Examining the Flynn effect in the general social survey vocabulary test using item response theory
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?
Two studies found that observed intelligence scores changed over several decades, while latent ability as estimated from IRT remained near-constant.
“When considering total performance, two studies found that observed intelligence scores changed over several decades, while latent ability as estimated from IRT remained near-constant (Beaujean & Osterlind, 2008;Beaujean & Sheng, 2010), confirming both that item properties can change without corresponding changes of ability, and that this can create the illusion of ability changes over time.”
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 Beaujean & Sheng, 2010
The conclusion is in line with a tradition of studies attributing fluctuations of intelligence scores to methodological biases, especially as they relate to cultural item content.
“This conclusion is in line with a tradition of studies attributing fluctuations of intelligence scores to methodological biases, especially as they relate to [cultural] item content”
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 Beaujean & Sheng, 2010
Performance can differ between groups of subjects without representing a true difference of ability.
“this is an illustration of the principle that performance can differ between groups of subjects without representing a true difference of ability (Beaujean & Osterlind, 2008;Beaujean & Sheng, 2010).”
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 Beaujean & Sheng, 2010
Cites
A Theory and Procedure of Scale Analysis: With Applications in Political Research
Mokken, R. J. (1971) · doi:10.1515/9783110813203 · Cited by 1,120 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Flynn effect: A meta-analysis.
Trahan, L. H., Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., & Hiscock, M. (2014) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0037173 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
“Beaujean and Osterlind (2008) and Beaujean and Sheng (2010) used item response theory (IRT) to determine whether increases in IQ scores over time reflect changes in the measurement of intellectual functioning rather than changes in the underlying construct (i.e., the latent variable of cognitive…”
Gonthier, C., Grégoire, J., & Besançon, M. (2021) · Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.intell.2020.101512 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
- Authors
- Alexander Beaujean, A., & Sheng, Y.
- Affiliations
- Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
- ORCID
- Sheng, Yanyan
- Venue
- Personality and Individual Differences
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-02
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 294-298
- ISSN
- 0191-8869 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2060166696
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Personality and Individual Differences (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
- Keywords
- Flynn effect, vocabulary test, General Social Survey, item response theory, classical test theory, test score trends
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
