Abstract
The development of an alternate form for Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM) Test is described. Items for each of the original 60 items of the SPM were developed to be comparable to the corresponding original items in terms of the underlying strategy and difficulty. An alternate form reliability analysis on a diverse group of 449 children (77 African-American, 122 Asian, 54 Filipino, 156 Latino/Hispanic, 38 white, and 2 other) showed an alternate form reliability coefficient of .90. Kuder-Richardson reliabilities of the newly developed alternate and the SPM were identical at .94: A Kolmogorov-Smirnov two-sample test, moreover, revealed no significant differences in central tendency, dispersion, and skewness for distributions of individual item difficulties. In addition, the two tests showed comparable predictive validity coefficients. The alternate form resolves one limitation of the SPM and could provide widespread utility as a research tool.
Highlights
Due to its nonverbal format, the Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) is purported to be a culturally fair, unbiased measure of fluid intelligence (Cattell, 1963), educative ability (J. Raven et al, 1993), or, as we will refer to it, general intelligence (g; Spearman, 1927), and has shown itself to be especially useful in situations where English is not an individual’s primary language
The internal consistency (IC) of the APM-18 scale yielded moderate reliability (α = .79). This alpha is lower than normative IC reports for the APM-36 (α = .84; Forbes, 1964), but higher than those for the APM-12
In Sample 2, we examined correlations between APM-18 scores and Big Five personality dimensions assessed with the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Scale (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and verbal and drawing creativity (Miller & Tal, 2007)
Summary
Due to its nonverbal format, the APM is purported to be a culturally fair, unbiased measure of fluid intelligence (Cattell, 1963), educative ability (J. Raven et al, 1993), or, as we will refer to it, general intelligence (g; Spearman, 1927), and has shown itself to be especially useful in situations where English is not an individual’s primary language. The positive aspects of this test are marred by its lengthy administration time (40-60 min), making it difficult to use in time-constrained multivariate research or classroom settings In answer to these various limitations, Arthur and Day (1994) developed a 12-item short form of the APM (which we call APM-12), with an administration time of 15 min. Several studies have shown that this 12-item form shows acceptable psychometric properties (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, test–retest reliability, convergent validity; see Arthur, Tubre, Paul, & Sanchez-Ku, 1999, for review). Hamel and Schmittmann (2006) have argued that the complete 36-item APM can be administered as a 20-min speed test Scores on this speeded form of the APM show strong correlations with scores on slower timed (40 min, r = .74) and untimed versions (r = .75) of the APM. We report the development and construct validity of this 18-item scale
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
