Intelligence and parallel versus sequential organization of information processing in analogical reasoning

• Authors: Jarosław Orzechowski , Edward Nęcka
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The construct of the organization of information processing (OIP) has been adopted as a possible cognitive mechanism responsible for human intelligent functioning. Participants (N = 77) were asked to solve an analogical reasoning task, a test of divided attention, a working memory capacity test, and Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices as a standard test of general fl uid intelligence. On the basis of the chronometric analysis of their performance in the analogy task, participants were divided into those preferring to use parallel or sequential modes of organization of information processing. It appeared that intelligent people using the parallel mode of processing obtained the best results in the analogical reasoning test. Other subgroups did not differ substantially from one another. It also appeared that intelligent people using the parallel mode of processing performed equally well regardless of their attentional resources and working memory capacity, whereas people using the sequential mode of processing were much more dependent on these basic cognitive limitations. A compensatory mechanism is suggested in order to account for this data: the parallel mode of processing probably helps to compensate for defi cient attention or impaired working memory, whereas the sequential mode cannot act in a compensatory way.

Keywords

EN

intelligence; analogical reasoning; parallel processing; sequential processing; attention; working memory

• Publisher: Committee on Psychological Sciences PAS, Warsaw School of Social Psychology
• Journal: Psychological Studies
• Year: 2011
• Volume: 49
• Issue: 5
• Pages: 41-53

Dates

published

2011-11-01

online

2012-11-13

Contributors

author

Jarosław Orzechowski

• Jagiellonian University Warsaw School of Social Sciences and Humanities

author

Edward Nęcka

• Jagiellonian University Warsaw School of Social Sciences and Humanities

References

• Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Boyle, M. O. (2005). Working memory and intelligence: The same or different constructs? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 30-60.
• Carlstedt, B., Gustafsson, J. E., & Ullstadius, E. (2000). Item sequencing effects on the measurement of fl uid intelligence. Intelligence, 28, 145-160.[Crossref]
• Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices test. Psychological Review, 97, 404-431.
• Chuderski, A., & Nęcka, E. (2010). Intelligence and cognitive control. In A. Gruszka, G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition (pp. 263-282). New York: Springer.
• Chuderski, A., Nęcka, E. (2011). The contribution of working memory to fl uid reasoning: capacity, control, or both? (submitted).[WoS]
• Chuderski, A., Taraday, M., Necka, E., & Smoleń, T. (2012). Storage capacity explains fl uid intelligence but executive control does not. Intelligence, 40(3), 278-295.[Crossref][WoS]
• Conway, A. R. A., Cowan, N., Bunting, M. F., Therriault, D. J., Minkoff, S. R. (2002). A latent variable analysis of working memory capacity, short-term memory capacity, processing speed, general fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 30, 163-183.[Crossref]
• Deary, I. J. (1993). Inspection time and WAIS-R IQ subtypes: A confi rmatory factor analysis study. Intelligence, 17, 223-236.[Crossref]
• Deary, I. J. (2000). Looking Down on Human Intelligence: From Psychometrics to the Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Dempster, F. N., & Corkill, A. J. (1999). Individual differences in susceptibility to interference and general cognitive ability. Acta Psychologica, 101, 395-416.
• Diascro, M. N., & Brody, N. (1993). Serial versus parallel processing in visual search tasks and IQ. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 243-245.
• Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79-132.[Crossref]
• Holyoak, K. J. (2005). Analogy. In K. J. Holyoak, & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook on thinking and reasoning (pp. 117-142). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Hunt, E. (1974). Quote the Raven? Nevermore. In L. W. Gregg (Ed.), Knowledge and cognition (pp. 129-157). Potomac, MD: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Hunt, E., & Lansman, M. (1982). Individual differences in attention. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence (pp. 207-254). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Jensen, A. R. (1982). The chronometry of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 255-310). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Jensen, A. R. (1987). Individual differences in the Hick paradigm. In P. A. Vernon (Ed.), Speed of information processing and intelligence (pp. 101-175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
• Kyllonen, P. C., & Christal, R. E. (1990). Reasoning ability is (little more than) working-memory capacity? Intelligence, 14, 389-433.[Crossref]
• Lohman, D. F. (2000). Complex information processing and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 285-340). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• McClelland, J. L. (1979). On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. Psychological Review, 86, 287-330.
• Nęcka, E. (1992). Cognitive analysis of intelligence: The signifi cance of working memory processes.Personality and individual differences, 13, 1031-1046.
• Nęcka, E. (1996). The attentive mind: Intelligence in relation to selective attention, sustained attention, and dual task performance. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 27, 3-24.
• Nęcka, E. (1997). Attention, working memory and arousal: Concepts apt to account for the “process of intelligence”. In G. Matthews (Ed.), Cognitive Science Perspectives on Personality and Emotion. Elsevier Science B.V.
• Nęcka, E. (2000). Pobudzenie intelektu: Zarys formalnej teorii inteligencji. [The arousal of intellect: An outline of the formal theory of intelligence]. Kraków: Universitas.
• Nęcka, E., & Orzechowski, J. (2005). Higher-order cognition and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Praetz (Eds.), Cognition and intelligence: Identifying the mechanisms of the mind (pp. 122-141). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Nęcka, E., Orzechowski, J., & Szymura, B. (2006). Psychologia poznawcza. [Cognitive psychology]. Warszawa: PWN & Academica.
• Nettelbeck, T. (1987). Inspection time and intelligence. In P. A. Vernon (Ed.), Speed of information processing and intelligence (pp. 295-346). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Orzechowski, J. (1998). Nieliniwo-równoległy model rozumowania przez analogię a różnice in dywidualne w funkcjonowaniu poznawczym człowieka.[Nonlinear and parallel model of analogical reasoning and individual differences in human cognition.] Unpublished Ph.D. thesis.
• Orzechowski, J. (2004). Poznawcze podłoże rozumowania przez analogię: Weryfi kacja modelu nieliniowo-równoległego. [Cognitive basis of analogical reasoning: Verifi cation of the nonlinear and parallel model of reasoning]. Studia Psychologiczne, 42, 95-106.
• Orzechowski, J. (2010). Working memory capacity and individual differences in higher-level cognition. In A. Gruszka, G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition (pp. 353-368). New York: Springer.
• Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1983). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and vocabulary scales (Section 4, Advanced Progressive matrices). London: H.K. Lewis.
• Raz, N., Willerman, L., & Yama, M. (1987). On sense and senses: Intelligence and auditory information processing. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 201-210.
• Schweizer, K. (2010). The relationship of attention and intelligence. In A. Gruszka, G. Matthews, & B. Szymura (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition (pp. 247-262). New York: Springer.
• Schweizer, K., & Moosbrugger, H. (2003). Attention and working memory as predictors of intelligence. Intelligence, 32, 329-347.
• Stankov, L. (1983). Attention and intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 471-490.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1977a). Intelligence, information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1977b). Component processes in analogical reasoning. Psychological Review, 84, 353-375.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (1986). What is intelligence?: Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and defi nition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
• Süß, H. M., Oberauer, K., Wittmann, W. W., Wilhelm, O., Schulze, R. (2002). Working memory capacity explains reasoning ability - and a little bit more. Intelligence, 30, 261-288.[Crossref]
• Sullivan, L., & Stankov, L. (1990). Shadowing and target detection as a function of age: Implications for the role of processing resources in competing tasks and in general intelligence. Australian Journal of Psychology, 42, 173-185.
• Treisman, A.M., & Gromican, S. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15-48.
• Wittmann, W. W., & Süß, H. M. (1999). Investigating the paths between working memory, intelligence, knowledge, and complex problem-solving performances via Brunswik symmetry. In P. L. Ackerman & R. D. Roberts (Eds.), Learning and individual differences. Process, trait content determinants (pp. 77−104). Washington: APA.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10167-010-0039-3