The TLAP-R (Jouve, 2013) is an untimed, non-verbal reasoning test prepared with perceptual material. It consists in 8 matrices, each one including 6 lines of 15 patterns of which 4 have been deleted. The examinee is asked to find the 4 missing patterns. The first version (limited to 5 matrices) of this test has been prepared by Xavier Jouve in mid 2000 for a research project.
The chiefly involved cognitive process mostly depends on fluid intelligence and the test is minimal-knowledge based. The material used to prepare the matrices is numerical but not heavily mathematically based so that the TLAP-R is suitable to assess any person with only basic arithmetic knowledge.
In order to complete the matrices, to find which patterns are missing, the TLAP-R requires inductive reasoning. The task requires figuring out a specific logical and governing rule from a chaotic situation. This process has been described by Spearman (1927) who considered it as the requisite for the eductive part of g. However, the TLAP-R showed a strong relationship with crystallized intelligence even without measuring it directly.
The TLAP-R has been administered along with several other tests in order to investigate its validity. Correlations are reported in Table 1.
Advanced Progressive Matrices. The main study has been conducted with the Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM; Raven, Raven & Court, 1998). The APM is a nonverbal figurative reasoning test divided into two sets of items. Only the second set has been used for the purposes of this study. It consists in 36 matrices of 3 lines and 3 columns each. The last pattern of the third line is missing, and 6 choices are given to the subject. Only one of these can logically be chosen to complete the matrix.
The APM compose the test of hardest difficulty among the Raven’s Progressive Matrices: the Colored Progressive Matrices are designed to assess children, the Standard Progressive Matrices aim at appraising average adults and the Advanced Progressive Matrices are dedicated to measure ability in above average adults. However, experience has shown that the APM are of relatively modest difficulty and are more suitable in testing average intelligent individuals rather than the intellectually gifted.
Raven’s tests of matrices have provided with strong evidence over years of being very appropriate measures of fluid intelligence and are usually used as criterion when the validity of an experimental questionnaire needs to be checked.
Both tests were administered to two samples of 62 and 65 individuals respectively. In the first sample, the APM were used under 30 minutes limited time conditions, and in the second one, examinees were asked to work on the APM during no more than 40 minutes.
As expected, the TLAP-R shown high correlations with the Raven’s test with a closer relationship when the APM are less strictly timed. In fact, the more restrictive the time limit, the more important the part taken by cognitive speediness. The TLAP-R and the APM correlated above .70 in both groups. The TLAP-R and 30 min timed APM correlation was the lowest at .73. When administered in less than 40 minutes, the correlation between these two nonverbal tests increased to .80. This is seen as very high and indicates the measurement of very closely related constructs.
Further analysis might be done using the APM without limiting the time of test-taking. Based on actual results, we may reasonably expect an even greater figure.
College admission tests. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) is a standardized, three-hour test that measures verbal and mathematical reasoning abilities that students develop over time, both in and out of school. Many colleges and universities use the SAT for admission purposes because it helps to predict successful performance in college. Moreover, the SAT, which was initially developed after an IQ test (Lemann, 1999) and despite of successive revisions, is still strongly correlated to traditional intelligence measures (Frey & Detterman, 2003; Jouve, 2010, 2011).
The recentered SAT (SAT I), used between 1995 and 2005, was divided into two sections, (i) a verbal part with emphasis on critical reading in which vocabulary was tested in the context of reading passages and in analogy and sentence-completion questions and (ii) a mathematical part with emphasis on data interpretation and applied math questions in which calculators were permitted but not required.
The American College Test (ACT) is a battery that intends to assess students acquired educational and self-developed competencies. It is composed of four subtests: English and Reading as measures of verbal domains, Mathematics and Science as measures of quantitative domains.
Scaled on a 36 points standardized metric, each subtest yield with a domain score and a composite score is also provided for evaluating the student’s overall performance. Correlations between the ACT and the SAT are repeatedly reported as being very high.
A group of 25 persons, mostly students, were administered the SAT I before taking the TLAP-R. All correlations were adjusted for restriction of range (McNemar, 1969). The TLAP-R – SAT I Verbal was the lowest at .40. The raw TLAP-R score correlated at .72 with the SAT I composite but the highest value was observed with the Mathematical reasoning scale of the SAT I (.80).
Another cohort of 20 examinees reported their ACT scores. Unfortunately, not all the subtest scores were known consequently the correlations between the TLAP-R and the ACT subtests have not been analyzed. Nonetheless, the TLAP-R and the ACT composite were seen to correlate highly. The result was .79, which is comparable to that of the TLAP-R – SAT I composite relationship.
Because of the relatively small samples, the results of this study would benefit from the gathering of more testees. However, the correlations that were obtained are somewhat coherent with the content of the TLAP-R. These findings suggest that a significant proximity exists between the latent construct measured by the TLAP-R and achievement or more generally, crystallized intelligence.
Culture Fair Intelligence Tests & Bonnardel ”Loi des Séries”. The Culture Fair Intelligence Tests (CFIT; Cattell, Krug & Barton, 1973) were developed to measure fluid intelligence according to their author’s theory of mental abilities (Cattell, 1971). Two scales of CFIT exists: scale 2 aiming at assessing children and adults of average ability and scale 3 that is suitable to evaluate higher levels of intelligence. Both scales are split into two forms. Only form A of the second (CFIT-2A) and the third scale (CFIT-3A) have been used in this study.
Each form of the CFIT scales consists in four types of visual problems: Series, Classifications, Matrices and Conditions. The CFIT are severely timed and include from the fact a measure of cognitive speediness along with the desired evaluation of fluid intelligence: for example, the 50 items of the CFIT-3A are to be completed within 12 and half minutes.
The Bonnardel ”Loi des Séries” (BLS4; Thiébaut, 2000) or Law of Sequences is just like the CFIT, a measure of nonverbal figurative reasoning that uses a short time to be administered (10 min). Among Bonnardel’s tests, the BLS4 is the one dedicated to the assessment of highly able individuals. In subjects of average ability, the B53 is more appropriate.
The BLS4 consists in 30 visual sequences arranged in ascending order of difficulty. The examinee has to choose among 6 answers the one that correctly follows a 3 patterns sequence. Each given answer includes 2 additional patterns.
Correlations between the TLAP-R and these tests of nonverbal ability are all three of similar magnitude. Given the fact that the Bonnardel’s and both Cattell’s tests are very close in their respective contents and test-taking conditions; a comparable level of relationships was expected. We observed mid-.60 values of Pearson coefficient: the TLAP-R – BLS4-2T correlation was the highest (.67) while the TLAP-R – CFIT-2A being the lowest (.64). These findings indicate that the TLAP-R has a strong predictive value for non-language ratiocination when a quick response is required.
Slosson Intelligence Test. The Slosson Intelligence Test-Revised (SIT-R; Slosson, 1998) is a test prepared for evaluating crystallized verbal intelligence in natives English (children and adults). The 187 SIT-R items are derived from the following cognitive domains: Information, Comprehension, Arithmetic, Similarities and Differences, Vocabulary and Auditory Memory.
Standardized on 2,000 individuals, approximating the contemporary U.S. census, the SIT-R uses a deviation IQ (SD = 16). The SIT-R provides a complement to other educational assessments that look at learning ability, readiness or achievement.
As can be seen in Table 1, the raw scores from both the TLAP-R and the SIT-R were seen to correlate highly (.69) in a cohort of 69 persons. This finding supports the use of the TLAP-R as a measure of general cognitive functioning rather than solely an indication of one’s non-language reasoning.
Jouve Numerical Appraisal Test, Jouve “Test des Proverbes” & Short Term Memory Retention Test. Three other relationships were investigated with ad-hoc, circumstantially prepared tests in samples of native French speakers.
The Jouve Numerical Appraisal Test (JNAT; Jouve, 2002) was prepared with 28 numerical sequences of mixed mathematically demanding skill levels. It was to be taken within less than 10 minutes, making it hard to finish. Although not many studies were conducted on the JNAT, it was seen to be a reliable measure: the corrected split-half coefficient for the JNAT raw scores was .89 (N = 65), which is high and appropriate for psychological measurement (Aiken, 2000; Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994).
The Jouve “Test des Proverbes” (JPROV; Jouve, 2003), or Test of Proverbs was a verbal comprehension and knowledge test designed with 3 distinct grids, each one including 10 proverbs along with 10 meanings. The subject was asked to link proverbs and corresponding meanings together during a 10-min period. The JPROV proved to be suitable for assessing in low to average ranges of mental ability: an unselected subject would approximately score 21 or 22 out of 30.
Psychometric properties of the JPROV items have been analyzed with the 2-Parameters Logistic Model and Multi-Dimensional Scaling. Furthermore, the raw score shown a very satisfactory reliability level (Spearman-Brown = .91, N = 212), and as a matter of validity, it correlated significantly with that of the CFIT-2A (r = .53, N = 175).
A third experimental measure served to perform this study: the Short-Term Memory Retention Test (STMRT; Jouve, 2000). It was was a test developed after Peterson and Peterson’s paradigm (1959) with the aim of measuring the retention of verbal items in short-term memory. The examinee needed to look at 10 lines of 4 unrelated letters each during 2 and half minutes, with the instruction of memorizing those quadrigrams. Once the time was over, the subject was asked, during an equivalent period of time, to take a paper-and-pencil task of symbol search as manner of distracting memorization before having to recall the letters as best possible. The symbol search part of the test was prepared with three given symbols to be encircled each time they were repeated into a 40×40 matrix of look-alike items.
The TLAP-R demonstrated significant linkage with both the JNAT and the JPROV. Interestingly, although the numerical content of the TLAP-R would have led to expect a slightly higher correlation with the JNAT, which is numerically oriented; the contrary was observed with a TLAP-R – JNAT correlation of .40, and a TLAP-R – JPROV correlation of .45. About the STMRT, as presented in Table 1, a low positive correlation (.19) was obtained by studying the relationship with the TLAP-R. These findings suggest that the TLAP-R can predict to some extent one’s ability in verbally and mathematically oriented domains, and does not appear to be particularly mathematically biased. Moreover, the TLAP-R is apparently independent to working memory.
References
Aiken, L. R. (2000). Psychological testing and assessment (10th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their Structure, Growth and Action. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Cattell, R. B., Krug, S. E., & Barton, K. (1973). Measuring Intelligence with the Culture Fair Tests. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.
Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2003). Scholastic Assessment Test and g: The Relationship Between the Scholastic Assessment Test and General Cognitive Ability. Psychological Science, 15(6), 333-378.
Jouve, X. (2000). Test de Rétention en Mémoire à Court Terme (Short Term Memory Retention Test, STMRT). Unpublished manuscript.
Jouve, X. (2002). Jouve Numerical Appraisal Test (JNAT). Unpublished manuscript.
Jouve, X. (2003). JPROV. Le Test des Proverbes : Brochure. Unpublished manuscript.
Jouve, X. (2010). Principal components factor analysis for the JCTI and SAT relationship. Retrieved from http://www.cogn-iq.org/archives/28
Jouve, X. (2011). Correlations between the JCCES and other measures. (2nd ed.). Retrieved from http://www.cogn-iq.org/archives/633
Jouve, X. (2013). TLAP: Revised. Retrieved from http://www.cerebrals.org/tlap/
Lemann, N. (1999). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy.
New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
McNemar , Q. (1949). Psychological statistics. New York, NY: Wiley.
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Peterson, L. R., Peterson, M. J. (1959). Short Term Retention of Individual Verbal Items. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 193-198.
Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Raven Manual: Sec. 4. Advanced Progressive Matrices (1998 ed.). Oxford: Oxford Psychologists Press.
Slosson, R. L. (1998). Slosson Intelligence Test Revised (SIT-R) For Children and Adults, Technical Manual, Calibrated Norms Tables. East Aurora, NY: Slosson Educational Publications, Inc.
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man. New York, NY: McMillan.
Thiébaut, E. (2000). Les Bonnardel : Les tests de raisonnement. Paris: Editions et Applications Psychologiques.
Xavier Jouve
Xavier Jouve, Ph.D. is a former psychometrician, author of the Epreuve de Performance Cognitive (EPC), a test published by the Editions du Centre de Psychologie Appliquée (Paris), the French branch of Pearson Education, Inc. Among others, he is a member of the Psychometric Society. Expertise: test development, cognitive abilities, giftedness, verbal reasoning, numerical culture fair sequences, IRT, MDS
Follow Me:
