Non-verbal intelligence measures (Raven, WISC Block Design) are non-significant math predictors when well-specified spatial and memory measures are in the model¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Raven and WISC Block Design remained non-significant even when entered without the other non-verbal IQ variable, and did not change model R2. → Szűcs Dénes 2014

Evidence¶

Szűcs Dénes 2014¶

Szűcs Dénes, Devine Amy, Soltesz Fruzsina, Nobes Alison, Gabriel Florence. (2014). Cognitive components of a mathematical processing network in 9-year-old children. Developmental Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12144

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Model refinement regressions (M2–M5, N = 98) adding IQ variables to the five significant predictors; only WISC Vocabulary was significant (M2 β = 0.18, p = .0156), while Raven and Block Design were non-significant and model R2 stayed at 0.68.

"Raven (Table4; M4 and Figure2D) and WISC Block Design (Table4; M5 and Figure2E) remained non-significant even when they were entered into the regression without the other non-verbal IQ variable."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• General Cognitive Ability — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Results provide no support for the IQ-achievement discrepancy model of dyslexia; non-verbal IQ correlated with all Year-1 language measures — related
• Neither IQ nor WMC significantly predicted early mathematics when both were in the same model, explaining only about 5% of variance — related
• In latent-variable SEM models, intelligence — not working memory — is the significant direct predictor of academic outcomes in both childhood and early adulthood — reports the opposite
• When previous academic achievement is controlled, intelligence predicts only later reading comprehension and age-10 mathematics, and WMC predicts nothing additionally — related
• IQ and working memory are reliable predictors of academic achievement at the beginning of school when domain knowledge is not controlled — reports the opposite
• Number sense measures are non-significant predictors of math once more robust predictors are included — related
• Block Play Predicts Math Achievement — related
• Previous domain knowledge accounts for most of the variance in later achievement, considerably reducing the predictive impact of IQ and WM — related
• Verbal STM/WM and several executive and sensorimotor measures show no robust relation with math in children with normal reading skill — related
• Visuo-spatial working memory and inhibition jointly predict mathematics performance in 9–10-year-old children — related