Trove: Find and get Australian resources. Books, images, historic newspapers, maps, archives and more. Manual for Raven's progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Raven and J.H. Sets I & II / Advanced Progressive Matrices (1) Section 5, Mill Hill Vocabulary Scale (1) more. Thumbnail [View as table] [View as. Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices. Raven's Manual Section 1 - General Overview (1998, Updated 2003). $89.50 Essential for use with all Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales Raven's Manual Section 4 - Advanced Progressive Matrices 1998 Edition. Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales enjoy a long and famous history in the assessment of general cognitive abilities in children. The Progressive Matrices usefully provide an assessment of non-verbal ability, an important feature for our ethnically diverse population, and the Vocabulary Scales provide scores in the verbal domain.

1. Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1995). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. Section 7: Research and references: Summaries of normative, reliability, and validity studies and references to all sections. Oxford: Oxford University Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
2. Crawford, J. R., Deary, I. J., Starr, J., & Whalley, L. J. (in press). The NART as an index or prior intellectual functioning: A retrospective validity study covering a 66 year interval. Psychological Medicine.Google Scholar
3. Deltour, J. J. (1993). Echelle de Vocabulaire Mill Hill de J. C. Raven: adaptation française et normes comparées du mill hill et du standard progressive matrices (PM38). Manuel et annexes. Braine le Château, Belgium: Editions L’Application des Techniques Modernes SPRL.Google Scholar
4. Eysenck, H. J. (1953). Uses and abuses of psychology. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar
5. Flynn, J. R. (1984). The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932 to 1978. Psychological Bulletin, 95,29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Flynn, J. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101,171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Goodlad, J. (1983). A place called school. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
8. Hogan, R. (1990). Unmasking incompetent managers. Insight, May21, 42–44.Google Scholar
9. Hogan, R. (1991). An alternative model of managerial effectiveness. Mimeo. Tulsa, OK: Institute of Behavioral Sciences.Google Scholar
10. Irvine, S. H. (1969). Factor analysis of African abilities and attainments: Continuities across cultures. Psychological Bulletin, 71, 20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
12. Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
13. McClelland, D. C. (1973). Testing for competence rather than for “intelligence.” American Psychologist, 28,1–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5–11.Google Scholar
15. Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Owen, K. (1992). The suitability of Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices for various groups in South Africa. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Penrose, L. S. (1938). Aclinical and genetic study of 1280 cases of mental defectives (the `Colchester Survey’). Medical Research Council. Republished by the Institute of Mental and Multiple Handicaps, 1975.Google Scholar
18. Raven, J. (1981). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary scales. research supplement no. 1: The 1979 British standardisation of the standard progressive matrices and mill hill vocabulary scales, together with comparative data from earlier studies in the UK, US, Canada, Germany and Ireland. Oxford: Oxford University Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
19. Raven, J. (1991). The tragic illusion: Educational testing. New York: Trillium Press; Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
20. Raven, J. (1994). Managing education for effective schooling: The most important problem is to come to terms with values. Unionville, NY: Trillium Press; Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
21. Raven, J. (1997). Educational research, ethics and the BPS. Starter paper and peer reviews by P. Mortimore, J. Demetre, R. Stainthope, Y. Reynolds, & G. Lindsay. Education Section Review, 21,(2) 3–26.Google Scholar
22. Raven, J. (2000a). Ethical dilemmas. The Psychologist, 13,404–406.Google Scholar
23. Raven, J. (2000b). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary scales. Research supplement no. 3 (2nd ed.): A compendium of international and north American normative and validity studies together with a review of the use of the RPM in neuropsychological assessment by Court, Drebing, & Hughes. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
24. Raven, J. (2000c). The Raven’s Progressive Matrices: Change and stability over culture and time. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998a). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 1: General overview. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
26. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998b). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 2: The coloured progressive matrices. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
27. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998c). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 4: The advanced progressive matrices. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
28. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998d). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 5: The Mill Hill vocabulary scale. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
29. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (2000). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Section 3: The standard progressive matrices. Oxford, UK: Oxford Psychologists Press; San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
30. Raven, J., & Stephenson, J. (Eds.). (2001). Competence in the learning society. New York: Lang.Google Scholar
31. Sattler, J. M. (2001) Assessment of chilldren: Cognitive applications. (4th ed.). San Diego, CA: Jerome M. Sattler.Google Scholar
32. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33. Silvey, J. (1972). Long-range predictions of educability and its determinants in East Africa (Chapter 42). In L. J. Cronbach & P. J. Drenth (Eds.), Mental tests and cultural adaptation. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
34. Spearman, C. (1926). Some issues in the theory of g (including the law of diminishing returns). Address to the British Association Section J—Psychology, Southampton, England, 1925. London: Psychological Laboratory; University College: Collected Papers.Google Scholar
35. Spearman, C. (1927a). The abilities of man. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
36. Spearman, C. (1927b). The nature of “intelligence” and the principles of cognition (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan.Google Scholar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Raven's Progressive Matrices (often referred tosimply as Raven's Matrices) are multiple choicetests of abstract reasoning, originally developed by Dr John C.Raven in 1936.^[1]In each test item, a candidate is asked to identify the missingsegment required to complete a larger pattern. Many items arepresented in the form of a 3x3 or 2x2 matrix, giving the test itsname.

Versions

The matrices are offered in three different forms forparticipants of different ability:

• Standard Progressive Matrices: These were theoriginal form of the matrices, first published in 1938. The bookletcomprises five sets (A to E) of 12 items each (e.g. A1 through toA12), with items within a set becoming increasingly difficult,requiring ever greater cognitive capacity to encode and analyzeinformation. All items are presented in black ink on a whitebackground.
• Colored Progressive Matrices: Designed foryounger children, the elderly, and people with moderate or severelearning difficulties, thistest contains sets A and B from the standard matrices, with afurther set of 12 items inserted between the two, as set Ab. Mostitems are presented on a colored background to make the testvisually stimulating for participants. However the very last fewitems in set B are presented as black-on-white — inthis way, if participants exceed the tester's expectations,transition to sets C, D, and E of the standard matrices iseased.
• Advanced Progressive Matrices: The advancedform of the matrices contains 48 items, presented as one set of 12(set I), and another of 36 (set II). Items are again presented inblack ink on a white background, and become increasingly difficultas progress is made through each set. These items are appropriatefor adults and adolescents of above average intelligence.

In addition, so-called 'parallel' forms of the standard andcoloured progressive matrices were published in 1998. This was toaddress the problem of the Raven's Matrices being too well-known inthe general population. The fact that testees have grownincreasingly experienced with the Ravens over the last 60 yearscould explain the increases in scores of around 10 IQ points pergeneration (see Flynneffect). Items in the parallel tests have been constructed suchthat average solution rates to each question are identical for theclassic and parallel versions. An extended form of the standardprogressive matrices, Standard Progressive Matrices Plus, waspublished at the same time, offering greater discriminationamong more able young adults.

The Triple Nine Society uses theAdvanced Progressive Matrices form for one of their admissiontests. They require a score of at least 32 out of 36 on or beforeDecember 31st, 1999 on the RAPM. The InternationalSociety for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) similarly accepts theRAPM as a qualification for admission.

Manual For Raven Progressive Matrices And Vocabulary Scales Section 12

Underlyingfactors

According to their author, Raven's Progressive Matrices andVocabulary tests measure the two main components of generalintelligence (originally identified by Spearman):the ability to think clearly and make sense of complexity, which isknown as eductive ability (from the Latin root 'educere', meaning'to draw out') and the ability to store and reproduce information,known as reproductive ability.

Adequate standardization, ease of use (without written orcomplex instructions), and minimal cost per person tested are themain reasons for its widespread international use in most countriesof the world.. It has among the highest predictive validities ofany test in most occupational groups and, even more importantly, inpredicting social mobility, the level of job a person will attainand retain. As a test of groups it can be quite expensive. However,to individually administer can result in a much lower per personcost, because the test booklets are re-usable.

The authors of the manual recommend that, when used inselection, RPM scores are set in the context of informationrelating to Raven's framework for the assessment of competence.

Some of the most fundamental research in cognitive psychologyhas been carried out with the RPM. The tests have been shown towork - scale - measure the same thing - in a vast variety ofcultural groups. Two remarkable, and recent, findings are that, onthe one hand, the actual scores obtained by people living in mostcountries with a tradition of literacy - from China, Russia, and India through Europe to Kuwait - are very similar at any point in time.On the other hand, in all countries, the scores have increaseddramatically over time such that 50% of our grandparents would beassigned to special education classes if theywere judged against today's norms (see Flynn effect). Yet none of the commonexplanations - access to television, changes in education, or changes in family size stand upto close scrutiny. The explanation seems to have more in commonwith those put forward to explain the parallel increase in lifeexpectancy which has doubled over the same period of time.

A 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with Autism score higher in Raven'stests than in Wechsler tests. Inaddition the people with autism were providing correct answers tothe Raven's test in less time, though erring as often as peoplewithout autism.^[2]

John Carlyle Raven first published his Progressive Matrices inthe UnitedKingdom in 1938. His three sons established Scotland-based test publisher J C Raven Ltd.in 1972. In 2004, HarcourtAssessment, Inc. a division of Harcourt Education acquired J CRaven Ltd.

Notes

Manual For Raven Progressive Matrices And Vocabulary Scales Section 1 2

1. ^ Raven, J. C.(1936). Mental tests used in genetic studies: The performanceof related individuals on tests mainly educative and mainlyreproductive. MSc Thesis, University of London.
2. ^Dawson M, Soulières I, GernsbacherMA, Mottron L (2007). 'The level and nature of autisticintelligence'. Psychol Sci18 (8):657–62. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01954.x. PMID17680932. Laysummary – ScienceDaily(2007-08-05).