Cognitive and Regulatory Predictors of Success in General Ability Tests in Preschool Years
The article presents the results of an empirical study of cognitive and regulatory predictors of the success in general abilities tests in preschool age. The study analyzed the basic cognitive characteristics (Processing speed and Number sense), regulatory characteristics (Cognitive control) and performance in general ability tests (Intelligence and Creativity). Computerized tasks 'Choice Reaction Time Task', 'Non-symbolic comparison of numerosity', 'Physical size comparison', 'Dot enumeration' were used for the measurement of cognitive characteristics. For diagnostics of development of cognitive control was used the computerized Stroop task 'Comparison of numbers'. Non-verbal intelligence was measured with 'Raven Progressive Matrices'". Creativity was measured with 'Short test of creative thinking' with originality and fluency of the performance as indicators. The study involved 225 children of preschool age (52.2% of boys, age 4.8-7.2 year). The mean age was 6.2 years (standard deviation = 0.6). All children successfully completed tasks related to the knowledge of the number series from 0 to 9. The hierarchical regression analysis revealed differences in the relationship between general abilities and regulatory and cognitive characteristics. Both cognitive and regulatory characteristics were significant predictors of intelligence, with individual differences in cognitive characteristics explaining 25% of the variance and regulatory characteristics - 21% of the variance. For the successful performance in the intelligence test in the senior preschool age, it is necessary to have a high level of cognitive control, to have high Processing speed and Number sense, in particular, to be able to compare the physical size of objects. Neither cognitive nor regulatory characteristics were found to be significant predictors of originality. At the same time, the fluency index, which reflects the number of completed tasks in the creative test, was predicted by a regression model with the inclusion of regulatory and cognitive linear components, explaining 36% of the variance with the help of one cognitive characteristic - Processing speed. The results obtained in a study of preschool children confirm the specificity of patterns of cognitive and/or regulatory characteristics necessary for the successful performance of tests of general abilities - Intelligence and Creativity.
Keywords
когнитивный контроль,
скорость переработки информации,
чувство числа,
тест,
общие способности,
интеллект,
творческие способности,
дошкольный возраст,
cognitive control,
processing speed,
number sense,
general abilities,
nonverbal intelligence,
creativity,
preschool yearsAuthors
| Tikhomirova Tatiana N. | Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Education | tikho@mail.ru |
| Misozhnikova Ekaterina B. | Moscow Department of Education | misozhenka@gmail.com |
| Malykh S.B. | Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Education | malykhsb@mail.ru |
Всего: 3
References
Вербицкая Л.А., Зинченко Ю.П., Малых С.Б., Тихомирова Т.Н. Когнитивные основы успешности обучения русскому языку: кросскультурное исследование // Вопросы психологии. 2017. № 1. C. 26-40.
Тихомирова Т.Н., Воронин И.А., Мисожникова Е.Б., Малых С.Б. Структура взаимо связей когнитивных характеристик и академической успешности в школьном возрасте // Теоретическая и экспериментальная психология. 2015. Т. 8, № 2. С. 55-68.
Verbitskaya L.A., Malykh S.B., Zinchenko Yu.P., Tikhomirova T.N. Cognitive predictors of success in learning Russian // Psychology in Russia: State of the Art. 2015. Vol. 8 (4). P. 91-100.
Byington E., Felps W. Why do IQ scores predict job performance? An alternative, socio logical explanation // Research in Organizational Behavior. 2010. Vol. 30. P. 175-202.
Guilford J.P. Intelligence, creativity and their educational implications. San Diego, CA, 1968. 229 p.
Silvia P.J. Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds // Personality and Individual Differences. 2008. Vol. 44. P. 10121021.
Rodic M., Zhou X., Tikhomirova T., Wei W., Malykh S., Ismatulina V., Sabirova E., Davidova Y., Tosto M., Lemelin J-P., Kovas Y. Cross-Cultural Investigation into Cognitive Underpinnings of Individual Differences in Early Arithmetics // Developmental Science. 2015. Vol. 18. P. 165-174.
Тихомирова Т.Н., Богомолова М.В. Обогащение среды и развитие способностей: трехкомпонентная модель образовательного пространства // Психология обучения. 2008. № 1. С. 36-46.
Тихомирова Т.Н. Влияние семейной микросреды на способности детей: роль поколе ний // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2004. Т. 1, № 4. С.133-141.
Tucker-Drob E.M., Bates T.C. Large cross-national differences in gene x socioeconomic status interaction on intelligence // Psychological science. 2016. Vol. 27, № 2. P. 138-149.
Nisbett R., Aronson J., Blair C., Dickens W., Flynn J., Halpern D., Turkheimer E. Intelligence: New findings and theoretical developments // American Psychologist. 2012. Vol. 67. P. 130 - 159.
Тихомирова Т.Н., Малых С.Б., Тосто М.Г., Ковас Ю.В. Когнитивные характеристики и успешность в решении математических заданий в старшем школьном возрасте: кросскультурный анализ // Психологический журнал. 2014. Т. 35, № 1. С. 41-53.
Rodic M., Tikhomirova T., Kolienko T., Malykh S., Bogdanova O., Zueva D.Y., Gynku E.I., Wan S., Zhou X., KovasY. Spatial complexity of character based writing systems and arithmetic in primary school: a longitudinal study // Frontiers in Psychology. 2015. Vol. 6 (333). URL: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00333
Nisbett R. Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and cultures count. New York, NY: WW Norton, 2009.
Tikhomirova T., Kuzmina Y., Lysenkova I., Malykh S. Development of Approximate Number Sense across the Elementary School Years: a Cross-cultural Longitudinal Study // Developmental Science. 2019. e12823.
Von Stumm S., Plomin R. Socioeconomic status and the growth of intelligence from infancy through adolescence // Intelligence. 2015. Vol. 48. P. 30-36.
Тихомирова Т.Н., Малых С.Б. Когнитивные основы индивидуальных различий в успешности обучения. СПб. : Нестор-История, 2017. 312 c.
Deary I.J., Der G., Ford G. Reaction times and intelligence differences. A population-based cohort study // Intelligence. 2001. Vol. 29. P. 389-399.
Rindermann H., Neubauer A.C. Processing speed, intelligence, creativity, and school performance: Testing of causal hypotheses using structural equation model // Intelligence. 2004. Vol. 32. P. 573-589.
Sheppard L.D., Vernon P.A. Intelligence and speed of information-processing: a review of 50 years of research // Personality and Individual Differences. 2008. Vol. 44 (3). P. 535-551.
Горюнова Н.Б., Дружинин В.Н. Операциональные дескрипторы ресурсной модели общего интеллекта // Психологический журнал. 2000. Т. 21, № 4. С. 57-64.
Aguilar-Alonso A. Personality and creativity // Personality and Individual Differences. 1996. Vol. 21 (6). P. 959-969.
Vartanian O., Martindale C., Kwiatkowski J. Creative potential, attention, and speed of information processing // Personality and Individual Differences. 2007. Vol. 43 (6). P. 1470-1480.
Der G., Deary I.J. IQ, reaction time and the differentiation hypothesis // Intelligence. 2003. Vol. 31 (5). P. 491-503.
Щебланова Е.И. Неуспешные одаренные школьники. М. : БИНОМ. Лаборатория знаний, 2011. 245 с.
Тихомирова Т.Н., Малых С.Б. Чувство числа и успешность в обучении математике в младшем школьном возрасте: перекрестно-лонгитюдный анализ // Психологический журнал. 2018. Т. 39, № 6. С. 47-58.
Kroesbergen E.H., Schoevers E.M. Creativity as predictor of mathematical abilities in fourth graders in addition to number sense and working memory // Journal of Numerical Cognition. 2017. Vol. 3 (2). P. 417-440.
Морошкина Н.В., Гершкович В.А. Сознательный контроль в мнемических задачах и задачах научения // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского государственного университета. Сер. 12. 2008. Вып. 2. С. 91-100.
Roebers C.M., Cimeli P., Rothlisberger M., Neuenschwander R. Executive functioning, metacognition, and self-perceived competence in elementary school children: an explorative study on their interrelations and their role for school achievement // Metacognition Learning. 2012. Vol. 7. P. 151-173.
Roebers C.M., Krebs S.S., Roderer T. Metacognitive monitoring and control in elementary school children: Their interrelations and their role for test performance // Learning and Individual Differences. 2014. Vol. 29. P. 141-149.
Brock L.L., Rimm-Kaufman S.E., Wanless S.B. Delay of gratification in first grade: the role of instructional context // Learning and Individual Differences. 2014. Vol. 29. P. 81 -88.
Fayena-Tawil F., Kozbelt A., Sitaras L. Think global, act local: a protocol analysis comparison of artists' and nonartists' cognitions, metacognitions, and evaluations while drawing // Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. 2011. Vol. 5 (2). P. 135-145.
Livingston J.A. Metacognition: An Overview. 1997. URL: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED474273
Ушаков Д.В. Психология интеллекта и одаренности. М. : Ин-т психологии РАН, 2011. 464 с.
Моросанова В.И., Фомина Т.Г., Ковас Ю.В. Взаимосвязь регуляторных, интеллектуальных и когнитивных особенностей учащихся с математической успешностью // Психологические исследования. 2014. Т. 7, № 34. С. 11.
Малых С.Б., Тихомирова Т.Н., Жоу С., Вей В., Родич М., Мисожникова Е.Б., Давыдова Ю.А., Ковас Ю.В. Структура взаимосвязей когнитивных характеристик и успешности в арифметике у дошкольников: кросскультурный анализ // Вопросы психологии. 2012. № 5. С. 133-143.
Равен Дж.К., Корт Дж.Х., Равен Дж. Руководство к Прогрессивным Матрицам Ра-вена и Словарным Шкалам / пер. с англ. 2-е изд., стер. М. : Когито-Центр, 2009. Разд. 2: Стандартные Цветные Матрицы (включая Параллельные версии Теста). 80 с.
Щебланова Е.И., Аверина И.С. Краткий тест творческого мышления. М. : ИНТОР, 1995. 48 с.
Shamosh N.A., Gray J.R. The relation between fluid intelligence and self-regulatory depletion // Cognition and Emotion. 2007. Vol. 21. P. 1833-1843.
