Item-response theory modeling of IQ gains (the Flynn effect) on crystallized intelligence: Rodgers’ hypothesis yes, Brand’s hypothesis perhaps
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Studies using IRT have shown that item parameters do vary across cohorts, with drifts of item difficulty for some items and loss of discriminating power for others, especially for tests involving culture-based knowledge such as vocabulary and mathematics.
“Studies using this approach have shown that item parameters do vary across cohorts, with drifts of item difficulty for some items and loss of discriminating power for others, especially for tests involving culture-based knowledge such as vocabulary and mathematics (Beaujean & Osterlind, 2008;Pietschnig et al., 2013).”
From No negative Flynn effect in France: Why variations of intelligence should not be assessed using tests based on cultural knowledge (2021) · cites this paper as Pietschnig et al., 2013
Subtests primarily reflecting Gc intrinsically depend on culture-based declarative knowledge, and culture as assessed by these tests changes over time, making them especially likely to develop DIF.
“On the other hand, subtests primarily reflecting Gc intrinsically depend on culture-based declarative knowledge, and culture as assessed by these tests changes over time (e.g.Pietschnig et al., 2013), making them especially likely to develop DIF (see Beaujean & Osterlind, 2008;Pietschnig et al., 2013;Wicherts et al., 2004).”
From No negative Flynn effect in France: Why variations of intelligence should not be assessed using tests based on cultural knowledge (2021) · cites this paper as Pietschnig et al., 2013
Cited by
Sorted by citations
One Century of Global IQ Gains: A Formal Meta-Analysis of the Flynn Effect (1909–2013)
Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615577701 · Cited by 316 · see citing works
Self-citationWoodley, M. A., te Nijenhuis, J., Must, O., & Must, A. (2014) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2013.12.004 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Dworak, E. M., Revelle, W., & Condon, D. M. (2023) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2023.101734 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Gonthier, C., Grégoire, J., & Besançon, M. (2021) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2020.101512 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Pietschnig, J., Tran, U. S., & Voracek, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Vienna (AT)
- Corresponding author
- Pietschnig, Jakob
- Venue
- Intelligence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 791-801
- ISSN
- 0160-2896 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2070180248
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 5.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Intelligence (publishedVersion)
- GRO (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Keywords
- Flynn effect, IQ gains, crystallized intelligence, test-taking behavior, guessing, measurement invariance, psychiatric inpatients and outpatients, academic qualifications, item response theory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
