IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v71y2018icp85-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

General Intelligence (g), ACT Scores, and Theory of Mind: (ACT)g Predicts Limited Variance Among Theory of Mind Tests

Author

Listed:
  • Coyle, Thomas R.
  • Elpers, Karrie E.
  • Gonzalez, Miguel C.
  • Freeman, Jacob
  • Baggio, Jacopo A.

Abstract

This study is the first to examine relations between general intelligence (g), non-g factors, and theory of mind (ToM) using structural equation modeling with multiple indicators of g and ToM. g was based on the subtests of the ACT, a college admissions test that is strongly g loaded, and ToM was based on the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test and the Short Story Test (SST). g correlated strongly with a latent ToM factor (β = .65) and moderately with the two ToM tests (β ≈ .34), which correlated modestly with each other (β = .27). The modest correlation between the ToM tests indicates that g predicted a small amount of variance among the ToM tests (7%) and suggests that the ToM tests had little in common. In addition, non-g residuals of the ACT subtests, obtained after removing g, correlated negligibly with the ToM factor and the ToM tests (|β| < 0.06). Similar results were obtained for the ToM residuals, which correlated trivially with the ACT subtests. The trivial non-g effects suggest that g-ToM relations were attributable to “not much more than g.” The results replicated with different combinations of ACT subtests, controls for possible confounds (reading comprehension on the SST), and another college admissions test (the SAT). The use of a convenience sample (college students) and the limited measures of g and ToM are discussed as limitations. Future research should examine the robustness of effects using different measures of g and ToM and also examine possible mediators of g-ToM relations (e.g., executive functions).

Suggested Citation

  • Coyle, Thomas R. & Elpers, Karrie E. & Gonzalez, Miguel C. & Freeman, Jacob & Baggio, Jacopo A., 2018. "General Intelligence (g), ACT Scores, and Theory of Mind: (ACT)g Predicts Limited Variance Among Theory of Mind Tests," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 85-91.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:71:y:2018:i:c:p:85-91
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2018.10.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289617303653
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2018.10.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Demetriou, Andreas & Golino, Hudson & Spanoudis, George & Makris, Nikolaos & Greiff, Samuel, 2021. "The future of intelligence: The central meaning-making unit of intelligence in the mind, the brain, and artificial intelligence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    2. Demetriou, Andreas & Mougi, Antigoni & Spanoudis, George & Makris, Nicolaos, 2022. "Changing developmental priorities between executive functions, working memory, and reasoning in the formation of g from 6 to 12 years," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:71:y:2018:i:c:p:85-91. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.