When previous academic achievement is controlled, intelligence predicts only later reading comprehension and age-10 mathematics, and WMC predicts nothing additionally¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? With preceding academic achievement included as a precursor, intelligence remained significant only for reading comprehension at t5 and mathematics at t3, while WMC was not a significant predictor at all. → Schneider Wolfgang 2017
Evidence¶
Schneider Wolfgang 2017¶
Schneider Wolfgang, Niklas Frank. (2017). Intelligence and Verbal Short-Term Memory/Working Memory: Their Interrelationships from Childhood to Young Adulthood and Their Impact on Academic Achievement. Journal of Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5020026
q2 · i? · associational · r2
Regression analyses from the LOGIC reanalysis predicting later achievement with precursors entered first. The article reports intelligence explained "14% of additional variance" for reading comprehension at t5 and "19% of additional variance" for mathematics at t3; WMC was not significant.
"However, when previous academic achievement was included in the models to predict later academic achievement, intelligence was only a significant predictor for reading comprehension at t5 (explaining 14% of additional variance) and for mathematics at t3 (explaining 19% of additional variance), and WMC was not a significant predictor at all."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Non-verbal intelligence measures (Raven, WISC Block Design) are non-significant math predictors when well-specified spatial and memory measures are in the model — related
- Kindergarten visual processing uniquely predicts grade-one early mathematics after controlling for prior mathematics and general cognitive abilities — related
- Neither IQ nor WMC significantly predicted early mathematics when both were in the same model, explaining only about 5% of variance — related
- IQ and working memory are reliable predictors of academic achievement at the beginning of school when domain knowledge is not controlled — related
- Previous domain knowledge accounts for most of the variance in later achievement, considerably reducing the predictive impact of IQ and WM — related
- In latent-variable SEM models, intelligence — not working memory — is the significant direct predictor of academic outcomes in both childhood and early adulthood — related
- Grade level, nonverbal intelligence, and working memory predicted mathematics achievement, explaining 88% of intercept variance but only 16-22% of slope variance — related
- Teacher personality does not predict student academic achievement when previous achievement is controlled — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
precursors-reduce-iq-wmc-prediction |
title |
When previous academic achievement is controlled, intelligence predicts only later reading comprehension and age-10 mathematics, and WMC predicts nothing additionally |
description |
When previous academic achievement is controlled, intelligence predicts only later reading comprehension and age-10 mathematics, and WMC predicts nothing additionally |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2017 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — schneider-wolfgang-2017 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.