Relations between mental performance and reaction time: New aspects of an old problem

Ruchalla, Elke; Schalt, E; Vogel, Friedrich

doi:10.1016/0160-2896(85)90016-9

Cited by 14 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are several other studies that are fully or partially in line with his results (e.g. Carlson and Jensen, 1982;Cohn, Carlson and Jensen, 1985;Grice, 1955;Jensen, 1980;Jenkinson, 1983;Leonard and Carpenter, 1964;Smith and Stanley, 1983;Spiegel and Bryant, 1978;Stabler and Dyal, 1963;Vernon and Jensen, 1984) whereas only a few are not (Ruchalla, Schalt and Vogel, 1985;Smith and Stanley, 1980). However, several of the studies mentioned have some limitations, such as selection of cross-modal instead of uni-modal stimuli when determining the complex condition in comparison with the simple one (e.g.…”

Section: Information Processing As a Simple Determinant Or Constituentsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…However, several of the studies mentioned have some limitations, such as selection of cross-modal instead of uni-modal stimuli when determining the complex condition in comparison with the simple one (e.g. Ruchalla et al, 1985), or lack of consideration of restriction of range and the relatively high errors of measurement. Following Hick (1952) and Roth (1964), the slope of the reaction time is interpreted here as speed of information processing.…”

Section: Information Processing As a Simple Determinant Or Constituentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This last category includes one of the Naylor experiments where a combination of numbers and letters had to be selected (Naylor, 1968), and some experiments on complex stimulus reaction times (e.g. Ruchalla et al, 1985).…”

Section: Facilitating Valid Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A basic information psychological parameter (BIP) for the reconstruction of concepts of intelligence

Lehrl

Fischer²

1990

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adherents oj" the Galton paradigm favour the concept that the simple parameter 'speed of information processing' has a physiological basis and determines complex achievements assessed in intelligence tests as well as social success. These assumptions are supported by inter-individual correlations. Further supporting evidence comes from total measurement where not only the information content of the stimuli is measured, but also the time to process them. This reveals an individually constant period during which 1 bit of information is processed. It is called the 'basic period of information processing' (BIP), which lasts 1/15s (= 67ms) in average adults (IQ 100) and is constant over the ranges from which target stimuli can be drawn and over varying modes of the signs (letters, numbers, musical notes, etc. ). In representative samples of adults duration of BIP correlatos with global ZQ (r = -0.60): We conclude that the BIP of an adult with an IQ of I22 is 50ms and with an ZQ of 78 twice as long (looms). We consider BIP to be a physiological and general determinant of intelligence, being measurable at a ratio or even an absolute scale level. Thus, it appears to be suitable as a building unit for reconstructing the rather fuzzy traditional concept of general intelligence.

show abstract

Section: Information Processing As a Simple Determinant Or Constituentsupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Information Processing As a Simple Determinant Or Constituentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A basic information psychological parameter (BIP) for the reconstruction of concepts of intelligence

Lehrl

Fischer²

1990

Eur J Pers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is likely especially for variability in the lower range, and possibly not so much for above-average performance. This possibility should be considered in attempts at interpreting intelligence or its main component (factor g) as outcome of simple capacities such as "complex reaction time", speed of information pro-cessing measured by evoked EEG potential and the like (Jensen & Munro 1979, Weiss 1982, Ertl 1966, Eysenck 1973, Ruchalla et al 1984.…”

Section: Possible Consequences Of Heterozygote Studies For Our Undersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical consequences of heterozygosity for autosomal‐recessive diseases*,**

Vogel

1984

Clinical Genetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heterozygotes of autosomal‐recessive diseases can often be recognized by special heterozygote tests, since enzyme activities are normally reduced in comparison with the normal homozygote state. In Drosophila, the majority of recessive lethal mutations shows a reduction of fitness in heterozygotes, whereas in a strong minority fitness of heterozygotes is increased. This review will be devoted to a consideration of the extent to which heterozygotes for a wide variety of nominally recessive diseases are subject either to an increased liability for common diseases or slight shifts of behavioral characteristics. The available evidence has been collected and will be discussed in three steps: 1. Most studies are available for phenylketonuria. For this group of diseases, a slight reduction of average ‐ especially verbal ‐ I.Q. in heterozygotes has been reported together with signs of a slightly increased cerebral irritability, a possible slight increase of risk for mental disease, and an increase of blood phenylalanine levels in stress situations. The PKU example is used to discuss methodological problems involved in such studies. 2. Other conditions for which relevant deviations in heterozygotes are possible or even likely include among others lipid storage diseases, microcephaly, myoclonus epilepsy, Wilson's disease, galaktokinase deficiency, homocystinuria, recessive myotonia and ataxia‐teleangiectasia (increased cancer risk). 3. Since heterozygotes for autosomal recessive diseases are common, it is possible that an appreciable fraction of “multifactorial” genetic liabilities for common, “constitutional” or mental disease might simply be due to heterozygosity for genes whose homozygous affects are already well known. By the same token, much of the “normal” genetic variability influencing cognitive performance (I.Q.) ‐ especially in the lower range ‐ and personality characteristics could also be caused by recessive genes in the heterozygous state.

show abstract

“…However, correlations of this magnitude have been reported only with subject samples that are very small, include mentally retarded individuals, and fail to match the distribution of abilities found in human populations. When the methodological defects have been remedied and representative samples used, the magnitudes of the observed correlations reduce considerably, typically to around -0.3 or less (Eysenck, 1986 ;Irwin, 1984;Smith & Stanley, 1983) or to zero (Ruchalla, Schalt & Vogel, 1985). Information-processing research has produced a further body of evidence comparing individuals differing in age or ability, at simple ('micro-level') cognitive tasks such as letter identification or encoding, which are regarded as forming elements of more complex skills.…”

Section: Ten Possibilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intelligence as an explanation

Howe¹

1988

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the level of someone's intelligence is frequently put forward as being a possible reason for that person's success or failure at intellectual tasks, intelligence level is in reality only a descriptive measure, not an explanatory concept. Ten conceivable states of affairs are described, which if proved to contribute to or be indicated by measured intelligence would legitimize the assertion that a statement about someone's intelligence can help to explain their degree of success at mental tasks. These are that level of intelligence is reliably related to (1) observable physiological variables, (2) variability in basic mental processing mechanisms, (3) the capacity to learn or remember, (4) fundamental thinking skills, (5) the ability to reason abstractly, (6) the complexity of a person's cognitive functioning, (7) adaptability or mental flexibility, (8) executive controlling functions, or (9) unspecified biological mechanisms, or (10) that indications of measured intelligence level precisely identify intellectual qualities that an individual possesses. The evidence fails to provide firm confirmation of the existence of any of these 10 states of affairs, indicating that measures of intelligence level have little or no explanatory value.

show abstract

Relations between mental performance and reaction time: New aspects of an old problem

Cited by 14 publications

References 21 publications

A basic information psychological parameter (BIP) for the reconstruction of concepts of intelligence

A basic information psychological parameter (BIP) for the reconstruction of concepts of intelligence

Clinical consequences of heterozygosity for autosomal‐recessive diseases*,**

Intelligence as an explanation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About