Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:20:02.111Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

22 - Intelligence and Reasoning

from Part V - Intelligence and Information Processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2019

By
Joni M. Lakin  and
Harrison J. Kell
Edited by
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

This chapter discusses and reviews research on the relationship between two closely aligned concepts: intelligence and reasoning. We begin by defining reasoning in a general sense. Next, we review prominent theories and models of intelligence and reasoning in both the psychometric and cognitive psychological traditions, highlighting how the two constructs are both intertwined yet nonetheless conceptually discriminable. We follow by discussing issues involved in validly measuring reasoning, touching on considerations, concerns, and evidence informed by the cognitive and psychometric perspectives. Then, we review the relationship between reasoning and allied constructs and domains, including expertise, practical outcomes (e.g., educational and workplace achievement), working memory, and critical thinking. We conclude by sketching multiple avenues for future research.

Keywords

reasoningfluid intelligenceworking memoryintelligencetestingassessment
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , pp. 528 - 552
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1988). Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 288–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2005). Ability determinants of individual differences in skilled performance. In Sternberg, R. J. & Pretz, J. E. (Eds.), Cognition and intelligence: Identifying the mechanisms of the mind (pp. 142–159). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M., & Boyle, M. O. (2002). Individual differences in working memory within a nomological network of cognitive and perceptual speed abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 131, 567–589.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arteche, A., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2008). The relationship of trait EI with personality, IQ and sex in a UK sample of employees. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 16, 421–426.Google Scholar
Bara, B. G., Bucciarelli, M., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1995). Development of syllogistic reasoning. American Journal of Psychology, 108, 157–193.Google Scholar
Beauducel, A., Brocke, B., & Liepmann, D. (2001). Perspectives on fluid and crystallized intelligence: Facets for verbal, numerical, and figural intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 30(6), 977–994.Google Scholar
Beauducel, A., & Kersting, M. (2002). Fluid and crystallized intelligence and the Berlin Model of Intelligence Structure (BIS). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(2), 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilalic, M., & Campitelli, G. (2018). Studies of the activation and structural changes of the brain associated with expertise. In Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 233–256). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. S. (1957). Going beyond the information given. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Burt, C. (1909). Experimental tests of higher mental processes and their relation to general intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2, 94–177.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. J. (1988). Task complexity: A review and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 13, 40–52.Google Scholar
Carlstedt, B., Gustafsson, J.-E., & Ullstadius, E. (2000). Item sequencing effects on the measurement of fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 28, 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40(3), 153–193.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1–22.Google Scholar
Chastain, R. L. (1992). Adaptive processing in complex learning and cognitive performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford.Google Scholar
Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., & Drasgow, F. (2011). Individual differences: Their measurement and validity. In Zedeck, S. (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (vol. 2, pp. 117–151). Washington: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., Bunting, M. F., Therriault, D. J., & Minkoff, S. R. B. (2002). A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, and general fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 30, 163–183.Google Scholar
Crawford, J. (1988). Intelligence, task complexity and tests of sustained attention. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., & Stough, C. (1996). Intelligence and inspection time: Achievements, prospects, and problems. American Psychologist, 51, 599–608.Google Scholar
Detterman, D. K. (1986). Human intelligence is a complex system of separate processes. In Sternberg, R. J. & Detterman, D. K. (Eds.), What is intelligence? Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition (pp. 57–61). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Douven, I. (2017). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, s.v. Abduction. https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/archives/spr2017/entries/abductionGoogle Scholar
Elson, S. B., Hartman, R., Beatty, A., Trippe, M., Buckley, K., Bornmann, J., et al. (2018). Critical analytic thinking skills: Do they predict job-related task performance above and beyond general intelligence? Personnel Assessment and Decisions, 4(1), 9–29.Google Scholar
Embretson, S. E. (1983). Construct validity: Construct representation versus nomothetic span. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 179–197.Google Scholar
Embretson, S. E. (2016). Understanding examinees’ responses to items: Implications for measurement. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 35, 6–22.Google Scholar
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Feeney, A. (2004). The role of prior belief in reasoning. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 78–102). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. S. B. T., & Over, D. E. (1996). Rationality and reasoning. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. N., & McDaniel, M. A. (2001). The stability of validity coefficients over time: Ackerman’s (1988) model and the General Aptitude Test Battery. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 60–79.Google Scholar
Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P. J., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 41–68). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fry, A. F., & Hale, S. (1996). Processing speed, working memory, and fluid intelligence: Evidence for a developmental cascade. Psychological Science, 7, 237–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furnham, A., Crump, J., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2007). Managerial level, personality and intelligence. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 805–818.Google Scholar
Galotti, K. M., Baron, J., & Sabini, J. P. (1986). Individual differences in syllogistic reasoning: Deduction rules or mental models? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 16–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gambrell, J. L. (2013). Effects of age and schooling on 22 ability and achievement tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure mapping in analogy and similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45–56.Google Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J. (2004). Working memory and reasoning. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 49–77). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gobet, F., & Waters, A. J. (2003). The role of constraints in expert memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 29, 1082–1094.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, J.-E. (1988). Hierarchical models of individual differences in cognitive abilities. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (vol. 4, pp. 35–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Haig, B. D. (2005). An abductive theory of scientific method. Psychological Methods, 10, 371–388.Google Scholar
Haier, R. J., Jung, R. E., Yeo, R. A., Head, K., & Alkire, M. T. (2005). The neuroanatomy of general intelligence: Sex matters. NeuroImage, 25(1), 320–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halpern, D. F., & Butler, H. A. (2018). Is critical thinking a better model of intelligence? In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of human intelligence (pp. 183–196). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1998). A basis for research on age differences in cognitive capabilities. In McArdle, J. J. & Woodcock, R. W. (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 57–91). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Blankson, N. (2005). Foundations for better understanding of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, test, and issues (vol. 2, pp. 41–68). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Masunaga, H. (2006). A merging theory of expertise and intelligence. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P. J., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 587–612). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huber, C. R., & Kuncel, N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86, 431–468.Google Scholar
Hunt, E. B. (2010). Human intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunt, E. B., Frost, N., & Lunneborg, C. (1973). Individual differences in cognition: A new approach to intelligence. In Bower, G. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (vol. 7, pp. 87–122). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1982). The chronometry of intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (vol. 1, pp. 255–310). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr. (2005a). Constructive replication of the visual-perceptual-image rotation model in Thurstone’s (1941) battery of 60 tests of mental ability. Intelligence, 33, 417–430.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr. (2005b). The structure of human intelligence: It is verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid and crystallized. Intelligence, 33, 393–416.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2011). Placing inspection time, reaction time, and perceptual speed in the broader context of cognitive ability: The VPR model in the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936. Intelligence, 39, 405–417.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Gottesman, I. I. (2006). Clarifying process versus structure in human intelligence: Stop talking about fluid and crystallized. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 29, 136–137.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., te Nijenhuis, J., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr. (2007). Replication of the hierarchical visual-perceptual-image rotation model in de Wolff and Buiten’s (1963) battery of 46 tests of mental ability. Intelligence, 35, 69–81.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2004). Mental models and reasoning. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 169–204). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. (1991). Deduction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Khemlani, S. S. (2013). Toward a unified theory of reasoning. Psychology of learning and motivation, 59, 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow, vol. 1. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 29, 440–458.Google Scholar
Kuncel, N. R. (2011). Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). Washington: National Research Council.Google Scholar
Kvist, A. V., & Gustafsson, J.-E. (2008). The relation between fluid intelligence and the general factor as a function of cultural background: A test of Cattell’s investment theory. Intelligence, 36, 422–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kyllonen, P. C., & Christal, R. E. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity?! Intelligence, 14, 389–433.Google Scholar
Larson, G. E., Merritt, C. R., & Williams, S. E. (1988). Information processing and intelligence: Some implications of task complexity. Intelligence, 12(2), 131–147.Google Scholar
Leighton, J. P. (2004). The assessment of logical reasoning. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 291–312). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Liu, O. L., Frankel, L., & Roohr, K. C. (2014). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: Current state and directions for next-generation assessment. Research Report ETS RR-14-10. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
Lohman, D. F. (1988). Spatial abilities as traits, processes, and knowledge. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (vol. 4, pp. 181–248). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lohman, D. F., & Hagen, E. (2001). Cognitive Abilities Test (Form 6). Itasca, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
Lohman, D. F., Korb, K., & Lakin, J. M. (2008). Identifying academically gifted English language learners using nonverbal tests: A comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Quarterly, 52, 275–296.Google Scholar
Lohman, D. F., & Lakin, J. M. (2017). Cognitive Abilities Test (Forms 7 & 8): Research handbook. Itasca, IL: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2012). Comparing models of intelligence in Project TALENT: The VPR model fits better than the CHC and extended Gf–Gc models. Intelligence, 40, 543–559.Google Scholar
Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (2001). Thinking. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 223–247.Google Scholar
Marshalek, B. (1981). Trait and process aspects of vocabulary knowledge and verbal ability. Technical Report No. 15. Aptitude Research Project, School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford.Google Scholar
Marshalek, B., Lohman, D. F., & Snow, R. E. (1983). The complexity continuum in the radex and hierarchical models of intelligence. Intelligence, 7(2), 107–127.Google Scholar
Martinez, M. E. (2000). Education as the cultivation of intelligence. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Naglieri, J. A. (1996). Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement.Google Scholar
Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Ng, T. W., Eby, L. T., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367–408.Google Scholar
Nickerson, R. S. (2004). Teaching reasoning. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 410–442). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2012). Cognitive abilities. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), Oxford library of psychology (pp. 179–224). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ones, D. S., Dilchert, S., Viswesvaran, C., & Salgado, J. F. (2010). Cognitive abilities. In Farr, J. & Tippins, N. (Eds.), Handbook of employee selection (pp. 235–275). Clifton, NJ: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2015). Education for life and work: Developing transferrable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Postlethwaite, B. E. (2011). Fluid ability, crystallized ability, and performance across multiple domains: A meta-analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City.Google Scholar
Primi, R. (2001). Complexity of geometric inductive reasoning tasks contribution to the understanding of fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 30, 41–70.Google Scholar
Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. L. (2006). Laboratory studies of training, skill acquisition, and retention of performance. In Ericsson, K. A., Charness, N., Feltovich, P. J., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 265–286). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raaheim, K. (1988). Intelligence and task novelty. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (vol. 4, pp. 73–97). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1977). Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. New York: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Rips, L. J. (1994). The psychology of proof. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Roberts, M. J. (1993). Human reasoning: Deductive rules or mental models, or both? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 569–589.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. D., & Stankov, L. (1999). Individual differences in speed of mental processing and human cognitive abilities: Toward a taxonomic model. Learning and Individual Differences, 11, 1–120.Google Scholar
Robinson, C. S., & Hayes, J. R. (1978). Making inferences about relevance in understanding problems. In Revlin, R. & Mayer, R. E. (Eds.), Human reasoning (pp. 195–206). Washington: Halsted Press.Google Scholar
Rozeboom, W. W. (1997). Good science is abductive, not hypothetico-deductive. In Harlow, L. L., Mulaik, S. A., & Steiger, J. H. (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 335–391). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ryans, D. G. (1938). A study of the observed relationship between persistence test results, intelligence indices, and academic success. Journal of Educational Psychology, 29, 573–580.Google Scholar
Salgado, J. F. (2017). Using ability tests in selection. In The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of recruitment, selection and employee retention (pp. 113–150). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
Salthouse, T. A., Babcock, R. L., Mitchell, D. R. D., Palmon, R., & Skovronek, E. (1990). Sources of individual differences in spatial visualization ability. Intelligence, 14, 187–230.Google Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 162–173.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sechrest, L. (1963). Incremental validity: A recommendation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 23, 153–158.Google Scholar
Snow, R. E., Kyllonen, P. C., & Marshalek, B. (1984). The topography of learning and ability correlations. Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, 2, 47–103.Google Scholar
Snow, R. E., & Lohman, D. F. (1989). Implications of cognitive psychology for educational measurement. In Linn, R. (Ed.), Educational measurement (vol. 3, pp. 263–331). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1923). The nature of “intelligence” and the principles of cognition. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Spilsbury, G. (1992). Complexity as a reflection of the dimensionality of a task. Intelligence, 16, 31–45.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., Sá, W. C., & West, R. F. (2004). Individual differences in thinking, reasoning, and decision making. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 375–409). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & Stanovich, P. J. (2010). A framework for critical thinking, rational thinking and intelligence. In Preiss, D. D. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Educational psychology: Perspectives on learning, teaching and human development (pp. 195–237). New York: Springer Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 672–695.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2013). Myside bias, rational thinking, and intelligence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 259–264.Google Scholar
Stenning, K., & Monaghan, P. (2004). Strategies and knowledge representation. In Leighton, J. P. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of reasoning (pp. 129–168). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Toward a unified theory of human reasoning. Intelligence, 10, 281–314.Google Scholar
Strenze, T. (2015). Intelligence and success. In Goldstein, S., Princiotta, D., & Naglieri, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of intelligence: Evolutionary theory, historical perspective, and current concepts (pp. 405–413). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Süß, H.-M., & Beauducel, A. (2005). Faceted models of intelligence. In Wilhelm, O. & Engle, R. W. (Eds.), Handbook of measuring and understanding intelligence (pp. 313–332). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Süß, H.-M., Oberauer, K., Wittmann, W. W., Wilhelm, O., & Schulze, R. (2002). Working memory capacity explains reasoning ability – and a little bit more. Intelligence, 30, 261–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swiney, J. F. (1985). A study of executive processes in intelligence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
US Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (2018). Standard occupational classification manual. www.bls.gov/soc/2018/soc_2018_manual.pdfGoogle Scholar
Vernon, P. E. (1950). The structure of human abilities. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Vernon, P. E. (1965). Ability factors and environmental influences. American Psychologist, 20, 723–733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 930–941.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, O. (2005). Measuring reasoning ability. In Wilhelm, O. & Engle, R. W. (Eds.), Handbook of measuring and understanding intelligence (pp. 373–392). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Wood, R. E. (1986). Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 60–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×