Evaluating untimed and timed abridged versions of Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices

Poulton, Antoinette; Rutherford, Kathleen; Boothe, Sarah; Brygel, Madeleine; Crole, Alice; Dali, Gezelle; Bruns, Loren; Sinnott, Richard; Hester, Robert

doi:10.1080/13803395.2022.2080185

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Time pressure had a limited detrimental effect on the ability of the APM to measure individual differences. For accuracy, the task had reliability below the conventional 0.70 threshold when performed under severe time pressure, which is in line with prior literature ( Hong and Cheng 2019 ; Poulton et al 2022 ) despite the difference in internal consistency not reaching significance. Importantly, reliability was significantly affected for RTs and also fell below 0.70 under severe time pressure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Is imposing time pressure a good or a bad thing? Time pressure has a limited detrimental effect on discriminating power (a reasonable time limit still allows most participants to finish most items, save for the final and most difficult items, which tend to have low success rates anyway; e.g., Bolton 1955 ), on reliability (e.g., Bolton 1955 ; Poulton et al 2022 ; see also Hong and Cheng 2019 ), and on the dimensional structure ( Poulton et al 2022 ) of Raven’s matrices. However, this limited impact on basic psychometric properties does not mean that versions with or without a time limit are equivalent (e.g., Davidson and Carroll 1945 ; Rindler 1979 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Should Intelligence Tests Be Speeded or Unspeeded? A Brief Review of the Effects of Time Pressure on Response Processes and an Experimental Study with Raven’s Matrices

Gonthier

2023

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intelligence tests are often performed under time constraints for practical reasons, but the effects of time pressure on reasoning performance are poorly understood. The first part of this work provides a brief review of major expected effects of time pressure, which includes forcing participants to skip items, convoking a mental speed factor, constraining response times, qualitatively altering cognitive processing, affecting anxiety and motivation, and interacting with individual differences. The second part presents data collected with Raven’s matrices under three conditions of speededness to provide further insight into the complex effects of time pressure, with three major findings. First, even mild time pressure (with enough time available for all participants to complete the task at a leisurely pace) induced speeding throughout the whole task, starting with the very first item, and participants sped up more than was actually required. Second, time pressure came with lower confidence and poorer strategy use and a substantial decrease of accuracy (d = 0.35), even when controlling for response time at the item level—indicating a detrimental effect on cognitive processing beyond speeding. Third, time pressure disproportionately reduced response times for difficult items and participants with high ability, working memory capacity, or need for cognition, although this did not differentially affect ability estimates. Overall, both the review and empirical sections show that the effects of time pressure go well beyond forcing participants to speed or skip the last few items and make even mild time constraints inadvisable when attempting to measure maximal performance, especially for high-performing samples.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Should Intelligence Tests Be Speeded or Unspeeded? A Brief Review of the Effects of Time Pressure on Response Processes and an Experimental Study with Raven’s Matrices

Gonthier

2023

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We found that the actual level of difficulty of test items differed significantly from the original order of presentation, as found in previous studies of the APM Set I in a paediatric population (Chiesi et al, 2012) and for a 12 item short‐form of the APM (Poulton et al, 2022). In the latter study, the authors suggested that the variability in scores reflected a lack of practice on easier, early items leading to unexpected errors.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Lifespan normative data (18–89 years) for Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices Set I

Murphy

Foley

Mole

et al. 2023

Journal of Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) Set I is a validated and brief test of fluid intelligence, ideal for use in busy clinical settings. However, there is a dearth of normative data allowing an accurate interpretation of APM scores.To address this, we present normative data from across the adult lifespan (18-89 years) for the APM Set I. Data are presented in five age cohorts (total N = 352), including two older adult cohorts (65-79 years and 80-89 years), which allows age-standardized assessment. We also present data from a validated measure of premorbid intellectual ability, which was absent from previous standardizations of longer forms of the APM. In line with previous findings, a striking age-related decline was noted, beginning relatively early in adulthood and most marked amongst lower-scoring individuals. Older adults did not demonstrate difficulty with specific test items or make an increased proportion of specific errors. Sex was not a significant predictor of performance. The data set is of particular use in the neuropsychological assessment of older adults, given the known susceptibility of fluid intelligence to both the effects of normal ageing and acquired brain injury in older age. The results are discussed in light of theories of neurological ageing.

show abstract

“…The current study used a short 12-item version of the RAPM. However, the edge density can also be computed for the remaining items and then correlated with the response times observed for those items in the literature (for studies that provide response times per RAPM item, see Adam & Vogel, 2018 ; Ellis et al, 2021 ; Frischkorn & Von Bastian, 2021 ; Goldhammer et al, 2015 ; Gonthier & Roulin, 2020 ; Liu et al, 2022 ; Loesche et al, 2015 ; Poulton et al, 2022 ; Rivollier et al, 2021 ; Robison & Campbell, 2023 ; Sense et al, 2019 ; Tsukahara & Engle, 2021 , 2023 ; and Vigneau et al, 2006 ). If using this approach, the edge density correlated between 0.27 and 0.73 with the mean response time, and Raven item number (1 to 36) correlated between 0.51 and 0.87 with the mean response time (see Supplementary Material ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Responses to Raven matrices: Governed by visual complexity and centrality

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Raven matrices are widely considered a pure test of cognitive abilities. Previous research has examined the extent to which cognitive strategies are predictive of the number of correct responses to Raven items. This study examined whether response times can be explained directly from the centrality and visual complexity of the matrix cells (edge density and perceived complexity). A total of 159 participants completed a 12-item version of the Raven Advanced Progressive Matrices. In addition to item number (an index of item difficulty), the findings demonstrated a positive correlation between the visual complexity of Raven items and both the mean response time and the number of fixations on the matrix (a strong correlate of response time). Moreover, more centrally placed cells as well as more complex cells received more fixations. It is concluded that response times on Raven matrices are impacted by low-level stimulus attributes, namely, visual complexity and eccentricity.

show abstract

Evaluating untimed and timed abridged versions of Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices

Cited by 5 publications

References 30 publications

Should Intelligence Tests Be Speeded or Unspeeded? A Brief Review of the Effects of Time Pressure on Response Processes and an Experimental Study with Raven’s Matrices

Should Intelligence Tests Be Speeded or Unspeeded? A Brief Review of the Effects of Time Pressure on Response Processes and an Experimental Study with Raven’s Matrices

Lifespan normative data (18–89 years) for Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices Set I

Responses to Raven matrices: Governed by visual complexity and centrality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About