مقایسه تست های آزمایشگاهی و حافظه کاری بالینی و پیش بینی آنها از هوش سیال
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|64916||2009||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||9888 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Intelligence, Volume 37, Issue 3, May–June 2009, Pages 283–293
The working memory (WM) construct is conceptualized similarly across domains of psychology, yet the methods used to measure WM function vary widely. The present study examined the relationship between WM measures used in the laboratory and those used in applied settings. A large sample of undergraduates completed three laboratory-based WM measures (operation span, listening span, and n-back), as well as the WM subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III and the Wechsler Memory Scale-III. Performance on all of the WM subtests of the clinical batteries shared positive correlations with the lab measures; however, the Arithmetic and Spatial Span subtests shared lower correlations than the other WM tests. Factor analyses revealed that a factor comprising scores from the three lab WM measures and the clinical subtest, Letter-Number Sequencing (LNS), provided the best measurement of WM. Additionally, a latent variable approach was taken using fluid intelligence as a criterion construct to further discriminate between the WM tests. The results revealed that the lab measures, along with the LNS task, were the best predictors of fluid abilities.