Utilización del modelo multirrasgo-multimétodo en la prueba de razonamiento abstracto y espacial (TRAE)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2022.1.36638Palabras clave:
razonamiento, inteligencia, validez, fiabilidadResumen
En el presente estudio se obtuvo evidencia de la fiabilidad y de la validez convergente y discriminante de la Prueba de Razonamiento Abstracto y Espacial (TRAE, en portugués). El TRAE y la BPR-5 (subpruebas de RA, RE, RV y RN) fueron administrados a 149 estudiantes de secundaria (52,3% niños; Medad =16,98, DE=0,87). Las puntuaciones totales de TRAE mostraron una fiabilidad adecuada (0,76), sin embargo, los escores de las subpruebas fueran menos fiables. El enfoque multi-rasgo/multi-método en ecuaciones estructurales mostró que la inclusión del razonamiento abstracto (AR) y espacial (SR) mejoraron el ajuste del modelo. Estos resultados apoyan la validez convergente del TRAE. Sin embargo, un modelo alternativo con correlaciones perfectas entre los factores AR y SR también fue plausible, lo que indica una falta de validez discriminante. Estos hallazgos respaldan la fiabilidad y la validez convergente de la escala general del TRAE. Mientras tanto, se necesita precaución con la interpretación de las subpruebas.
Descargas
Citas
Almeida, L., & Primi, R. (2015). BPR-5: Baterias de provas de raciocínio. Manual técnico (2nd ed.). Casa do Psicólogo.
Beaty, R. E., Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2014). Does insight problem solving predict real-world creativity? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8(3), 287-292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035727
Beaujean, A. A., Firmin, M. W., Michonski, J. D., Berry, T., & Johnson, C. (2010). A multitrait-multimethod examination of the reynolds intellectual assessment scales in a college sample. Assessment, 17(3), 347-360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191109356865
Byrne, B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications and programming. Routledge.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81-105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
Cormier, D. C., Bulut, O., McGrew, K. S., & Frison, J. (2016). The role of Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) cognitive abilities in predicting writing achievement during the school-age years. Psychology in the Schools, 53(8), 787-803. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21945
Eid, M. (2010). Multitrait-multimethod-matrix. In N. Salkind (Ed.), Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 850–855). Sage.
Eid, M., Lischetzke, T., & Nussbeck, F. W. (2006). Structural Equation Models for Multitrait-Multimethod Data. In M. Eid & E. Diener (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 283–299). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/11383-019
Fan, X. (2003). Two approaches for correcting correlation attenuation caused by measurement error: Implications for research practice. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(6), 915-930. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164403251319
Gignac, G. E. (2014). Fluid intelligence shares closer to 60% of its variance with working memory capacity and is a better indicator of general intelligence. Intelligence, 47, 122-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2014.09.004
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Jacobs, K. E., & Roodenburg, J. (2014). The development and validation of the Self-Report Measure of Cognitive Abilities: A multitrait-multimethod study. Intelligence, 42(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.09.004
Keith, T. Z., & Reynolds, M. R. (2010). Cattell-Horn-Carroll abilities and cognitive tests: What we’ve learned from 20 years of research. Psychology in the Schools, 47(7), 635-650. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20496
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
Koch, T., Eid, M., & Lochner, K. (2018). Multitrait-Multimethod- Analysis: The Psychometric Foundation of CFA-MTMM Models. In P. Irwing, T. Booth, & D. J. Hughes (Eds.), The Wiley Handbook of Psychometric Testing: A Multidisciplinary Reference on Survey, Scale and Test Development (pp. 781-846). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118489772.ch18
Lance, C. E., Dawson, B., Birkelbach, D., & Hoffman, B. J. (2010). Method effects, measurement error, and substantive conclusions. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 435-455. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109352528
Laros, J. A., Almeida, G. O. M., Valentini, F., & Lima, R. M. F. (2015). Dimensionalidade e evidências de validade convergente do SON-R 6-40. Temas Em Psicologia, 23(4), 929-945. https://doi.org/10.9788/tp2015.4-10
Laros, J. A., Jesús, G. R., & Karino, C. A. (2013). Validação brasileira do teste não-verbal de inteligência SON-R 2½-7[a]. Avaliação Psicológica: Interamerican Journal of Psychological Assessment, 12(2), 233-242.
Li, D., & Shi, J. (2019). Fluid intelligence, trait emotional intelligence and academic performance in children with different intellectual levels. High Ability Studies, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2019.1694493
Lima, R. M. F., & Laros, J. A. (2017). Evidências de validade convergente e discriminante dos escores do SON-R 6-40. Psicologia - Teoria e Prática, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.5935/1980-6906/psicologia.v19n1p107-120
McGrew, K. S., & Flanagan, D. P. (1998). The intelligence test desk reference (ITDR) - Gc-Gf cross battery assessment. Allyn and Bacon.
Nunes, C. S. S., & Nunes, M. F. O. (2015). Matrizes Progressivas Avançadas de Raven (1st ed.). Casa do Psicólogo.
Peng, P., Wang, T., Wang, C. C., & Lin, X. (2019). A meta- analysis on the relation between fluid intelligence and reading/ mathematics: Effects of tasks, age, and social economics status. Psychological Bulletin, 145(2), 189-236. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000182
Primi, R. (2002). Inteligência fluida: definição fatorial, cognitiva e neuropsicológica. Paidéia, 12(23), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-863X2002000200005
Primi, R., & Almeida, L. (2000). Estudo de validação da Bateria de Provas de Raciocínio (BPR-5). Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa, 16(2), 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-37722000000200009
Primi, R., Correia, T. A., & Almeida, L. (2019). Bateria de Provas de Raciocínio (BPR-5). In C. S. Hutz, D. R. Bandeira, & C. M. Trentini (Eds.), Avaliação da Personalidade e Inteligência (1st ed., pp. 109-122). Artmed.
Rabelo, I. S., Pacanaro, S. V., Leme, I. F. A., Ambiel, R. A. M., & Alves, G. A. da S. (2015). Teste não verbal de inteligência geral: BETA-III: Subtestes raciocínio matricial e códigos (1st ed.). Casa do Psicólogo.
Rueda, F. J. M., Noronha, A. P. P., Sisto, F., Santos, A. A. A., & Castro, N. R. (2016). Manual Técnico WISC-IV (1st ed.). Casa do Psicólogo.
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2018). The Cattell– Horn–Carroll Theory of Cognitive Abilities. In D. P. Flanagan & E. M. McDonough (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 73-163). Guilford Press.
Sistema de Avaliação de Testes Psicológicos - SATEPSI. (2019). Testes favoráveis. Recuperado de http://satepsi.cfp.org.br/testesFavoraveis.cfm
Sisto, F. (2012). Teste Conciso de Raciocínio (1st ed.). Casa do Psicólogo.
Sternberg, R. J. (2011). The theory of successful intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg & S. B. Kaufman (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence (pp. 504-527). Cambridge University Press.
Valentini, F., Laros, J. A., & de Barros Mose, L. (2020). Validity Evidence of the Abstract and Spatial Reasoning Test. Trends in Psychology, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-020-00056-w
Wasserman, J. D. (2018). A History of Intelligence Assessment: The Unfinished Tapestry. In D. P. Flanagan & E. M. McDonough (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 3-55). Guilford Press.
Widaman, K. F. (1985). Hierarchically Nested Covariance Structure Models for Multitrait-Multimethod Data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168500900101
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2022 Psico
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.
