MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Construct Validity of Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices for African and Non‐African Engineering Students in South Africa

2004· article· en· W2098325707 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Selection and Assessment · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Abilities and Testing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRaven's Progressive MatricesPsychologyTest (biology)Construct validityWechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleComprehensionMathematics educationDevelopmental psychologyPsychometricsCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We test the hypothesis that the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices has the same construct validity in African university students as it does in non‐African students by examining data from 306 highly select 17‐ to 23‐year olds in the Faculties of Engineering and the Built Environment at the University of the Witwatersrand (177 Africans, 57 East Indians, 72 Whites; 54 women, 252 men). Analyses were made of the Matrices scores, an English Comprehension test, the Similarities subscale from the South African Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, end‐of‐year university grades, and high‐school grade point average. Out of the 36 Matrices problems, the African students solved an average of 23; East Indian students, 26; and White students, 29 ( p <.001), placing them at the 60th, 71st, and 86th percentiles, respectively, and yielding IQ equivalents of 103, 108, and 118 on the 1993 US norms. The same pattern of group differences was found on the Comprehension Test, the Similarities subscale, university course grades, and high‐school grade‐point average. The items on the Matrices ‘behaved’ in the same way for the African students as they did for the non‐African students, thereby indicating the test's internal validity. Item analyses, including a confirmatory factor analysis, showed that the African/non‐African difference was most pronounced on the general factor of intelligence. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by correlating the Matrices with the other measures, both individually and in composite. For the African group, the mean r =.28, p <.05, and for the non‐African group, the mean r =.27, p <.05. Although the intercepts of the regression lines for the two groups were significantly different, their slopes were not. The results imply that scores on the Raven's Matrices are as valid for Africans as they are for non‐Africans.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.340 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it