Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K E Stanovich

Publications and source records attributed to K E Stanovich.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Discrepancies between normative and descriptive models of decision making and the understanding/acceptance principle.

Several tasks from the heuristics and biases literature were examined in light of Slovic and Tversky's (1974) understanding/acceptance principle-that the deeper the understanding of a normative principle, the greater the tendency to respond in accord with it. The principle was instantiated both correlationally and experimentally. An individual differences version was used to examine whether individuals higher in tendencies toward reflective thought and in cognitive ability would be more likely to behave normatively. In a second application of the understanding/acceptance principle, subjects were presented with arguments both for and against normative choices and it was observed whether, on a readministration of the task, performance was more likely to move in a normative direction. Several discrepancies between performance and normative models could be explained by the understanding/acceptance principle. However, several gaps between descriptive and normative models (particularly those deriving from some noncausal base rate problems) were not clarified by the understanding/acceptance principle-they could not be explained in terms of varying task understanding or tendencies toward reflective thought. The results demonstrate how the variation and instability in responses can be analyzed to yield inferences about why descriptive and normative models of human reasoning and decision making sometimes do not coincide.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Who uses base rates and P(D/approximately H)? An analysis of individual differences.

In two experiments, involving over 900 subjects, we examined the cognitive correlates of the tendency to view P(D/approximately H) and base rate information as relevant to probability assessment. We found that individuals who viewed P(D/approximately H) as relevant in a selection task and who used it to make the proper Bayesian adjustment in a probability assessment task scored higher on tests of cognitive ability and were better deductive and inductive reasoners. They were less biased by prior beliefs and more data-driven on a covariation assessment task. In contrast, individuals who thought that base rates were relevant did not display better reasoning skill or higher cognitive ability. Our results parallel disputes about the normative status of various components of the Bayesian formula in interesting ways. It is argued that patterns of covariance among reasoning tasks may have implications for inferences about what individuals are trying to optimize in a rational analysis (J. R. Anderson, 1990, 1991).

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later.

A group of 1st-graders who were administered a battery of reading tasks in a previous study were followed up as 11th graders. Ten years later, they were administered measures of exposure to print, reading comprehension, vocabulary, and general knowledge. First-grade reading ability was a strong predictor of all of the 11th-grade outcomes and remained so even when measures of cognitive ability were partialed out. First-grade reading ability (as well as 3rd- and 5th-grade ability) was reliably linked to exposure to print, as assessed in the 11th grade, even after 11th-grade reading comprehension ability was partialed out, indicating that the rapid acquisition of reading ability might well help develop the lifetime habit of reading, irrespective of the ultimate level of reading comprehension ability that the individual attains. Finally, individual differences in exposure to print were found to predict differences in the growth in reading comprehension ability throughout the elementary grades and thereafter.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1993

Does reading make you smarter? Literacy and the development of verbal intelligence.

The studies reported here represent the first steps in the development of a new research paradigm for studying the unique cognitive correlates of literacy. Reading experience exhibits enough isolable variance within a generally literate society to be reliably linked with cognitive differences. Research on such links is therefore facilitated because the consequences of engaging in literacy activities can be studied without necessarily obtaining totally illiterate samples or setting up cross-cultural comparisons. Issues that are at least analogous issues to those raised in cross-cultural research can be studied within literate societies with a paradigm such as this, and therefore the speed with which we can answer questions about the cognitive consequences of literacy may be greatly increased because more studies can be carried out, larger samples can be studied, and the range of the cognitive domains tapped can be widened. Research in this area appears to have been stifled because of the widespread acceptance of the most extreme interpretations of the outcome of Scribner and Cole's (1981) investigation--interpretations that have slowly diffused throughout the literature without being accompanied by any new data. These conclusions are fueled by a powerful social critique that advances the argument that the positive cultural and economic effects of literacy have been overstated--indeed, that literacy is, if anything, a repressive force (Auerbach, 1992; Street, 1984, 1988; Stuckey, 1991). Educational theorists such as Frank Smith accused the educational establishment of "overselling" literacy and have argued that "Literacy doesn't generate finer feelings or higher values. It doesn't even make anyone smarter" (1989, p. 354). The data reported herein appear to indicate that these theorists could well be wrong in this conclusion. If "smarter" means having a larger vocabulary and more world knowledge in addition to the abstract reasoning skills encompassed within the concept of intelligence, as it does in most laymen's definitions of intelligence (Stanovich, 1989; Sternberg, 1990), then reading may well make people smarter. Certainly our data demonstrate time and again that print exposure is associated with vocabulary, general knowledge, and verbal skills even after controlling for abstract reasoning abilities (as measured by such indicators as the Raven).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Child↗
PubMed1993

Dysrationalia: a new specific learning disability.

The concept of selective deficit is the foundation of most conceptual definitions of learning disability. Such definitions have tended to implicate the construct of intelligence in the conceptualization of learning disability and have led to the use of IQ test scores to operationalize the notion of aptitude-achievement discrepancy. The learning disabilities field is only beginning to grapple with the implications of its reliance on the concept of psychometrically defined intelligence. For example, discrepancy-based definitions of learning disabilities guarantee that such disabilities will become more or less prevalent depending on the comprehensiveness of the set of skills assessed on IQ tests. Unlike the vernacular concept of intelligence--which is quite broad--psychometric operationalizations reflect only a thin slice of the mental domain that might be considered cognitive. Thus, it is possible that we have not exhausted the potential set of discrepancy-based disabilities. As a demonstration proof, a new discrepancy-based disability category is proposed and defended in this paper. The disability is one that may force more careful consideration of the role that intelligence plays in conceptual and operational definitions of learning disabilities.

Child↗
PubMed1992

Studying the consequences of literacy within a literate society: the cognitive correlates of print exposure.

Most studies of the cognitive consequences of literacy have attempted to compare the performance of literate individuals with that of illiterate individuals. We argue that it is not absolutely necessary to examine illiterates in order to study the cognitive consequences of reading experience because there is enormous variation in exposure to print even within a generally literate society. In the present study, we tested several methods of assessing differential exposure to print and demonstrated that all have significant correlations with measures of vocabulary, cultural knowledge, spelling ability, and verbal fluency. Several indicators of print exposure predicted variance in these knowledge domains even when general ability and reading-comprehension skill were statistically controlled. Our results, although correlational, suggest that print exposure is an independent contributor to the development of certain verbal skills.

Educational Status↗