Intelligence 77 (2019) 101404 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Intelligence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/intell Decomposing the influence of mental processes on academic performance T ⁎ Andreas Demetrioua, , Nikolaos Makrisb, Dimitrios Tachmatzidisb, Smaragda Kazic, George Spanoudisd a University of Nicosia, and Cyprus Academy of Science, Letters, and Arts, Makedonitissas Avenue, P.O. Box 24005, 1700 Nicosia, Cyprus b Democritus University of Thrace, Greece c Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Greece d University of Cyprus, Cyprus ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: We explored relations between academic performance and cognition from 9 to 15 years of age. Participants were Academic performance examined on executive control processes, reasoning in several domains, self-evaluation of performance in these Cognition domains, and language. Structural equation modelling showed that cognitive and language ability highly pre- Language dicted school performance. These relations changed with age; cognitive flexibility, working memory and rea- Cognitive development soning dominated from 9 to 11 and reasoning and language dominated from 13 to 15 years. Self-evaluation was Intelligence related with academic performance only in secondary school, but this relation was masked by reasoning. SES influenced school achievement directly on top of cognitive influences in both primary and secondary school.The implications for cognitive developmental theory and educational implications are discussed. 1. Introduction instance, numerical operations and the mental number line in mathe- matics, mental rotation and mental imagery in spatial reasoning, This study examined how performance at school relates to various sorting and class reasoning in classification, etc. Although the exact dimensions of cognition. We decomposed this relation into specific number, identity, and degree of functional autonomy of the domains processes involved in cognition, such as executive control, reasoning, are still disputed, some domains are recognized across disciplines of language and cognitive self-evaluation, and specified if they relate to psychological research. For instance, spatial, categorical, quantitative, school performance differently at different levels of school education. causal, social, and verbal reasoning emerged as distinct domains in Below we first summarize current research about the organization and differential, cognitive, developmental, and educational psychology development of these mental processes. We then summarize research (Carroll, 1993; Case, 1992; Case, Demetriou, Platsidou, Kazi, 2001; showing how these processes relate to academic achievement. Finally, Demetriou & Spanoudis, 2018; Gardner, 1983; Thurstone, 1973). we state predictions to be tested by our study. At still a higher level, all domains relate to a higher-order factor, general intelligence or g, reflecting the fact that all mental processes 1.1. Intelligence correlate with each other. Although widely accepted, the nature of g is still under strong dispute. Through the years, it has been associated 1.1.1. Organization with three types of domain-independent processes. First is reasoning in The hierarchical interpretation of mental processes dominates in its various manifestations, including inductive, analogical, and deduc- psychometric (Carroll, 1993) and brain models (Haier, 2017) of the tive reasoning (Carroll, 1993; Jensen, 1998; Spearman, 1927). In cur- human mind. According to this interpretation, mental abilities are or- rent psychometric theory, this factor is basically identical with fluid ganized in three major hierarchical levels. At the task level, there are intelligence (gf) (Gustafsson & Undheim, 1996). Later, several processes specific processes related to specific tasks, such as addition inmathe- which reflect efficiency in representing and processing information matics, visualization in space, classifying objects, etc. At this level, were found to independently relate with psychometric g. These include specificities of task content and the context involving the taskmaybe processing speed (Coyle, 2017; Kail, Lervag, & Hulme, 2015), inhibition important. At a higher level, task-specific skills are organized in several and attention control (Arsalidou & Pascaul-Leone, 2016; Blair, 2006; broad domains, identified by mental processes shared by tasks. For Zelazo, 2015), and working memory (Baddeley, 2012; Case, 1992; ⁎ Corresponding author at: University of Nicosia, Makedonitissas Avenue, P.O. Box 24005, 1700 Nicosia, Cyprus. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Demetriou), [email protected] (N. Makris), [email protected] (S. Kazi), [email protected] (G. Spanoudis). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2019.101404 Received 28 March 2019; Received in revised form 18 September 2019; Accepted 19 September 2019 Available online 06 November 2019 0160-2896/ © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. A. Demetriou, et al. Intelligence 77 (2019) 101404 Halford, Wilson, & Phillips, 1998; Kyllonen & Christal, 1990; Pascual- carefully and rehearse (Chevalier, Martis, Curran, & Munakata, 2015; Leone, 1970). Finally, recent research suggested that various aspects of Paulus, Tsalas, Proust, & Sodian, 2014; Spanoudis et al., 2015). In metacognition (Demetriou et al., 2018; Efklides, 2008) relate with g. adolescence, they become aware of inferential processes, such as de- These include awareness of mental processes and their mental load ductive and inductive reasoning, and of the constraints underlying their (Demetriou & Kazi, 2006; Kazi, Demetriou, Spanoudis, Zhang, & Wang, validity (Demetriou et al., 2017; Moshman, 2015). Thus, with devel- 2012), awareness of the origins of knowledge (Spanoudis, Demetriou, opment, individuals become increasingly accurate in evaluating their Kazi, Giorgala, & Zenonos, 2015), and self-evaluation of one's own performance and representing their own strengths and weaknesses. performance on cognitive tasks (Demetriou & Efklides, 1989; Makris, Overall, self-evaluations of performance and cognitive self-representa- Tahmatzidis, Demetriou, & Spanoudis, 2017). tions tend to reflect actual performance with relative accuracy since Makris et al. (2017) showed recently that psychometric g is a early adolescence, becoming increasingly stricter and less positive with complex additive function of all of these processes: attention control, attainment of principle-based reasoning (Demetriou et al., 2017; shifting flexibility, working memory, reasoning, and awareness ac- Demetriou, Makris, Kazi, Spanoudis, & Shayer, 2018; Demetriou & counted for 27%, 18%, 27%, 19%, and 7% the variance of g, respec- Spanoudis, 2018). tively, adding up to 98% of total g variance. van der Maas et al. (2006) The developmental patterns outlined suggest that the nature of g proposed that g may reflect the dynamic interaction between these varies in development. Specifically, the relation between reasoning and processes rather than any specific process as such; the relative con- processing and representational efficiency changes with development. tribution of each process in this interaction may vary across different On the one hand, the relation with attention control (−0.52, −0.35, tasks, depending upon their specific demands (van der Maas, Kan, and − 0.17, at 9–11, 11–13, and 13–15 years, respectively) and flex- Marsman, & Stevenson, 2017). Thus, it is important to specify how each ibility (−0.71, −0.38, and − 0.10, for the three age groups, respec- process relates with school performance at different phases of educa- tively) decreases with age, because these processes tend to automate tion. with age; on the other, the relation with working memory (0.06, 0.65, and 0.74, for the three age groups, respectively) and awareness 1.1.2. Development strengthens, because these processes develop until late adolescence All processes above develop from birth to adulthood. Processing (0.25, 0.30, and 0.35, for the three age groups, respectively). These becomes faster with time (Demetriou et al., 2013; Kail et al., 2015). patterns suggest a shift from executive processes related to attention Attention becomes more efficient in focusing on stimuli for the time control to reasoning processes and explicit awareness involved in pro- needed, in resisting distraction until processing is complete, and flex- blem solving and planning (Demetriou et al., 2017; Makris et al., 2017). ibly shifting between stimuli or responses according to needs (Arsalidou & Pascaul-Leone, 2016; Zelazo, 2015). Working memory increases so 1.2. Intelligence, socioeconomic environment, and academic performance that more information may be held in mind and processed (Case, 1992; Pascual-Leone, 1970). The unit of representation changes from reality- School performance is related to cognitive ability. Psychometric referenced representations to relational constructs signifying relations intelligence accounts for about 30% of variance of school performance, at various levels of abstraction (Demetriou & Spanoudis, 2018). although this relation may vary with level of education (Gustafsson & Inference also changes at several levels. For instance, at preschool, Balke, 1993; Roth et al., 2015). Also, academic self-concept (Guay, representations function in blocks largely matching their episodic March, & Boivin, 2003; Johannesson, 2017), self-evaluation (Mabe III & origin rather than inferential links. Toddlers may translate representa- West, 1982), cognitive self-representation, and personality (Demetriou,