Reasoning tests are the predominant individual tests (as opposed to test batteries) for measuring intelligence, because reasoning ability is closely linked to the g-factor of intelligence. However, when using these tests, method effects such as the item-position effect and, in the case of time limits, the effect of speededness can distort the interpretation of the test results. In this area of research, we investigate how these effects can be represented at the latent level using fixed-link models within the framework of confirmatory factor analysis. On the one hand, this statistical control enables an adjusted and therefore more valid assessment of reasoning ability. On the other hand, the psychological meaning of these method effects can be empirically investigated through their explicit representation. For example, the item position effect is associated with learning the rules underlying the items. However, the final clarification of its significance is still open. Furthermore, controlling for the effect of speededness seems to change the established relationships between cognitive processing speed and psychometric intelligence.
Current Studies on this Research Area:
Borter, N., Schlegel, K., & Troche, S. J. (2023). How Speededness of a Reasoning Test and the Complexity of Mental Speed Tasks Influence the Relation between Mental Speed and Reasoning Ability. Journal of Intelligence, 11(5), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11050089
von Gugelberg, H. M., Schweizer, K., & Troche, S. J. (2021). The dual mechanisms of cognitive control and their relation to reasoning and the item-position effect. Acta Psychologica, 221, 103448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103448
Schweizer, K., & Troche, S. (2019). The EV scaling method for variances of latent variables. Methodology, 15(4), 175-184. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241/a000179
Schweizer, K. & Troche, S. (2018). Is the factor observed in investigations on the item-position effect actually the difficulty factor? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 78(1), 46-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164416670711
