Cited by 21Cognitive Abilities and TestingPsychometric Methodologies and TestingEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

Jensen’s chronometric research: Neither simple nor sufficient but a good place to start

Nettelbeck, Ted·1998·Intelligence

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0160-2896(99)80006-3

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Nettelbeck, T.
Affiliations
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Nettelbeck, Ted
Venue
Intelligence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-01
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
233-241
ISSN
0160-2896 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2040815994
Cited by
21
References
2
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (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 › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
reaction time, processing speed, general intelligence, fluid intelligence, Raven's Progressive Matrices, intelligence testing, psychometric intelligence

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