Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-bp2c4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-21T08:49:49.579Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Central Intellective Factor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

H. J. A. Rimoldi
H. J. A. Rimoldi*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The proof of the existence of “g” is more than a methodological problem and concerns the very core of psychological theory. The principles of noegenesis should be identified experimentally before a final opinion can be rendered about “g.” Many general factors isolated in different studies are not necessarily “g.” In the present study a second-order unrotated general factor has been identified by using Thurstone's method. It seems possible to identify this factor with “g.” In the first order, factors that seem to represent the first and second principles of noegenesis have been found. The existence of synthetic and analytic activities and their interplay in intellectual performances is indicated. The relation of likeness is of great interest in explaining cognitive abilities and is isolated both as a first and second order factor. For the final identification of factors the search should be conducted beyond the elementary listing of tests. The dynamic aspects underlying factors are more meaningful than their simple description. The second order gives indications that allow for a better interpretation of fundamental psychological activities.

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , March 1951 , pp. 75 - 101
Copyright
Copyright © 1951 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

The final part of this study was carried on at the Psychometric Laboratory, University of Chicago, during the year 1946—47. This part of the research was completed under a State Department Grant and a Frank Fund Fellowship.

The author is indebted to Dr. L. L. Thurstone for his assistance and to Mr. V. S. Tracht for his help in preparing the manuscript.

†

As described by Spearman the principles of noegenesis refer to: 1) “a person has more or less power to observe what goes on in his own mind,” 2) “when a person has any two or more ideas (using this word to embrace any items of mental content, whether perceived or thought of), he has more or less power to bring to mind any relations that essentially hold between them,” and 3) “when a person has in mind any idea together with a relation, he has more or less power to bring up into mind the correlative idea” (27). The theoretical postulation and a complete discussion of these three principles is found in The Nature of Intelligence and the Principles of Cognition (25).

References

Alexander, W. P. Intelligence, concrete and abstract. Brit. J. Psychol., 1935, 6, 19.Google Scholar
Balinsky, B. An analysis of the mental factors of various age groups from nine to sixty. Genet. Psychol. Monogr., 1942, 23, 191–234.Google Scholar
Bechtoldt, H. P.Factorial study of perceptual speed. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Chicago, 1947.Google Scholar
Blakey, R. A re-analysis of a test of the theory of two factors. Psychometrika, 1940, 5, 121–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blakey, R. A factor analysis of a non-verbal reasoning test. Educ. psychol. Meas., 1941, 1, 187–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, W. The mathematical and experimental evidence for the existence of a central intellective factor. Brit. J. Psychol., 1932, 23, 171–179.Google Scholar
Brown, W., and Stephenson, W. A test of the theory of two factors. Brit. J. Psychol., 1932, 23, 352–370.Google Scholar
Burt, C. Mental and Scholastic Tests. London, 1922.Google Scholar
Burt, C. The Factors of the Mind, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, C., and John, E. A factorial analysis of the Terman Binet tests. Part I and Part II. Brit. J. educ. Psychol., 1942, 12, 156–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, C. Mental abilities and mental factors. Brit. J. educ. Psychol., 1944, 14, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, J. B. A factor analysis of verbal abilities. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 279–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El Koussy, A. A. H. An investigation into the factors in tests involving the visual perception of space. Brit. J. Psychol., 1935, 7(20), 1–87.Google Scholar
Goodman, C. H. Factorial analysis of Thurstone's seven primary abilities. Psychometrika, 1943, 8, 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P. A note on the discovery of a G factor by means of Thurstone's centroid method of analysis. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 205–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, B., and Spearman, C. General ability, its existence and nature. Brit. J. Psychol., 1912, 5, 51–84.Google Scholar
Holzinger, K. J. Preliminary report on Spearman-Holzinger Unitary Trait Study. No. 1 to No. 9. Prepared at the Statistical Laboratory, Dept. of Education, The University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Line, W. The growth of visual perception in children. Brit. J. Psychol., Monograph Supplements, 1931, No. 15.Google Scholar
Mieli, R. L'analyse de l'intelligence. Arch. Psychol., 1943, 31, 1–64.Google Scholar
Mellone, M. A. A factorial study of picture tests for young children. Brit. J. Psychol., 1944, 35, 9–16.Google Scholar
Moyniham, J. F. The concept of the synthetic sense and a technique of its measurement. Stud. Psychol. Psychiat. Cathol. Univ. Amer., 1942, 5, No. 5.Google Scholar
Reyburn, H. A. and Taylor, J. C. Some factors of intelligence. Brit. J. Psychol., 1941, 31, 259–270.Google Scholar
Rimoldi, H., Buhrer, L., San Martin, R., Cortada, N., and Velasco, E. Desarollo intelectual entre los ll y los 14 años. Publicaciones del Instituto de Psicologia Experimental., 1945, 1(4), 119–237.Google Scholar
Rimoldi, H. J. A. Study of some factors related to intelligence. Psychometrika, 1948, 13, 27–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spearman, C. The Nature of Intelligence and the Principles of Cognition, London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1927.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. Disturbers of tetrad differences. J. educ. Psychol., 1930, 21, 559–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C. The Abilities of Man, London: Macmillan Co., 1932.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. Thurstone's work reworked. J. educ. Psychol., 1939, 30, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C. How G can disappear. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 353–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C. Theory of general factor. Brit. J. Psychol., 1946, 36, 117–131.Google Scholar
Stephenson, W. Tetrad differences for verbal subtests. J. educ. Psychol., 1931, 22, 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, W. Tetrad differences for non-verbal subtests. J. educ. Psychol., 1931, 22, 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stephenson, W. Tetrad differences for verbal subtests relative to non-verbal subtests. J. educ. Psychol., 1931, 22, 334–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swineford, F. Some comparisons of the multiple factor and bi-factor methods of analysis. Psychometrika, 1941, 6, 375–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thurstone, L. L.Primary mental abilities. Psychometric Monographs, No. 1, 1938.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L., and Thurstone, T. G.Factorial studies of intelligence. Psychometric Monographs, No. 2, 1942.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. A factorial Study of Perception, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1944.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. Multiple Factor Analysis, Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1947.Google Scholar
Wright, R. E. A factor analysis of the original Stanford-Binet scale. Psychometrika, 1939, 4, 209–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yela, M. Application of the concept of simple structure to Alexander's data. Publication of the Psychometric Laboratory, The University of Chicago, 1948, No. 49.Google Scholar