Do&Ment-Resume

DO&MENT-RESUME ED 248 260 TM 840 56D AUTHOR 'Grubb, Henry. J. TITLE The Cultural'-Distance Perspective: -An Exploratory Analysis of Its Effect on Learning and Intelligence. PUB DATE Apr 84 114p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association (Baltimore, April 12 -15, 1984). PUB YPE Speeches/Confeience Papers (150) -- Reports Research /Technical (143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC05 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Academic Achievement; *Cross Cultural Studies; Cultural Influencesp Intelligence Quotient; *Intelligence Tests; Perfdrmance Factors; PostsecondaryEducation; Predictive Validity; *Subcultures; *Test Bias; Testing Prbblemsf Test Use IDENTIFIERS *Cultural Distance Approach ABSTRACT. The purpose .of 'this study is to examine the role of the cultur1, distance hypothesis in determininggroupdifferences bn. intelligence and performance scales in Black and White subjects. This vigw, the Cultural-Distance Approach, briefly stated is that a sub=culture's distance from the major culture, on which test questions of a test are based and validated, will determine that sub-culture's group sub-score paitermin relation to the sub-score pattern of the'norming population. EightypOst-secondary school adults 48 White males and females, 32 Black males and females) were recruited and administered a series of tests. Analysis of variance '(AMOVA's) were calculated for each of the IQ measures. The results suggest that Although Blacks and Whites perform equally onlearning tasks at either,the LevelI or Level II dichotomy of intel ctual abilities, pirformance on' standardized tests of IQ do not equately reflect, this. equality of performance, possibly becaUse of he loading of cultural bias.in the latter measures. A 93-itembibliography, supplementary forms, and statistical tables are appended. (Author/EGS) 4 ** ******************************************************************** * * . reproductionssupplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * from the original document. * **************************************************************IW****** 1 ti THE CULTURAL- DISTANCEPERSPECTIVE: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF ITS EFFECT ON LEARNING AND INTELLIGENCE NI) (ABSTRACT) CX) % The stance of the present investigation is an amalgamationof the environmental, historical, and social-psychological points of viewwith the addition of current . kno;rledge in the fields of socio-biology, clinical and developmental psychology. Th.!.s view, the Cultural-Distance Approach, briefly stated isthat'a sub culture's distance'from the major culture, on which test questions of a tesp are basedand validated, will determine that sub-culture's group sub-score patternin relation to the sub-score pattern of the normingpopulation. Therefore minority member performance on tests based and validated on the majorculture (or even validated on membert of thesociety according to percentage representation of *all subcultures in thesupra-curAe)will show characteristic'patterns of group responding ...which are different from those of the norming sample. These'response patterns are indications of what is salient to each minority sub-culture onthe tests and within the major culture,and what is net. This paper is an examination of some of the socio-cultural factors which may lead to groupperforman*differences on IQ tests and an attemptlto determineempirically if the Cultural -stance approach is valid in its analysis of test bias. The resdlts suggest that although Blacks and Whites perform equally on learning tasks at eitherthe Level I or Leirel II dichotomy of intellectual abilities, performance onstandardized bests of IQ do not adequately r7). reflect this equality of performance, possiblybecause of the loading.of cuitural- 4b" bias in the latter measures. **PERMISSION TO REPRODUCETHIS U.S DEPARTMENT OfEDUCATION NATIONAl. INSTITUTE OfEDUCATION MATERIAL 14A6NBEENGRANTED BY f VOCATIONAL FU IRCF S INFORMATION tiN:ER WM! ti X (he,,int loner itthn, bor, 1110 0410 r4 rarevrct fff70 ih tionsath'Of toganvatloh flatirhatmqIt M.nr'f rhahtles haw. hew,entitle Intfhphrvis ."Piewtuitkert Pilhilrttj TO THE EDUCATIONALRESOURCES r. this tkn. Pntntn ofvi4;v4 o* tipUIROV's 'ilAttlf! 71 INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) morn fit, nut ,w iP4.11/V ,ftpHje8.?htltelNit postohh n png t/J Grew36 $ THE CULTURAL-DISTANCE PERSPECTIVE: AN EXPLORATORY ANALYSIS OF ITS EFFECT ON LEARNING AND INTgLLIGENCE INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study is to examine the sociological, cultural, and environmental determinants of group differences on measuresfof IQ. Specifically, the difference in performance of Black and White post-secondary school adults, espec- tally college students, is to be examined using a correlational approach while holding most significant environmental differneces between the group constant. The basic tenet of this paper is that the oft - recordeddifference between groups cliBlack and White students is not the result of racial genetics but describes the . I / 1 . dultural distance between the two groups. 4 The recorded difference in Black and White scores on standardized IQ tests is one of the-most discussed, and yet unresolved,issue's extant in psychology today. Many explanations for this phenomenon have beenposit*. Biological Accounts . For example, Jensen (1969) has suggested that genetics p;ay a centralrole in I producing these differences. He argues that a "developmental lag," genetically . determined, causes Black children to perPorm about two years below Whitechildren of equal chronological age. Jensen exploi-ed the Black-White difference in some detail. In °fie study (Jensen, 1977), he divided at White sample into twosub-groups in order to control for culturaldiffereqces: one consisting bf subjects wbo % .. 3 . equalled the total White sample regarding theilpeap andstaft4ardideviation, and one -,4 comps4ged of lower scoring Whites from the0441 sample thatlqualledthe mean and . .. standard deviation of the total Black sample: eklied..thi*seCond group a . 241 "pseudo race." I 1 2 Jensen found thht the difference between the "pseudo race sub-group and the sub-group equalling the whole White population was thi same as that observed between the total Black sample and the total White sample, From these results he argued that the diffetence between the two racial groups could not be explajned by cultural differences between the races. The significant RxI (Race by Item) interaction he obtained in his total comparisons could not be interpreted as bias 1 in the test because a similar interaction was discovered beten the two White sub-groups. However, Jensen is aware of a possible flaw in his conclusion, and a thus he states that: "the.only counter hypothesis to explain these results is that the lower scoring Whites in the pseudo race comparison differi(rom the higher scoring Whites in the same way that Blacks differ frolt Whites, because resumab1 are both, . the lower-scoring Whites, and the majority of Blacks culturally disadvantaged and therefore share thestembiaies," 4. 62-63). This, of course, is a very real possiblity. By the very act of sub-group of White subjects to Black subjects on test performance, Jensen mayhave . been de facto matching the vo pdpulations on the environmental andsociological facto s which would-distinguish these two groups from the higher scoringWhite sub-g oup. Unfortunately, Jensen did not purgue thislin; of reasoning. One thing is fo certain however, racial genetics couldnothave caused the equivalency of the B ack group and lower scoring White sub-group on thedependent measure. Jensen" ' does of propose an answer to,this dilemma either. Jensen, in refutingmcultural 'cliff rence," raised more questions than he answere. Jensen's argument represents a common error' type. He, and many test con- 4tr tors and users assume that, tests, especiallythosevalidat&An representative 41. 11 sam les of the national population, areequally valid for all individuals regardless of ultural background. Wheieas a teat Ma, adequately tap the present intellectual Eu ctioning of a individual member of tydominant culture group it may either .4° I 3 41, (1) accurately measure the intellectual ability of a minority group member or (2) bla representation of his distance from the valUes, mores, perceptions, and response patterns of the dominant culture. The fact that the White pseudo-race scored coMparabketo the Black group could either signify the Whites"disadvantaged" status as suggested and ignored by Jensen or truly represent a reduction in mental facility when compared to co- tac,ials. This however does not necessarily reflect on the potential of the Black group. Conwill (1980), suggests that Jensen beligved that, a boost of 20 to 30 IQ points was Possible for children moved from extremely deprived environments to ft* good or average environments; Jensen however, stated that he couldfind cot a single case report of a child being given a permanently superior'IQ by such means (evidence demonstrating such increases will be given later in the text). Jensen thlbtefore concluded4that environmental manipulation could only lead to large differences in IQ scores when the, original environment is extremely inadequate andthat the child typically described hs "culturally disadvantaged"does not live in such an extremelyretar ding environment. In effect Jensen said the difference between the environmentA of the'Middle-class and lower-class child was not important. Herzog, Newcomb, and Cisin (1972), in &research paper titled "But Some are ,More Poor than Others: SES Differences in a Preschool Program,"

Load more