Attentional WM is not necessarily specifically related with fluid intelligence: the case of smart children with ADHD symptoms

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Orsini

et al. 2014

Self Cite

The Version of Scholarly Record of this Article is published in RESEARCH IN AbstractThe WISC-IV was used to compare the intellectual profile of two groups of children, one with specific learning disorders (SLDs), the other with intellectual disabilities (ID), with a view to identifying which of the four main factor indexes and two additional indexes can distinguish between the groups. We collected information on WISC-IV scores for 267 children (M age =10.61[SD=2.51], range 6-16 years, females = 99) with a diagnosis of either SLD or ID. Children with SLD performed better than those with ID in all measures. Only the SLD children, not the ID children, revealed significant differences in the four main factor indexes, and their scores for the additional General Ability Index (GAI) were higher than for the Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI).Children with a diagnosis of SLD whose Full-Scale Intelligence Quotient (FSIQ) was < 85 showed a similar pattern. Our findings confirm the hypothesis that children with SLD generally obtain high GAI scores, but have specific deficiencies relating to working memory and processing speed, whereas children with ID have a general intellectual impairment. These findings have important diagnostic and clinical implications and should be considered when making diagnostic decisions in borderline cognitive cases.

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Differences in the intellectual profile of children with intellectual vs. learning disability

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Orsini

et al. 2014

Self Cite

“…Processing speed tasks (i.e., the Coding and the Symbol Search) may demand an involvement of the executive attention component, which seems to be impaired in children with SLD (Johnson et al, 2010). Deficits in the processing speed component and in the WM may therefore share the same basic mechanisms and be due to the same executive attention problem --confirming, here again, that differences in tasks measuring processing speed may not reflect differences in g. Importantly, this situation is probably not limited to SLD, but could well apply to other groups of children with impairments in executive processes, such as those with ADHD (Cornoldi, Giofrè, Calgaro, & Stupiggia, 2013). Like those with SLD, children with ADHD typically score lower in the Processing Speed Index, and a deficit in the Coding task, for example, is very common in such children (Calhoun & Mayes, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The structure of intelligence in children with specific learning disabilities is different as compared to typically development children

2015

Intelligence

Self Cite

Children with specific learning disabilities (SLDs) are characterized by a poor academic achievement despite an average intelligence. They are therefore typically assessed not only with achievement tests, but also with intelligence tests, usually the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The assumption of a discrepancy between IQ and achievement in children with SLD has been questioned, however, and the implications of using different measures in batteries of intellectual subtests have not been thoroughly investigated. The present study examined these issues, taking advantage of a large database of scores obtained in the ten core subtests of the WISC-IV by a group of 910 Italian children with a clinical diagnosis of SLD, who were compared with the children considered for national standardization purposes. Our results support the doubts raised concerning the IQ-achievement discrepancy model, showing that relevant discrepancies can emerge even within the WISC profile. The four main WISC-IV indexes were found differently related to intelligence (measured by means of the g-factor) and the g content of many subtests differed in children with SLD vis-à-vis typically-developing children. These results have important implications both theoretical, indicating that the g-factor is weakly identified in children with SLD children, and practical, indicating that the QI obtained with the WISC-IV may not be a good measure of intellectual functioning for children with SLD, which are discussed.  There are differences in the g content of the indexes and many subtests between SLD cases and controls.Intelligence, WISC-IV and SLD 2 The structure of intelligence in children with specific learning disabilities is different as compared to typically development childrenIntelligence is one of the most important and most often assessed constructs in psychology (Gottfredson, 1997a). It has been demonstrated, for instance, that intelligence tests such as the WISC, the WAIS and the Raven progressive matrices are among the psychological tests most commonly used in Europe, taking first, second and fourth places, respectively (Evers et al., 2012). This may be due to the importance of intelligence, which is also confirmed by the fact that intelligence can predict important academic and occupational outcomes, and performance in everyday life (e.g., Deary, Strand, Smith, & Fernandes, 2007;Gottfredson, 1997b;Schmidt & Hunter, 2004).The WISC, and particularly the WISC-IV (Wechsler, 2003), which is the latest version to become available in many countries, is one of most often used psychological tests. The popularity of the WISC-IV is probably due to the fact that it is relatively quick to administer and it measures important cognitive factors of relevance to the assessment of both typical populations and clinical groups (Prifitera, Saklofske, & Weiss, 2008). The WISC-IV, as presented in the test manuals, is structured around four factors, considered among the main basic factors underlying intelligence: i) the verbal comprehension ...

“…Although the two constructs are closely related, they do not appear to overlap completely and the two constructs can be considered as distinguishable (Conway, Kane, & Engle, 2003). Their relationship is under debate (Martínez et al, 2011) Conway, & Gathercole, 2010), and it has also been argued that highly-controlled WM processes have a greater power for predicting intelligence in typically-developing children (Cornoldi, Orsini, Cianci, Giofrè, & Pezzuti, 2013) than in particular populations (Cornoldi, Giofrè, Calgaro, & Stupiggia, 2013). The idea that different components of WM relate differently to intelligence has found further support: a recent study on 4 th -and 5 th -graders, for instance, supported the relationship between WM and intelligence, but showed that only active WM and visuospatial short-term memory were significantly related to intelligence, while verbal short-term memory did not .…”

Section: Cognitive Processes Involved In Geometry: Working Memory Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relationship among geometry, working memory, and intelligence in children

Mammarella

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

2014

Self Cite

Although geometry is one of the main areas of mathematical learning, the cognitive processes underlying geometry-related academic achievement have not been studied in detail. This study explored the relationship between working memory (WM), intelligence (g-factor) and geometry in 176 typically-developing children attending school in their 4 th and 5 th grades. Structural equation modeling showed that about 40% of the variance in academic achievement and in intuitive geometry (which is assumed to be independent of a person's cultural background) were explained by WM and the g-factor. After taking intelligence and WM into account, intuitive geometry was no longer significantly related to academic achievement in geometry. We also found intuitive geometry closely related to fluid intelligence (as measured by Raven) and reasoning ability, while academic achievement in geometry depended largely on WM. These results were confirmed by a series of regressions in which we estimated the contributions of WM, intelligence and intuitive geometry to the unique and shared variance explaining academic achievement in geometry. Theoretical and educational implications of the relationship between WM, intelligence and academic achievement in geometry are discussed.