Differences in intelligence and automatic memory processes

Ellis, Norman R.; Meador, Darlene M.

doi:10.1016/0160-2896(85)90028-5

Cited by 13 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, the 7-month data had not yet been analyzed at the time the batteries for later ages were chosen. Because visual recognition memory in later childhood continues to relate to intelligence (e.g., Ellis, Meador, & Bodfish, 1985; Fagan, 1984; Harris & Fleer, 1972), we think that had we used different stimuli, or problems better suited to capture more complex cognitive activity, 1-year measures of visual recognition memory would, in all probability, also have related to later cognition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information processing at 1 year: Relation to birth status and developmental outcome during the first 5 years.

Rose¹,

Feldman²,

Wallace³

et al. 1991

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As part of a longitudinal study of high-risk preterm infants (birthweight less than 1500 g) and a low socioeconomic status (SES) comparison group of full-term infants, measures of information processing were obtained at 1 year: visual and tactual recognition memory, cross-modal transfer, and object permanence. Of these, cross-modal transfer was the most strongly related to later intelligence, correlating with outcome at 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years for preterms and from 3-5 years for full-terms (rs = .44 to .54); relations with outcome were independent of SES, maternal education, medical risk, and early Bayley scores. When this 1-year measure of cross-modal transfer was combined with 7-month visual recognition memory, 35%-51% of the variance in 3-, 4-, and 5-year IQ was explained.Studies of infant development have existed for well over 100 years, but it is only recently that efforts have been made to characterize cognitive development during this period from an information-processing perspective. Earlier work was directed primarily toward delineating the different accomplishments or achievements that distinguish one developmental level from another. By contrast, much of the more recent work is designed to discover the nature of the processes that underlie cognitive development. These efforts are bearing fruit. New techniques have been developed, and there is now a burgeoning literature indicating not only that early cognitive competence can be measured, but also that rapid cognitive development is a hallmark of early infancy. During the first year of life, infants evidence the capacity for complex visual discriminations, rapid learning, long-term memory, categorization, cross-modal transfer, and various types of subtle abstractions (for reviews, see Olson & Sherman, 1983;Rose & Ruff, 1987;Rovee-Collier & Gekoski, 1979).Recently, we and other investigators have found that individual differences on some of these early abilities are related to later intelligence. For example, there is a growing body of evidence that infants who show better visual recognition memory or faster visual habituation achieve higher scores on measures

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Information processing at 1 year: Relation to birth status and developmental outcome during the first 5 years.

Rose¹,

Feldman²,

Wallace³

et al. 1991

Developmental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meanwhile, cognitive science has increasingly focused on identifying and measuring the more elementary processes believed to form the substrate of sucb complex abilities. Two elementary processes tiiought to be particularly important in tbis respect are memory and processing speed (Detterman, 1987a(Detterman, , 1987b(Detterman, , 1990Ellis & Meador, 1985). Historically, both have played a central role in theoretical conceptualizations concerning the foundation of individual differences in cognitive functioning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Memory and Processing Speed in Preterm Children at Eleven Years: A Comparison with Full-Terms

Rose¹,

Feldman²

1996

Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effects of prematurity on 11-year-olds' performance on 2 specific aspects of cognition--memory and processing speed, using a new computer-administered battery, the Cognitive Abilities Test (CAT: Detterman). Preterms performed more poorly than their full-term controls on all memory tasks; this relative deficit was associated with the presence and severity of neonatal Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS). Preterms were also slower on selected aspects of processing speed but not on motor speed. Memory and processing speed, taken together, accounted for much of the 10-point difference in WISC-R IQ between groups.

show abstract

“…It is not clear from any of these data why less able individuals should produce evidence of weaker phonetic memory coding, but it is known that such coding is at least partially under strategic control, possibly through the use of active rehearsal strategies (e.g., Torgesen & Goldman, 1977). Further, there is speculation, and some evidence, that IQ is in turn partially influenced by strategic or control processes of cognition (see, e.g, Bilsky, Whittemore, &Walker, 1982, andEllis, Meador, &Bodfish, 1985, for discussions and evidence pro and con). Hence it may be the case that less intellectually able individuals tend not to use active learning strategies such as rehearsal and thus show weaker phonetic coding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phonological awareness in reading-disabled adults: A follow-up and extension

Simpson

Byrne

1987

Australian Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Byrne and Ledez (I 983) showed reading-disabled adults to be deficient in the phonetic e n d i n g of spoken words in a continuous word recognition task, although their performance was comparable to that of norm$ readers in nonword recognition. The present study has similarly compared readm disabled and normal reading the low average range on two mental ability tmts. Both groups showed evidence of the use of the semantic code in memory in contmuous recognition, but neither group evidenced phonetic encoding In contrast, both reading groups rwcaled we of phonetic encoding in the nonword recognition task It appears from a com arison of the results in this study with those of Byrne and e e z that employment or)phonetic encoding ma be ability-linked, and its usefulness m rcadrng research ma therefore be limited. rrh, subjccts were also tested on a syllable classification tasc to assess their awareness of the phoneme as a unit of the speech strcam in a way which did not require the subjects deliberately to manipulate speech segments. Both reading groups demonstrated phonemic awareness, a finding which contrasts with previous research in which poor readers have demonstrated a deficiency in this aspect of metalinguistic knowledkc. Different testing methods may lead to different conclusions about phonermc awareness. adults on these tasks, but has in addition.controlled f or ability by selecting subjects in The experiments reported in this paper are a follow-up and extension to the work of Byrne and L e d a (1 983), who investigated memory coding and phonemic awareness in samples of disabled adult readers. To study memory processes Byrne and L e d a used as one of their procedures the continuous word recognition task previously employed by Byrne and Shea (1 979) with children. In it subjects are presented with a long list of spoken works and required to decide if each item had been presented previously in the list or not. False positive errors based on meaning (for example, saying "old" to house when home but not house had been previously presented) were relatively prominent among the poor readers, both child and addt, but neither group of poor readers made a sigmfkant number of phonetic false positives (e.g, comb for home). This was taken to indicate that the disabled We are grateful for suggestions for improvements to this manuscript made b Dr D. assistance in aspects of data analysis. The subjects who ve fmly of then tune have also earned our gratitude, as has Ms Jennifer Lyon of Department of Technical and Further Education, New South Wales.Requests for reprints should be sent to Brian Byme, Department of Psychology, University of New England, N.S.W. 2351, Australia.M. Thomson and two anonymous reviewen. We alto thank Dr. M. V. C q o Y for her A~t d h

show abstract

Differences in intelligence and automatic memory processes

Cited by 13 publications

References 15 publications

Information processing at 1 year: Relation to birth status and developmental outcome during the first 5 years.

Information processing at 1 year: Relation to birth status and developmental outcome during the first 5 years.

Memory and Processing Speed in Preterm Children at Eleven Years: A Comparison with Full-Terms

Phonological awareness in reading-disabled adults: A follow-up and extension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About