Correspondence Between the General Ability to Discriminate Sensory Stimuli and General Intelligence

Abstract

For more than a century the veracity of Spearman’s postulate that there is a nearly perfect correspondence between general intelligence and general sensory discrimination has remained unresolved. Most studies have found significant albeit small correlations. However, this can be used neither to confirm nor dismiss Spearman’s postulate, a major weakness of previous research being that only single discrimination capacities were considered rather than general discrimination. The present study examines Spearman’s hypothesis with a sample of 1,330 5- to 10-year-old children, using structural equation modeling. The results support Spearman’s hypothesis with a strong correlation (r = .78). Results are discussed in terms of the validity of the general sensory discrimination factor. In addition, age-group-specific analyses explored the age differentiation hypothesis.

Relations among fluid intelligence, sensory discrimination and working memory in middle to late childhood – A latent variable approach

“…The correlations were lower than the ones found in previous studies. However, the strength of correlations found in previous studies also differed, with some studies finding very high correlations (r = .92; Deary et al, 2004) and others finding correlations between r = .64 and r =.78 (Deary et al, 2004;Meyer et al, 2010;Troche & Rammsayer, 2009). Whether these differences in strength of correlations are due to the fact that the present study focused on fluid intelligence only, or whether there were differences in the measurement of sensory discrimination or fluid intelligence that influenced the results is unclear at this stage.…”

“…More recent studies have been able to show a reliable relationship between intelligence and sensory discrimination for different modalities (Acton & Schroeder, 2001;Haldemann, Stauffer, Troche, & Rammsayer, 2011;Meyer et al, 2010;Stankov, Seizova-Cajić, & Roberts, 2001;Troche & Rammsayer, 2009). In most of these studies, single discrimination tasks correlated modestly with intelligence.…”

“…Because studies have shown that both GDA and WM are strongly related to intelligence (Ackerman et al, 2005;Deary et al, 2004;Engel de Abreu et al, 2010;Meyer et al, 2010;Swanson, 2011;Tillman et al, 2009;Troche & Rammsayer, 2009) and some researchers have suggested that WM and intelligence are essentially the same (Kyllonen & Christal, 1990), we first tested whether the theoretically derived three-factor model (with GDA, WM, and fluid intelligence as one factor each) could be assumed, or whether a twofactor model with either WM and fluid intelligence or GDA and fluid intelligence tasks loading onto one factor respectively, made more sense.…”

“…But the question of which mechanisms of information processing are more, respectively less essential when trying to explain individual differences in psychometric intelligence is still a strongly debated issue (Deary, 2012;Demetriou, Mouyi, & Spanoudis, 2008;Hunt, 2011). Different information-processing mechanisms have been suggested to be related to intelligence, including attention (e.g., Burns, Nettelbeck, & McPherson, 2009;Schweizer, Moosbrugger, & Goldhammer, 2005;Stankov, 1988), processing speed (e.g., Fry & Hale, 2000;Kail, 2007), sensory discrimination (e.g., Deary, Bell, Bell, Campbell, & Fazal, 2004;Meyer, Hagmann-von Arx, Lemola, & Grob, 2010;Troche & Rammsayer, 2009), and working memory (WM; e.g., Conway, Getz, Macnamara, & Engel de Abreu, 2011;Cowan & Alloway, 2009). …”

Suppressive mechanisms in visual motion processing: From perception to intelligence

“…Structural equation modeling has revealed remarkably strong links (0.68 < r < 0.92) between two latent traits: general intelligence and general sensory discrimination (Deary et al, 2004; Meyer et al, 2010). Additionally, reaction times (RTs) correlate better with IQ if the number of response alternatives is higher (Deary, Derb & Ford, 2001); choice RTs for choosing among four options better correlate with IQ than RTs for just two options; simple RTs show the weakest link.…”