Interactive Effects of Educational Level and Gender on Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction Scores: A Comparative Study

This study aimed to investigate the interactive effects of educational level and gender on the Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction (JCTI) scores. A sample of 251 participants aged 10 to 26 years (172 males and 79 females) was divided into middle and high school male (M-MHS) and female (F-MHS) students, and college male (M-Col.) and female (F-Col.) students. Statistical analyses included Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and unpaired t-tests, followed by post hoc analyses using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD), Scheffé, and Bonferroni and Holm procedures. Results revealed no significant differences in JCTI scores between male and female middle and high school students. However, a significant difference was found between male and female college students, with males outperforming females. Additionally, significant differences were observed between middle and high school students and their respective college counterparts, regardless of gender. These findings contribute to the understanding of the development of cognitive abilities and the role of gender across educational levels. Future research should address study limitations and examine additional factors that may influence the interactive effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores.

JCTI, educational level, gender differences, cognitive performance, inductive reasoning, statistical analysis

Psychometric tests are commonly used to assess individual differences in cognitive abilities and to predict various educational and professional outcomes. The Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction (JCTI) is a measure of inductive reasoning, which is considered a fundamental aspect of intelligence (Carroll, 1993). Previous research has examined the role of demographic factors, such as educational level and gender, in influencing cognitive performance on psychometric tests (Halpern, 2000; Hyde, 2005; Voyer et al., 1995). However, the interactive effects of these factors on JCTI scores remain relatively unexplored. The present study aims to address this gap by investigating the effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores among middle and high school students and college students.

Previous research has provided mixed findings regarding the influence of gender on cognitive performance. While some studies have reported no significant gender differences in problem-solving abilities during adolescence (Halpern, 2000; Hyde, 2005; Hyde et al., 1990), others have found gender differences in specific cognitive domains, such as visuospatial and mathematical reasoning, favoring males at higher educational levels (Voyer et al., 1995; Hedges & Nowell, 1995). These inconsistent findings highlight the need for further research to elucidate the role of gender in shaping cognitive performance across different educational levels.

In addition to gender, educational level has been found to influence cognitive performance, with individuals at higher educational levels generally exhibiting better performance on cognitive tests (Ceci, 1991; Neisser et al., 1996). However, the interactive effects of educational level and gender on cognitive performance remain poorly understood. By examining the combined effects of these factors on JCTI scores, the present study aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the demographic factors that contribute to individual differences in cognitive abilities.

The study's research question is: How do educational level and gender interact to influence JCTI scores among middle and high school students and college students? Based on the literature, we hypothesize that there will be no significant gender differences in JCTI scores among middle and high school students, while gender differences will be more pronounced at the college level, with male students outperforming female students.

This study is significant for several reasons. First, it contributes to the existing literature on the influence of demographic factors on cognitive performance, particularly regarding the interactive effects of educational level and gender. Second, the findings have practical implications for educational interventions and policies aimed at reducing gender disparities in cognitive performance. Finally, the study provides valuable information for scholars in the field of psychometrics to improve the development and validation of cognitive tests, such as the JCTI, in diverse populations.

Method

Research Design

The present study employed a quantitative, cross-sectional research design to investigate the interactive effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores. This design was chosen because it allowed for the examination of relationships between variables within a specific point in time (Creswell, 2013).

Participants

The sample consisted of 251 participants aged 10 to 26 years, including 172 males and 79 females. Demographic information, such as age, gender, and ethnicity, was collected using a demographic questionnaire. The study utilized convenience sampling to recruit participants, with the only inclusion criterion being enrollment in middle school, high school, or college.

Materials

The primary measure used in this study was the Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction (JCTI; Jouve, 2010), a standardized measure of inductive reasoning. The JCTI consists of 52 multiple-choice items and has been validated for use with individuals aged 10 to 26 years. The JCTI has demonstrated good reliability in previous research (Jouve, 2010).

Procedures

Participants completed the demographic questionnaire and JCTI in a quiet, controlled environment under the supervision of trained research assistants. Prior to beginning the JCTI, participants were provided with standardized instructions and an opportunity to ask questions. To ensure data quality, research assistants monitored participants throughout the data collection process and provided clarification when needed.

Statistical Analyses

Data were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA; Keppel & Wickens, 2004) single factor and unpaired t-tests to examine the interactive effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores. Post hoc analyses were conducted using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD; Tukey, 1977), Scheffé (Scheffé, 1953), and Bonferroni and Holm procedures (Holm, 1979). Statistical significance was set at the 0.05 level for all analyses, following recommendations by Cohen (1992).

Results

To examine the interactive effects of educational level and gender on the Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction (JCTI), raw scores were analyzed using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) single factor and unpaired t-tests. Additionally, post hoc analyses were conducted using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD), Scheffé, and Bonferroni and Holm procedures. The sample consisted of 251 participants aged 10 to 26 years, with 172 males and 79 females. The comparisons were made between middle and high school male (M-MHS) and female (F-MHS) students and college male (M-Col.) and female (F-Col.) students.

Middle and High School (MHS) Results

The analysis of the JCTI scores for middle and high school students was conducted using a single-factor ANOVA and unpaired t-tests to compare the means between the male and female groups. The male middle and high school students (M-MHS) had a mean JCTI score of 26.39 with a standard deviation of 11.53, while the female middle and high school students (F-MHS) had a mean score of 21.68 with a standard deviation of 12.34.

The ANOVA results showed that the between-group variance (F(1, 101) = 3.78) was not significant at the 0.05 level (p = 0.055). Similarly, the unpaired t-test results indicated that the difference in the means between the M-MHS and F-MHS groups was not statistically significant (t(101) = 1.94, p = 0.055). This implies that the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant difference between the JCTI scores of male and female students at the middle and high school levels cannot be rejected.

The 95% confidence interval for the mean difference between the M-MHS and F-MHS groups was calculated to further understand the relationship between the two groups. The confidence interval ranged from -9.54 to 0.10, which means that we can be 95% confident that the true difference in the population means falls within this range. Given that the confidence interval includes zero, it supports the finding that there is no significant difference between the JCTI scores of male and female middle and high school students.

College (Col.) Results

The JCTI scores for college students were analyzed using a single-factor ANOVA and unpaired t-tests to compare the means between the male and female groups. The male college students (M-Col.) had a mean JCTI score of 34.40 with a standard deviation of 10.11, while the female college students (F-Col.) had a mean score of 28.10 with a standard deviation of 10.76.

The ANOVA results demonstrated that the between-group variance was significant (F(1, 146) = 11.27, p = 0.001), indicating that there was a significant difference between the JCTI scores of the M-Col. and F-Col. groups. Consistently, the unpaired t-test results also showed a statistically significant difference in the means between the M-Col. and F-Col. groups (t(146) = 3.36, p = 0.001). This implies that the null hypothesis stating that there is no significant difference between the JCTI scores of male and female students at the college level can be rejected.

To better understand the relationship between the two groups, the 95% confidence interval for the mean difference between the M-Col. and F-Col. groups was calculated. The confidence interval ranged from -10.01 to -2.59, which means that we can be 95% confident that the true difference in the population means falls within this range. Given that the confidence interval does not include zero, it supports the finding that there is a significant difference between the JCTI scores of male and female college students.

All Groups Together

When the JCTI scores were analyzed for all groups together, the ANOVA results indicated that there were significant differences among the four groups (F(3, 247) = 15.36, p < 0.001). Post-hoc analyses were conducted using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD), Bonferroni, and Holm procedures to further examine these differences and determine which group pairs had statistically significant differences in their means.

Tukey's HSD results revealed that there were significant differences in JCTI scores between the F-MHS and F-Col. groups (p < 0.05) and between the F-Col. and M-Col. groups (p < 0.01). Additionally, the differences between the F-MHS and M-Col. groups (p < 0.01) and between the M-MHS and M-Col. groups (p < 0.01) were found to be significant according to all post hoc procedures (Tukey's HSD, Bonferroni, and Holm).

Bonferroni and Holm's procedures further confirmed these results, showing significant differences between F-MHS and F-Col. (p < 0.05), F-MHS and M-Col. (p < 0.01), M-MHS and M-Col. (p < 0.01), and F-Col. and M-Col. (p < 0.01). The comparisons between F-MHS and M-MHS, and M-MHS and F-Col., however, were not found to be significant according to any of the post hoc tests.

Discussion

Interpretation of Results and Relation to Previous Research

The present study aimed to investigate the interactive effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores. Consistent with our hypotheses, the findings revealed no significant difference in JCTI scores between male and female middle and high school students, suggesting that gender does not have a substantial influence on cognitive performance at this educational level. This result aligns with previous research, which has also reported no significant gender differences in problem-solving abilities during adolescence (e.g., Halpern, 2000; Hyde, 2005; Hyde et al., 1990).

In contrast, our results showed that gender differences in JCTI scores become more pronounced at the college level, with male students outperforming their female counterparts. This finding is consistent with several studies that have reported gender differences in specific cognitive domains, such as visuospatial and mathematical reasoning, favoring males at higher educational levels (e.g., Voyer, Voyer, & Bryden, 1995; Hedges & Nowell, 1995). However, it is worth noting that some research has reported either no gender differences or even female advantages in other cognitive domains, such as verbal abilities and episodic memory (e.g., Herlitz & Rehnman, 2008; Hyde & Linn, 1988). These mixed results highlight the complexity of the relationship between gender and cognitive abilities and suggest that the observed gender differences in JCTI scores may be domain-specific.

Implications for Theory, Practice, and Future Research

The observed gender differences in JCTI scores among college students have important implications for both theory and practice. From a theoretical perspective, the results contribute to our understanding of the development of cognitive abilities and the role of gender in shaping cognitive performance across educational levels. The findings also underscore the need for further investigation of the underlying mechanisms responsible for the observed gender differences, such as biological, social, and cultural factors.

From a practical standpoint, the results may have implications for educational interventions and policies aimed at reducing gender disparities in cognitive performance. For example, educators and policymakers could design and implement targeted interventions to support female college students in developing the cognitive skills assessed by the JCTI, such as inductive and deductive reasoning. Additionally, further research is needed to explore the specific factors that contribute to the observed gender differences in JCTI scores among college students, such as differences in learning experiences, motivation, or self-efficacy. Understanding these factors could help inform the development of effective strategies to reduce gender disparities in cognitive performance and promote greater equity in educational outcomes.

Despite the study's contributions, there are several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. As mentioned earlier, the sample size was relatively small, particularly for the female groups, which may limit the generalizability of the results. Furthermore, other factors that may influence JCTI scores, such as socioeconomic status or cultural background, were not considered in this study. Future research should address these limitations by using larger and more diverse samples, as well as by examining the interactive effects of educational level, gender, and other potentially relevant factors on JCTI scores.

Conclusion

This study examined the interactive effects of educational level and gender on JCTI scores, revealing no significant difference between male and female middle and high school students, indicating that gender does not significantly impact cognitive performance at these levels. However, results demonstrated a significant difference in JCTI scores between male and female college students, with males outperforming females, suggesting that gender differences become more pronounced at higher educational levels.

These findings have implications for both theoretical understanding and practical interventions in the field of cognitive performance and educational outcomes. The results emphasize the need for further exploration of the underlying mechanisms responsible for these gender differences and may inform the development of targeted strategies to address disparities in cognitive performance.

The study's limitations include a relatively small sample size and a lack of consideration for other potentially influencing factors, such as socioeconomic status or cultural background. Future research should address these limitations and further investigate the interactive effects of educational level, gender, and other relevant factors on JCTI scores. Ultimately, understanding these relationships can contribute to promoting greater equity in educational outcomes and cognitive performance across genders.

References

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312

Ceci, S. J. (1991). How much does schooling influence general intelligence and its cognitive components? A reassessment of the evidence. Developmental Psychology, 27(5), 703–722. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.27.5.703 

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155-159. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155 

Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 

Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269(5220), 41–45. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7604277 

Herlitz, A., & Rehnman, J. (2008). Sex Differences in Episodic Memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 52–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00547.x 

Holm, S. (1979). A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6(2), 65–70. 

Hyde, J. S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. J. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.139 

Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.104.1.53 

Hyde J. S. (2005). The gender similarities hypothesis. The American psychologist, 60(6), 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.6.581 

Jouve, X. (2010). Evaluating the Reliability of the Jouve Cerebrals Test of Induction: A Psychometric Analysis. Retrieved from https://cogniqblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/reliability-coefficients-and-standard.html 

Keppel, G., & Wickens, T. D. (2004). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (4th ed.). New York: Pearson. 

Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., Halpern, D. F., Loehlin, J. C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R. J., & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77 

Scheffé, H. (1953). A method for judging all contrasts in the analysis of variance. Biometrika, 40(1-2), 87-110. 

Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory Data Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 

Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. Psychological bulletin, 117(2), 250–270. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.250