DOCSLIB.ORG

EMPATHY and INTELLIGENCE AS PREDICTORS of COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY in COUNSELING STUDENTS a Dissertation Submitted to the Kent Stat

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EMPATHY and INTELLIGENCE AS PREDICTORS of COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY in COUNSELING STUDENTS a Dissertation Submitted to the Kent Stat EMPATHY AND INTELLIGENCE AS PREDICTORS OF COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY IN COUNSELING STUDENTS A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College of Education, Health and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Staci A. Hayes May 2019 © Copyright, 2019 by Staci A. Hayes All Rights Reserved ii A dissertation written by Staci A. Hayes B.A., University of Akron, 2004 ME.D., Kent State University, 2011 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2019 Approved by _________________________________, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Jason McGlothlin _________________________________, Co-director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Martin Jencius _________________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Dianne Kerr Accepted by _________________________________, Director, School of Lifespan Development Mary M. Dellman-Jenkins and Educational Sciences _________________________________, Dean, College and Graduate School of James C. Hannon Education, Health and Human Services iii HAYES, STACI A., Ph.D., May 2019 LIFESPAN DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES EMPATHY AND INTELLIGENCE AS A PREDICTOR OF COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY IN COUNSELING STUDENTS (165 pp.) Co-Directors of Dissertation: Jason McGlothlin Ph.D. Martin Jencius Ph.D. Counseling is a complicated and difficult process. Clinical issues often present as ambiguous and incomplete (Welfare & Borders, 2010a), challenging counselors to become comfortable with ambiguity and move forward with confidence. Many factors have been suggested to contribute to the success of counselors despite this perceived deficit. The concepts of empathy and cognitive complexity may be the most effective way of making this difficult and sometimes awkward transition. Simple linear regressions were utilized to determine if age, number of client hours, empathy and intelligence of participants could we accurately predict their level of cognitive complexity. In running of the univariate research design, it was concluded that this was not a predictive linear regression. A high effect size was established with alpha at .05 and power .80. 50 participants were utilized. The predictive variables do not accurately predict cognitive complexity. However, it was determined that there is a slight correlation between how this study defines and measure empathy and cognitive complexity. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are so many people that contributed to my ability to complete this arduous, challenging and fun task. First of all, to my Participants, thank you so for being so open and giving with your time. This project would have never been possible without your kindness and enthusiasm for the topic. Drs. Miller and Storlie, your mentorship this year has been invaluable and you both are so amazing. The time I spent with you both taught me so much of who I want to be as a counselor educator and I cherish being able to talk openly and honestly and look forward to our continued professional relationship. In honor of Dr. Betsy Page, I know that you would proud, but I just keep thinking about how much you taught me and how much I still had to learn from you. I thank you for your integral role in this project and all you did for me. To my committee, your kindness and patience chartered me through this long, crazy endeavor and I appreciate all you have done. Dr. McGlothlin, your ability to navigate seemingly complex and difficult situations with grace never ceases to amaze me. Thank you for helping me break this process down into manageable and concrete steps. Dr. Marty Jencius, you came in at such a difficult time and your enthusiasm, sense of humor and thoughtfulness were like a breath of fresh air. Dianne Kerr, thank you for your feedback and support. Your continued commitment to this project has meant so much. To my Mom, almost everything good in me either came from or has been conscientiously cultivated by you. I am so glad that I understand and appreciate all you have done for me, both big and small. And, all that I am is because of what you have taught and sacrificed for me. I love you so much. To my husband Brandon. I cannot iv imagine my life without you and you make my heart smile. Thank you for making me laugh and always believing in me. You have turned into such an amazing teammate and have taught me to keep moving forward and believe in myself even if I am not exactly sure what I am doing or where I am going. But, I am just grateful that we get to go there together. To Riley and Emmi, being your mom is the greatest honor of my life. I would have never imagined that you both would be so incredibly strong, funny and kind. With hard work and a little luck, you can do anything and know that I will always have your back. To my sister Shawna, you may not have always understood what or why I was trying to accomplish with this project, but you blindly supported and assumed that I would get it done with grace and ease. And lastly, to my mom and dad Fred and Cheryl, you are there, you show up and I see you both. You are so precious to me and I know you like me better than your son. You both give so much, and I feel like I can never express how much all you do is appreciated. I love you both and thank you for all you have done to help me during this project. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................. iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. ix CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 Purpose and Rationale............................................................................................. 3 Definitions............................................................................................................... 5 Review of the Literature ......................................................................................... 6 Cognitive Complexity ...................................................................................... 6 History of cognitive complexity ............................................................ 7 Detecting and measuring cognitive complexity ................................... 11 Empathy ......................................................................................................... 15 History of empathy ............................................................................... 16 Detecting and measuring empathy ....................................................... 21 Research in empathy ............................................................................ 21 Intelligence .................................................................................................... 26 History of intelligence .......................................................................... 26 Detecting and measuring intelligence .................................................. 27 Research in intelligence ....................................................................... 30 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................. 31 II. METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 32 Participants ............................................................................................................ 33 Procedures ............................................................................................................. 33 Research Methodology ......................................................................................... 36 Multiple Regression ....................................................................................... 36 Instrumentation .............................................................................................. 37 Demographic sheet ............................................................................... 37 The Counselor Cognition Questionnaire .............................................. 37 The Hayes Scale of Empathy for Supervisors...................................... 42 The Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test of Empathy ............................... 45 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 48 Delimitations ......................................................................................................... 50 Chapter Summary ................................................................................................. 51 III. RESULTS ................................................................................................................... 52 Sampling ............................................................................................................... 53 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 53 vi Demographic Data ......................................................................................... 54 Sex assigned at birth / current gender identity ..................................... 54 Client hours .......................................................................................... 54 Age ....................................................................................................... 55 Race / Ethnicity ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Disjunctions of Conjunctions, Cognitive Simplicity and Consideration Sets by John R
    Disjunctions of Conjunctions, Cognitive Simplicity and Consideration Sets by John R. Hauser Olivier Toubia Theodoros Evgeniou Rene Befurt Daria Silinskaia February 2009. Forthcoming Journal of Marketing Research, 2009. John R. Hauser is the Kirin Professor of Marketing, MIT Sloan School of Management, Massa- chusetts Institute of Technology, E40-179, One Amherst Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, (617) 253-2929, fax (617) 253-7597, [email protected]. Olivier Toubia is the David W. Zalaznick Associate Professor of Business, Columbia Business School, Columbia University, 522 Uris Hall, 3022 Broadway, New York, NY, 10027, (212) 854- 8243, [email protected]. Theodoros Evgeniou is an Associate Professor of Decision Sciences and Technology Manage- ment, INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance 77300, Fontainebleau, FR, (33) 1 60 72 45 46, theo- [email protected]. Rene Befurt is at the Analysis Group, 111 Huntington Avenue, Tenth Floor, Boston, MA 02199, 617-425-8283, [email protected]. Daria Silinskaia is a doctoral student at the MIT Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, E40-170, One Amherst Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, (617) 253-2268, [email protected]. We would like to thank Daniel Bailiff (AMS), Simon Blanchard (PSU), Robert Bordley (GM), Anja Dieckmann (GfK), Holger Dietrich (GfK), Min Ding (PSU), Steven Gaskin (AMS), Patricia Hawkins (GM), Phillip Keenan (GM), Clarence Lee (MIT), Carl Mela (Duke), Andy Norton (GM), Daniel Roesch (GM), Matt Seleve (MIT), Glen Urban (MIT), Limor Weisberg and Kaifu Zhang (INSEAD) for their insights, inspiration, and help on this project. This paper has benefited from presentations at the Analysis Group Boston, the Columbia Business School, Digital Business Conference at MIT, Duke University, General Motors, the London Business School, Northeastern University, the Marketing Science Conference in Vancouver, B.C., and the Seventh Triennial Choice Symposium at the University of Pennsylvania.
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation As a Basis for Praxis
    Theories of Intelligence, Learning, and Motivation as a Basis for Praxis Dr Eulalee Nderu-Boddington Ph.D. Education Assistant Professor at Prince Sultan University Riyadh Saudi Arabia May 26th 2008 ABSTRACT This paper examines how Piaget, Werner, and Gardner differ regarding the roles of cognition, intelligence, and learning in the developmental process. Piaget believes in the predominance of genetic factors. Werner stresses the influence of biological factors, while Gardner proposes that the environment plays a greater influence in how intelligence and learning are acquired. This paper also surveys research on achievement and learning strategies and their role in student motivation. The development of conceptual understanding is related to prior knowledge, interest, learning goals, and achievement goals. Introduction This paper focuses on the developmental theories of Werner, Gardner, and Piaget, all of whom have significantly influenced the field of education through their differing understandings of how students learn from childhood to adulthood. Most researchers agree that a combination of biology and environment affects personality and intelligence, but they differ in assigning relative importance to these two influences. Although poor nutrition, poor health care, and head injuries have been linked to poor IQ scores, for the most part environmental variables have not been found to account for a substantial portion of observed variations in human intelligence. Therefore, some psychologists believe heredity is the dominant influence on intelligence. They base their views on research that concentrates on variations among people in general cognitive ability or IQ. Others believe that such research overemphasizes the concept of IQ and gives too much credit to genetics (Azar, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Message-Induced Ambivalence and Its Correlates
    Exploring Message-Induced Ambivalence and Its Correlates: A Focus on Message Environment, Issue Salience, and Framing Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Jay D. Hmielowski, M.A. Graduate Program in Communication The Ohio State University 2011 Dissertation Committee: Dave Ewoldsen R. Kelly Garrett R. Lance Holbert (Chair) Erik Nisbet 0 Copyright By Jay D. Hmielowski 2011 1 Abstract Scholars across the social sciences (psychology and political science) have recently started to broaden the approach to concept of attitudes. These scholars have focused on the concept of attitudinal ambivalence, which is defined as people holding both positive and negative attitudes toward attitude objects. However, communication scholars have generally ignored this concept. Recently, communication scholars have emphasized the importance of looking at the complementary effects of consuming divergent messages on people‘s attitudes and beliefs. Although studies have started to look at the complementary effects of media, it is necessary to examine the relationship between the complexity of a person‘s communication environment and the complexity of their attitudes. Therefore, this study begins the process connecting the complexity of people‘s communication environment and the complexity of their attitude structures. The major goal of this dissertation is to look at the generation of ambivalence by looking at four important factors: a) the relationship between specific media outlets relative to the generation of potential ambivalence, b) how different individual difference variables moderate the relationship between different media outlets and the generation of ambivalence, c) pinpointing the message variables that may lead people to the generation of ambivalence, and d) how media, ambivalence fit into a larger communication process focused on different political outcome variables.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Intelligence Differences: a Recent History Ian J
    Forum TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol.5 No.3 March 2001 127 Historical Perspective Human intelligence differences: a recent history Ian J. Deary Differences among humans in their mental important5. As a result of The Bell Curve’s that it does not emerge (Guilford, abilities are prominent, important, and controversies, the APA put together a task Thurstone, Gardner, Cattell and Horn); that controversial. In part, the controversy force of 11 people to write a report on there is a hierarchy of mental abilities from arises from over-uses and abuses of mental ‘Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns’. The the general factor through broad ability tests, from insalubrious events in the individuals concerned came from different factors to very specific, narrow abilities history of mental test research, and from research traditions within and outside (Burt, Vernon) or that there is merely a lack of knowledge about what is and is not intelligence and were known to hold very range of uncorrelated narrow abilities currently known concerning human different views on the topic. Yet, they (Guilford)10,11. The resolution of these intelligence. In this article, some of the managed to produce a wide-ranging review debates was available from the 1940s, but well-attested facts about human intelligence article that all contributors signed. It not widely recognized. By 1939, Eysenck differences are summarized. A striking remains a touchstone for disinterested and showed that even Thurstone’s own data limitation of this body of research is that, authoritative information about intelligence contained a general factor that refuted his whereas much is known about the taxonomy differences.
    [Show full text]
  • New Frameworks for Evaluating Cognitive Complexity
    NEWA FRAMEWORK FORFRAMEWORKS APPROACHING COGNITIVE DEMAND ON STUDENTFOR THINKING EVALUATING IN SCIENCE ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY Frameworks for educators evaluating the cognitive complexity of assessment items in mathematics, science, and reading Throughout the country, state assessments in reading, mathematics, and science continue to play important roles in instructional improvement and accountability. State assessments must align to academic standards that are significantly more challenging than previous standards, reflecting the current knowledge and skill demands of postsecondary education and careers. They require a deeper understanding of subject matter, the ability to read more complex texts and materials, and the development and application of essential skills for collaboration, communication, inquiry, and problem solving. In short, new academic standards demand a more complex set of cognitive skills. Consequently, assessing student performance in these subjects is challenging and requires different kinds of assessments and assessment items. All statewide summative assessments must now require a range of cognitive demand. As Achieve has helped states design, develop, and evaluate state assessments, we’ve seen firsthand the challenge of assessing cognitively complex skills. Attempting to understand the cognitive complexity of assessment items is not new, but traditional frameworks now fall short because many are broad and content- agnostic. As new standards across all three content areas have become more reflective of the actual work students must do in each content area, understanding the cognitive complexity of the tasks that students complete requires content-specific frameworks. Achieve has developed three new frameworks - one each for mathematics, reading, and science - that can be used to evaluate the cognitive complexity of assessment tasks.
    [Show full text]
  • Cognitive Complexity and the Structure of Musical Patterns
    1 Cognitive complexity and the structure of musical patterns Jeffrey Pressing Department of Psychology University of Melbourne Parkville, Victoria Australia 3052 [email protected] Introduction Patterns are fundamental to all cognition. Whether inferred from sensory input or constructed to guide motor actions, they betray order: some are simple, others are more complex. Apparently, we can erect a simplicity-complexity dimension along which such patterns may be placed or ranked. Furthermore, we may be able to place the sources of patterns—such things as mental models, neural modules, growth processes, and learning techniques—along a parallel simplicity-complexity dimension. Are there psychological forces pushing us along this dimension? Seemingly so. The drive to simplify and regularize is seen in familiar Gestalt ideas of pattern goodness and Prägnanz, which hold in many situations. The drive towards complexity can be seen in the accretional processes of individual development, or the incremental sophistication of many cultural behaviours such as systems of musical design (e.g. musical harmonies in mid to late 19th century Europe), or new scientific methodologies (e.g. increasing sophistication in brain imaging techniques). Quite beyond this, the handling of complexity is a central issue in human skill and learning, providing the drive to efficiency in resource-limited processes like memory, attention, or multi-tasking. It has parallel implications in systems engineering, organization management or adaptive neural network design problems. In these cases, complexity is something to be circumscribed by various information- management strategies while functional performance specifications are maintained. Yet another picture of complexity is as an emergent property, one embodying sophisticated implicit order springing up as a cumulative consequence of simple, typically iterative nonlinear processes operating in certain ranges of their control parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Political Psychology
    INTRODUCTION TO POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY This comprehensive, user-friendly textbook on political psychology explores the psychological origins of political behavior. The authors introduce read- ers to a broad range of theories, concepts, and case studies of political activ- ity. The book also examines patterns of political behavior in such areas as leadership, group behavior, voting, race, nationalism, terrorism, and war. It explores some of the most horrific things people do to each other, as well as how to prevent and resolve conflict—and how to recover from it. This volume contains numerous features to enhance understanding, includ- ing text boxes highlighting current and historical events to help students make connections between the world around them and the concepts they are learning. Different research methodologies used in the discipline are employed, such as experimentation and content analysis. This third edition of the book has two new chapters on media and social movements. This accessible and engaging textbook is suitable as a primary text for upper- level courses in political psychology, political behavior, and related fields, including policymaking. Martha L. Cottam (Ph.D., UCLA) is a Professor of Political Science at Washington State University. She specializes in political psychology, inter- national politics, and intercommunal conflict. She has published books and articles on US foreign policy, decision making, nationalism, and Latin American politics. Elena Mastors (Ph.D., Washington State University) is Vice President and Dean of Applied Research at the American Public University System. Prior to that, she was an Associate Professor at the Naval War College and held senior intelligence and policy positions in the Department of Defense.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffrey O. Nuckols, the IMPACT of COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY on IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT (Under the Direction of Dr
    Jeffrey O. Nuckols, THE IMPACT OF COGNITIVE COMPLEXITY ON IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT (Under the direction of Dr. Jennifer Bowler) Department of Psychology, July 2014 This study seeks to add to the knowledge of cognitive complexity by examining its relationship with impression management and social desirability. In light of past studies a positive relationship between cognitive complexity and impression management was expected. This predicted relationship was found to exist, thereby increasing knowledge of the construct of cognitive complexity. Furthermore, relationships between cognitive complexity, social desirability, and impression management were expected, with social desirability moderating the relationship between cognitive complexity and social desirability. The results of this study did not support the hypothesized relationships involving social desirability; in fact, the results ran counter to those predicted. However, these findings raise interesting questions for future research. Both the expected findings and those which were unexpected add to the body of knowledge about cognitive complexity and point to the need for continued research on this topic. The Impact of Cognitive Complexity on Impression Management A Thesis Presented To The Faculty of the Department of Psychology East Carolina University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Psychology with a Concentration in Industrial and Organizational Psychology by Jeffrey O. Nuckols July, 2014 ©Copyright 2014 Jeffrey O. Nuckols The Impact of Cognitive Complexity on Impression Management by Jeffrey O. Nuckols APPROVED BY: DIRECTOR OF DISSERTATION/THESIS: _______________________________________________________ Jennifer L. Bowler, PhD COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Karl L. Wuensch, PhD COMMITTEE MEMBER: _______________________________________________________ Shahnaz Aziz, PhD CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY: ____________________________________________________________ Susan L.
    [Show full text]
  • Relationship Between Spirituality, Religion and Spiritual Intelligence
    Relationship between Spirituality, Religion and Spiritual Intelligence: Intelligence of the 21stcentury (A Comparative Analysis) Sharmila Dhote Introduction: For long, the world gave much importance to Intelligence Quotient. The higher the figure, the belief went, the greater the intelligence. This attitude is a legacy of the early 20th century when psychologists devised tests to measure intelligence. These tests primarily measured intellectual or rational intelligence (used to solve logical problems). In mid-1990s, Daniel Goleman revealed findings in neuroscience and psychology that stressed the importance of Emotional Quotient (EQ). This makes us aware of our feelings and that of others. Goleman argued that EQ was a basic requirement for the use of IQ. If the areas of our brain that feel are damaged, our ability to think effectively is diminished. In 2000, however, authors Dana Zohar and Ian Marshall introduced a new dimension to human intelligence namely, SpiritualQuotient (or SQ), the ultimate intelligence. This is the intelligence used to solve problems of meaning and value. “Is my job giving me the fulfillment I seek?” “Am I relating to the people in my life in a way that contributes to their happiness and mine?” Answers to these questions determine whether we will find happiness or not. IQ and EQ are inadequate in such issues. IQ and EQ give way to spiritual intelligence, the ultimate intelligence that can add value and meaning to your life. Definitions Of Spiritual Intelligence Definitions of spiritual intelligence rely on the concept of spirituality as being distinct from religiosity. 55 Danah Zohar defined 12 principles underlying spiritual intelligence: Self-awareness: Knowing what I believe in and value, and what deeply motivates me.
    [Show full text]
  • Counselor Cognitions: General and Domain-Specific Complexity. By: Laura E. Welfare and L. Dianne Borders This Is the Pre-Peer Re
    Counselor cognitions: General and domain-specific complexity. By: Laura E. Welfare and L. DiAnne Borders This is the pre-peer reviewed version of the following article: Welfare, L. E., & Borders, L. D. (2010). Counselor cognitions: General and domain-specific complexity. Counselor Education and Supervision, 49(3), 162-178. which has been published in final form at DOI: 10.1002/j.1556-6978.2010.tb00096.x. Abstract: Counselor cognitive complexity is an important factor in counseling efficacy. The Counselor Cognitions Questionnaire (L. E. Welfare, 2006) and the Washington University Sentence Completion Test (J. Loevinger & R. Wessler, 1970) were used to explore the nature of general and domain-specific cognitive complexity. Counseling experience, supervisory experience, counselor education experience, and highest counseling degree completed were identified as significant predictors of counselor cognitive complexity. Implications for counselor education are discussed. Keywords: counseling | counselor cognitive complexity | cognitive complexity | counselor education | counselor assessment. Article: Clients and their clinical issues are often complex, multifaceted, and even contradictory. Counselors must be able to identify and integrate multiple ambiguous pieces of information to gain an accurate understanding of client needs, interpersonal dynamics, and treatment implications. In essence, counselors need to function at high levels of cognitive complexity to address the multiple demands clients present (Blocher, 1983; Stoltenberg, 1981). Theories of cognitive complexity (e.g., Harvey, Hunt, & Schroeder, 1961; Kelly, 1955; Loevinger, 1976) suggest that, on the basis of their training and clinical experiences, counselors create conceptual templates (or constructs) to describe what they observe. These templates are organized into systems that explain the concordant and discordant relationships between and among the templates.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dual-Process Theory of Human Intelligence
    The Dual-Process (DP) Theory of Human Intelligence The Dual-Process (DP) theory of human intelligence (Davidson &Kemp, 2011; S.B. Kaufman, 2009, 2011, 2013) incorporates modern dual-process theories of cognition (see Epstein, 1994; Evans, 2008, 2010; Evans & Frankish, 2009; Kahneman, 2011; Kahneman & Frederick, 2002, 2005; Stanovich, 2004, 2011— but also see Keren & Schul, 2009; Kruglanski & Grigerezner, 2011; Osman, 2004) into a theory of human intelligence. By doing so, the Dual-Process theory organizes many constructs relating to both explicit and implicit cognition that are at least partially separable and are meaningfully related to a wide range of socially valued intelligent behaviors. In particular, performance across a wide range of intelligent behaviors—across the arts and sciences—are predicted by a hierarchical structure of goal-directed and spontaneous cognitive processes. Goal-directed processes consume limited attentional resources, whereas spontaneous processes are not dependent on input from higher-level control processes (see Stanovich & Toplak, 2012). The theory has a few key tenets. The first tenet is that there are meaningful and adaptive individual differences in both goal-directed and spontaneous cognitive processes. The second tenet is that both goal-directed and spontaneous cognitive processes jointly determine all intelligent behaviors, although in varying degrees depending on the behavior. A third tenet is that neither mode of thought is more “intelligent” than any other across the board, but what is important is the ability to flexibly switch mode of thought depending on the situation (for applications of this idea to creativity, see Gabora, 2003, 2010; Gabora & S. B. Kaufman, 2010; Howard-Jones & Murray, 2003; Martindale, 1995, Vartanian, 2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligence As a Developing Function: a Neuroconstructivist Approach
    Journal of Intelligence Article Intelligence as a Developing Function: A Neuroconstructivist Approach Luca Rinaldi 1,2,* and Annette Karmiloff-Smith 3 1 Department of Brain and Behavioural Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia 27100, Italy 2 Milan Center for Neuroscience, Milano 20126, Italy 3 Centre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck, London WC1E 7HX, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-02-6448-3775 Academic Editors: Andreas Demetriou and George Spanoudis Received: 23 December 2016; Accepted: 27 April 2017; Published: 29 April 2017 Abstract: The concept of intelligence encompasses the mental abilities necessary to survival and advancement in any environmental context. Attempts to grasp this multifaceted concept through a relatively simple operationalization have fostered the notion that individual differences in intelligence can often be expressed by a single score. This predominant position has contributed to expect intelligence profiles to remain substantially stable over the course of ontogenetic development and, more generally, across the life-span. These tendencies, however, are biased by the still limited number of empirical reports taking a developmental perspective on intelligence. Viewing intelligence as a dynamic concept, indeed, implies the need to identify full developmental trajectories, to assess how genes, brain, cognition, and environment interact with each other. In the present paper, we describe how a neuroconstructivist approach better explains why intelligence can rise or fall over development, as a result of a fluctuating interaction between the developing system itself and the environmental factors involved at different times across ontogenesis. Keywords: intelligence; individual differences; development; neuroconstructivism; emergent structure; developmental trajectory 1.
    [Show full text]