Black-White Differences in Cognitive Processing: A Study of the Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive Theory of Intelligence

Abstract

Matarazzo (1992) predicted that in the 21 st century the field of intelligence testing would be marked by steadfast adherence to the traditional verbal, quantitative, and nonverbal IQ concepts. In addition, however, he predicted that tests that borrow "heavily from the recent knowledge explosion in cognitive psychology, information processing, and developmental psychology" (p. 1012) would be developed. Matarazzo went on to suggest that the research in cognition would yield "new forms of individually administered intelligence tests of a type never before available in tests of ability" (p. 1013), which he illustrated using the work of Das, Kirby, and Jarman (1979) and Naglieri and Das (1990). The PASS theory and the work of Kaufman and Kaufman (1983) are two important efforts to redefine intelligence according to research in cognitive psychology as described by Matarazzo (1992). Their work was ignored by Neisser et al. (1996) in their review of knowns and unknowns about intelliResearchers have typically found a mean difference of about 15 points between Blacks and Whites on traditional measures of intelligence. Some have argued that the difference between Blacks and Whites would be smaller on measures of cognitive processing. This study examined Black (n = 298) and White (n = 1,691) children on Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, and Successive cognitive processes (PASS theory of intelligence) as operationalized by the Cognitive Assessment System (CAS). Regression analyses, controlling for key demographic variables, showed an estimated CAS Full Scale mean score difference of 4.8, which is smaller than that found with traditional IQ. Correlations between the PASS scores and achievement were similar for Blacks (median of .70) and Whites (median of .64). Moderated regression analyses showed no interaction effect for race by CAS Full Scale with achievement, suggesting that there are similar relationships between the CAS and achievement for Black (n = 298) and White (n = 1,691) groups. Nonsignificant interactions resulted when the Black and White child groups were analyzed with smaller matched samples (n = 298; n = 298). These results add to the growing body of literature supporting the validity of the PASS theory as measured by the CAS and the utility of the theory for assessment of minority students.

Exercise improves executive function and achievement and alters brain activation in overweight children: A randomized, controlled trial.

“…It is strongly correlated with academic achievement ( r = .71), though it does not contain achievement-like items (Naglieri & Rojahn, 2004). It is known to respond to educational interventions (Das, Mishra, & Poole, 1995), and it yields smaller race and ethnic differences than traditional intelligence tests, making it more appropriate for the assessment of disadvantaged groups (Naglieri, Rojahn, Aquilino, & Matto, 2005). …”

Passive Smoke Exposure and Its Effects on Cognition, Sleep, and Health Outcomes in Overweight and Obese Children

“…21 The Cognitive Assessment System yields smaller race and ethnic differences than traditional intelligence tests, making it more appropriate for the assessment of disadvantaged groups. 22 It provides four scales each comprised of three subtests. The Planning scale measures executive function (i.e., strategy generation and application, self-regulation, intentionality, and utilization of knowledge).…”

Does the KABC-II Display Ethnic Bias in the Prediction of Reading, Math, and Writing in Elementary School Through High School?

“…Criterion measures of achievement included the Scholastic Achievement Test, the Woodcock–Johnson Achievement test, and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition (Wechsler, 2001). These studies found that IQ predicted achievement about equally well for Caucasian and African American school-aged children in terms of (a) the magnitude of the coefficients of correlation (Edwards & Oakland, 2006; Naglieri and Johson, 2000; Naglieri et al, 2005; Poteat et al, 1988; Weiss et al, 1993; Weiss & Prifitera, 1995), and (b) the tests’ slope (Keith, 1999) and intercept (Weiss et al, 1993; Weiss & Prifitera, 1995).…”

“…However, with the exception of Keith (1999), who established prediction invariance of six broad CHC abilities ( G c, G s, G f, G c, G a, and G sm) in addition to the global General Ability Index of the Woodcock–Johnson–Revised (WJ-R; Woodcock & Johnson, 1989), all other studies only used global scaled scores as predictor variables (e.g., Weiss et al, 1993; Weiss & Prifitera, 1995). For example, studies that examined individually administered tests of cognition used the Wechsler Full Scale IQ, the General Ability Index of the Woodcock–Johnson test or the Full Scale score on the Cognitive Assessment System (Naglieri & Das, 1997) as predictors (Edwards & Oakland, 2006; Naglieri, Rojahn, Matto, & Aquilino, 2005; Weiss et al, 1993; Weiss & Prifitera, 1995). Criterion measures of achievement included the Scholastic Achievement Test, the Woodcock–Johnson Achievement test, and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Second Edition (Wechsler, 2001).…”