1. Linda S. Gottfredson University of Delaware Newark, DE Creativity on the Brain (and its psychometrics) Discussion of Rex E. Jung’s presentation, “Neuroimaging of Creativity and Intelligence” New Voices in Creativity and Intelligence Conference University of Kansas Lawrence, KS, November 2, 2009

2. Exciting interdisciplinary research Big advances, quickly: More imaging methods Lower cost Larger samples More collaboration More theory testing More psychometric traits Etc.

3. Psychometric (Interpretive) Challenges Construct validity IQ = score g = theoretical construct Restriction in range Reliability of measurement Sampling error 3 statistical artifacts misled personnel selection psychology for many decades Treating scores as constructs badly muddled intelligence debates Your assessment of your field’s needs? Questions of experts here today?

4. Constructs vs. Measurements Construct (empirical phenomenon) Measurement (score) “Intelligence”g—general proficiency at learning, reasoning (“catching on)” IQ score “Creativity”??

5. Hierarchical model of cognitive abilities— The empirical relatedness of differences across individuals g VQSMOthers MOST GENERAL Domain general More heritable Psychometrically unitary Physiologically distributed NARROW = Specific variance, unrelated to g Where is “intelligence”? It’s just a label that can be applied to different layers of traits in—or outside—the hierarchical model (factor analyses of scores)

6. Hierarchical model of cognitive abilities— The empirical relatedness of differences across individuals g VQSMOthers MOST GENERAL Domain general More heritable Psychometrically unitary Physiologically distributed NARROW IQ ≈ IQ ≈ = Specific variance, unrelated to g Family of Constructs (factor analyses of scores)

7. A closer look at constructs vs. measures Gf GcGm Gv Gm etc g Constructs

8. An often misunderstood point Gf GcGm Gv Ga etc g Constructs g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities

9. Scores ≠ Constructs FSIQ WMIPSI ds ln cd ss VCI PRI si vo bd pc mr co Gf GcGm GvGa etc g ConstructsTest Scores g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities

10. Note: IQ is just sum of scores, not of constructs FSIQ WMIPSI ds ln cd ss VCI PRI si vo bd pc mr co Gf GcGm Gv Ga etc g ConstructsTest Scores g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities IQ is sum of subtest scores

11. IQ (score) is a good estimate of g (construct) FSIQ WMIPSI ds ln cd ss VCI PRI si vo bd pc mr co Gf GcGm Gv Ga etc g ConstructsTest Scores g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities IQ is sum of subtest scores

12. FSIQ WMIPSI ds ln cd ss VCI PRI si vo bd pc mr co Gf GcGm Gv Ga etc g ConstructsTest Scores g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities IQ is sum of subtest scores Took 100 years to get here. Lots of conceptual development

13. “IQ” scores differ in tilt & precision FSIQ WMIPSI ds ln cd ss VCI PRI si vo bd pc mr co Gf Gc Gm Gv Ga etc g ConstructsTest Scores g is core ingredient of all more specific abilities IQ is sum of subtest scores ⇝ ? Jung & Haier (2007) note a serious theoretical problem: IQ scores in (imaging) studies often not measuring same construct(s) Different studies use different “intelligence” tests.

14. So, not same processes tapped Gv g g, if battery broad Gv, if battery has mostly verbal tests

15. We Need Parallel Conceptual Effort for Creativity CIQ CartoonsMUTGMT Constructs??Test Scores What is the structure? Is there a single c? Domain coverage? Common factors? CAQRAT Jung’s example today

16. Intersection of 2 domains? Often used to measure creativity

17. Artifact #1 Restriction in Range in Scores (whole range not sampled)

19. Restricted

21. 100

22. 22 Mean IQs by occupation level & years education 0-7 8 9-11 12 13-15 16+ Unskilled Semiskilled Skilled Manager, Cler, Sales Professional & Tech Occupation: Years education: WAIS-R IQ (mean + 1 SD), US adults ages 16-74 IQ 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 ~%ile: 2 5 10 15 25 37 50 63 75 85 90 95 98 Mean + 1 SD range Imaging Sample 1 Mean + 1 SD Openness Sample

23. The missing top third 140 150 160 170 180 Mean + 1 SD

24. What kind of creativity? 140 150 160 170 180 Cox estimates: Cultural-level creativity HaydnMozartBeethoven JQ AdamsJefferson Jackson LincolnMadisonGrantWashington Divergent thinking Mean + 1 SD

25. Artifact #2 Reliability of Measurement

26. Reliability of Creativity Measures? Subjective ratings (self vs. other)

27. Reliability of Brain Measurements? Lower reliability will lower correlations. Differential reliability will change patterns of correlations.

28. Artifact #3 Sampling Error (chance errors in reflecting full population)

29. Small samples = Big confusion Small sample Ns = large confidence intervals (CI) Different sample sizes = different confidence intervals Leads to:  Unstable parameter estimates  Unstable patterns of significance

30. All 3 Artifacts = Chaos Small sample Ns plus Unreliability plus Restriction in range equals:  “Complex” pattern of results  “Specificity” theories False inferences!! Point? Knowing amount & type of artifacts helps unmuddy the picture, as it did in personnel selection psychology. Clockwork-like patterns emerged.

31. Questions?

32. Thank you. www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson