Directions:

In this test you will be given proverbs. Your task is to choose a proverb that is the closest in meaning to the first. Here is an example:

‘Birds of a feather flock together.’

Opposites attract

Tell me what company you keep and I will tell you who you are

There is little friendship in the world and least of all between equals

To check an elephant, inspect its tail

Shared joy is doubled joy

In this example the correct answer is (b) since ‘Tell me what company you keep and I will tell you who you are’ is closer in meaning to the ‘Birds of a feather flock together’ than any other alternative answer.

After each item you will be asked to state how confident you are that your answer is correct. A guess corresponds closely to 0% confidence so you should give this as your rating. Absolute certainty corresponds to 100% confidence. Please make your choice from the ratings provided on the sheet. Please work as quickly and accurately as you can.

The truth is immortal, but the man who tells the truth will become dead.

Truth lies at the bottom of a well.

Better a lie that heals than a truth that wounds.

One is always wrong, but with two, truth begins.

Truth is mighty and will prevail.

The truth of a word depends on how you understand it.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

A fisherman of shallow seas uses a short line; a fisherman of deeper seas uses a long line.

No bird soars too high, if she soars with her own wings.

Those who say it cannot be done are usually interrupted by others doing it.

You will only reach as far as you aim and prepare yourself to reach.

Vision is not seeing things as they are, but as they will be.

One can never consent to creep when one feels an impulse to soar.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Empty vessels make the most sound.

Tall trees often have shallow roots.

Still waters run deep.

A tiger hides its claws.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

If the beard were all, goats might preach.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Virtue is its own reward

Some rise by sin, others by virtue fall.

There are no fans in hell.

In social life, we please more often by our vices than our virtues.

Be good and you will be lonesome.

Virtue is goodness, not material or money.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

The journey of a thousand miles begins with one step.

To travel hopefully is better than to arrive.

Traveler, there is no trail: you blaze the trail as you travel.

A man travels the world over in search of what he needs and returns home to find it.

One may not reach the dawn save by the path of night.

He who is outside the door already has a good part of the trip behind him.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Better to understand little than to misunderstand a lot.

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.

The opinion of the intelligent is better than the certainty of the ignorant.

A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.

What he doesn't know would make a library anybody would be proud of.

It isn't what a man doesn't know that makes him a fool, but what he does know that isn't so.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

A careless watch invites the thief.

A full cup must be carried steadily.

A greedy eye never got a good bargain.

He that shows his purse longs to be rid of it.

Everyone carries a fool under his coat, but some hide it better than others.

Great possessions depend on fate; small possessions come from diligence.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Silence is one great art of conversation

Silence is the only thing that can't be misquoted.

When the mouth stumbles, it is worse than the foot.

When you are arguing with an idiot, make sure the other person isn't doing the same thing.

Silence is the ultimate weapon of power.

You can win more friends with your ear than you can with your mouth.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

The smallest leak sinks the largest ship.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

Do not draw your sword to kill a gnat.

The fish which you did not catch is always big.

The pitcher goes so often to the well that it is broken at last.

The last straw breaks the camel’s back.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

In prosperity our friends know us; in adversity we know our friends.

Never speak ill of yourself; your friends will always say enough on that subject.

A real friend is one who walks in when the rest of the world walks out.

He who whips the dog of a friend whips the friend himself.

A good friend is worth more than money in your pocket.

A friend is someone that won't begin to talk behind your back the minute you leave the room.

How confident are you that your answer is correct?

20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%

Future Life Events Scale

This scale will ask you to state what you believe the chance of a particular thing happening in future to be. You will also be asked to indicate how sure you are about your opinion.

The following statements describe various events that may or may not happen. On a scale between 0 and 100, please indicate how likely each event is to occur. Thus, if you felt that an event was very likely, you should write a number close to 100; if you felt an event was very unlikely, you’d write a number close to 0; and you felt an event was about equally likely and unlikely, you’d write a number close to 50.

We also want you to indicate how sure you are of your opinion. Please circle one of the options next to the sentence after you completed it.

Each question is accompanied by the following rating scale:

Not sure at allSlightly sureModerately sureQuite sureVery sure□□□□□

The chances that you’ll be successful in your chosen career are about_______ in 100.

The probability that a cure for cancer will be eventually found is about ________ in 100.

The chance that if you put some effort into mathematical training, you’d be able to do well in mathematics is about _______ in 100.

On average, the chance of passing a driving test at the first attempt is about _______ in 100.

The chances that the problem of terrorism will be solved are about _______ in 100.

The chance that if you put your mind into something, your goals would come true is about ______ in 100.

The chances that virtual reality will become the main entertainment in the future are about _______ in 100.

The probability that the human race will survive for another thousand years is about _____ in 100.

The chance that if you put your mind and effort into solving a problem, you would succeed is about _______ in 100.

The chance that if you open a business it would succeed is about _______ in 100.

Kaufman's Intelligence Batteries

In 1983, the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC; American Guidance Service), an intelligence tests for children ages 2.5–12.5 years, was constructed from a theoretical perspective in which Cattell's distinction between fluid and crystallized intelligence was combined with the Luria's neuropsychological ideas about the importance of simultaneous versus sequential mental processing. Test scores on four intellectual domains can be administered: sequential processing, simultaneous processing, mental processing (which is the first two domains combined), and achievement. The scales have high reliability coefficients. Separate percentile norms have been presented for different ethnic and socioeconomic groups.

Kaufman constructed two other intelligence tests: the Kaufman Adolescent and Adult Intelligence Test (KAIT; 1993) and the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (K-BIT; 1990). The KAIT was designed for the age range 11–85 years. The test has a good reliability. Validity coefficients with WISC-R and WAIS-R can be interpreted as high. The K-BIT was designed as a screening instrument to get a quick estimation of the intelligence level of an examinee. The structure of the test differs from KAIT or K-ABC, consisting of only two subtests: a vocabulary test and a nonverbal subtest for inductive reasoning (matrices). The K-BIT is designed for the age range 4–90 years and takes only 15–20 minutes.

Two-Component Models of Life Span Changes in Intelligence

Two-component models of life span changes in intelligence posit that development of intellectual abilities can be mapped onto biological versus cultural ensembles of influences (see Figure 1). Typical contemporary examples for two-component models are the distinction between fluid and crystallized intelligence advanced by Raymond B. Cattell and John Horn and the decomposition of cognition into mechanics and pragmatics proposed by Paul Baltes. Two-component models of life span changes in intelligence have a long history dating back to Johann Nicolaus Tetens (1736–1807), a philosopher and psychologist of the enlightenment era who noted that well-trained skills are less likely to decline with advancing age than the basic abilities underlying their acquisition. Thus, and most importantly, two-component theories dispute the validity of a unitary general intelligence construct in understanding intellectual development across the life span. Instead, at least two broad, ontogenetically intertwined but separable categories of abilities are needed to describe the basic properties of intellectual development.

The first collection of intellectual abilities represents measurable outcomes of the influence of the biological component on development. It manifests itself in cognitive processes involving extrapolation, reorganization, and transformation of novel information (i.e., reasoning) and in basic information processes such as working memory (i.e., the ability to maintain information online while manipulating it), processing speed (i.e., the speed with which elementary processing operations can be performed), and cognitive control (i.e., the top-down coordination and control of lower-level processing). Henceforth, these processes are referred to as the fluid mechanics of intelligence.

The second, more disparate category of intellectual abilities refers to procedural and declarative knowledge common to a given culture (e.g., verbal knowledge), but also to specialized and sometimes highly idiosyncratic (person-specific) knowledge such as occupational expertise, as well as to knowledge about the meaning and conduct of life. Henceforth, these processes are referred to as the crystallized pragmatics of intelligence. For examples of specific abilities and functions related to each of the two components, see Figure 2.

Diversity of Tests

One perplexing fact about intelligence tests today is that the experts do not agree on the nature of intelligence or how many kinds of intelligence exist. Spearman and Burt argued that there was just one important kind—general intelligence. Raymond Cattell claimed there were two, fluid and crystallized intelligence. Robert Sternberg opts for a three-part (triarchic) conceptualization. Leon Thurstone believed that seven different factors combine to make a person intelligent. Howard Gardner sees evidence of perhaps eight and maybe even more kinds of intelligence. Daniel Goleman argues for the existence of emotional and cognitive intelligence. Many of the major theorists devised their own tests to tap the abilities featured in the theories. When the same children take two of these tests, there is usually a substantial positive correlation between the scores, but it never approaches a perfect correlation. Each test seems to weight the various features of the human mind a little differently.

Unlike the profession of psychiatry where there has been a decade-long effort to formulate a common diagnostic terminology and criteria, embodied in the DSM and ICD, psychology has its own professional organizations, usually a main one in each country, but no consensus version of an intelligence test to recommend. Instead, scientific psychology has developed an elaborate technology for constructing, evaluating, and using psychological tests. The American Psychological Association provides a number of standards for professional practice and education that are considered mandatory, but the APA website states emphatically that “APA's Testing Office does not maintain, sell, or endorse any tests.” The Buros Center at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln publishes a massive Mental Measurements Yearbook (Carlson, Geisinger, & Jonson, 2017) with in-depth reviews of many tests.

After more than 100 years of experience with many kinds of tests, there is at least a consensus that several of them are reasonably good (Table 15.3). They have been revised several times to correct shortcomings and restandardized to reflect continuing changes in the population of people where they will be applied. A full kit including a detailed instruction manual with norms and scoring sheets can be purchased from commercial websites, and several of them are making available much less costly versions that can be administered and scored via the Internet.

Table 15.3. Current Intelligence Tests

Test nameEditionStandardization sampleAges (years)Time (min)Bayley Scales of Infant Development314091–42 months30–90Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children230253–1825–55Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test2Based on US census4–9020Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test—Individual215005–1725–30Raven's Colored Progressive Matrices2003No norms5–1115–30Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales548002–8550Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children522006–1660Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale4220016–9060–90

What is crystallized vs fluid intelligence?

What does crystallized intelligence refers to?

What is fluid and crystallized intelligence quizlet?

What does fluid intelligence refers to?