What makes an intelligence test valid

Binet, A. A method of measuring the development of the intelligence of young children 3rd ed. Bink, M. Cognitive regularities in creative activity. Review of General Psychology, 4 1 , 59— Brody, N. Construct validation of the Sternberg Triarchic abilities test: Comment and reanalysis. Intelligence, 31 4 , — What cognitive intelligence is and what emotional intelligence is not.

Psychological Inquiry, 15, — Brooks-Gunn, J. The effects of poverty on children. The Future of Children, 7 2 , 55— Ceci, S. How much does schooling influence general intelligence and its cognitive components? A reassessment of the evidence. Developmental Psychology, 27 5 , — Schooling, intelligence, and income. American Psychologist, 52 10 , — Deary, I. Reaction times and intelligence differences: A population-based cohort study. Intelligence, 29 5 , — The impact of childhood intelligence on later life: Following up the Scottish mental surveys of and Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86 1 , — Duncan, J.

A neural basis for general intelligence. Science, , — Eigsti, I. Predicting cognitive control from preschool to late adolescence and young adulthood. Psychological Science, 17 6 , — Ericsson, K. The scientific study of expert levels of performance: General implications for optimal learning and creativity.

High Ability Studies, 9 1 , 75— Feldman-Barrett, L. The wisdom in feeling: Psychological processes in emotional intelligence. Flynn, J. Searching for justice: The discovery of IQ gains over time. American Psychologist, 54 1 , 5— Intelligence, 37 1 , 94— Frey, M. Scholastic assessment or g? The relationship between the scholastic assessment test and general cognitive ability. Psychological Science, 15 6 , — Furnham, A. Personality and intelligence as predictors of creativity.

Personality and Individual Differences, 45 7 , — Gardner, H. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. Garlick, D.

Integrating brain science research with intelligence research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12 5 , — Gottfredson, L.

Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history and bibliography. Intelligence, 24 1 , 13— Dissecting practical intelligence theory: Its claims and evidence. Haier, R. Brain imaging studies of personality: The slow revolution. Stelmack Ed. Intelligence and changes in regional cerebral glucose metabolic rate following learning. Intelligence, 16 3—4 , — Harms, P. Emotional intelligence and transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analysis.

Hennessey, B. Annual Review of Psychology, 61 , — Horn, J. Apprehension, memory, and fluid intelligence decline in adulthood. Research on Aging, 3 1 , 33— Huttenlocher, J.

Environmental input and cognitive growth: A study using time-period comparisons. Child Development, 69 4 , — Kuncel, N. Ginty AT. Construct validity. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine. Springer, New York, NY; Johnson E. Face validity. In: Volkmar FR, ed. Encyclopedia of Autism Spectrum Disorders. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity.

Res Social Adm Pharm. Your Privacy Rights. To change or withdraw your consent choices for VerywellMind. At any time, you can update your settings through the "EU Privacy" link at the bottom of any page.

These choices will be signaled globally to our partners and will not affect browsing data. We and our partners process data to: Actively scan device characteristics for identification. I Accept Show Purposes. Table of Contents View All.

Table of Contents. Content Validity. Criterion-Related Validity. Construct Validity. Face Validity. Reliability vs. Internal and External Validity Internal and external validity are used to determine whether or not the results of an experiment are meaningful. Frequently Asked Questions What is external validity in psychology? What is internal validity in psychology? What is the difference between reliability and validity in psychology? What kind of data measures content validity in psychology?

How do you assure validity in a psychological study? Furthermore, the present study examined typically developing children enrolled in regular school with slightly higher intelligence. Thus, the conclusions based on the current study cannot be generalized to children with special needs or with different intelligence levels. To examine the predictive validity of the present intelligence tests, future studies are required with larger sample sizes and including children with different levels of intelligence e.

Because of these limitations, conclusions from the current study have to be considered as preliminary. These results support the use of the four intelligence tests for issues raised in psychological practice and reveal their predictive validity on longitudinal scholastic achievement in typically developing school-aged children with slightly higher intelligence.

These results suggest that school grades in mathematics and language can be predicted by intelligence tests depending on their composition of subtests e. Thus, in psychological practice, examiners have to consider the variety of subtests included in a particular intelligence test when making specific predictions of mathematics and language. More studies analyzing larger samples as well as children with different levels of intelligence or special needs are required to replicate and generalize the findings of the current study.

JG and PH contributed to the study design, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data. Drafted and revised the manuscript, gave final approval, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

FS contributed to the study design and acquisition of data. Revised the manuscript, gave final approval, and agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. AG contributed to the study design and interpretation of data. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Binet, A. Methodes nouvelles pour le diagnostic du niveau intellectuel des anormaux. Canivez, G. Chernick, M. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.

Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Deary, I. Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence 35, 13— Dehn, M. Working Memory and Academic Learning. Assessment and Intervention.

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Google Scholar. Duckworth, A. What no child left behind leaves behind: the roles of IQ and self-control in predicting standardized achievement test scores and report card grades. Efron, B. Bootstrap methods: another look at the jacknife. CrossRef Full Text. Faul, F. Methods 39, — Glutting, J. Grob, A. Bern: Hans Huber. Gut, J. Cognitive, language, mathematical, and socioemotional skills as predictors of subsequent school performance.

A contextualized view on long-term predictors of academic performance. Hagmann-von Arx, P. Seifried, S. Drewes, and M. Hasselhorn Stuttgart: Kohlhammer , — Heller, K. German Cognitive Ability Test — - Revision. Karbach, J. Parental involvement and general cognitive ability as predictors of domain-specific academic achievement in early adolescence.

Mackintosh, N. He says IQ tests do have meaning and are valid measures of intelligence — when they are interpreted correctly. Our field needs to evolve. One of the ways the tests are frequently misinterpreted, according to Dombrowski, is when any score from the test besides the overall IQ is used. IQ tests measure a variety of skills like working memory, fluid reasoning, verbal comprehension and more.

One cognitive scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, says we need to question what IQ tests are actually telling us. Steven Piantadosi uses cross-cultural psychology experiments to study the universal nature of human cognition and language. He says he feels he has a responsibility to speak up against sloppy claims about intelligence, as he recently did in this Twitter thread. Another issue is the cultural bias baked into the nature of the test itself.