Increased Proportion of Farm Animal Names Generated by Patients with Alzheimer's Disease: What Does it Mean?

Binetti et al. (1995) reported that patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) produced fewer semantic clusters than controls on the Animals Fluency task; of the clusters produced, 80% involved farm animals for the patients with AD compared to 40% for controls. In the present study we replicated the finding of Binetti et al.; however, the differential distribution of animal names by subcategory for the patients and controls could be accounted for by differences in the overall output and by assuming that word generation was strictly determined by prototypicality of the animal names. Thus, the increased proportion of farm animal names produced by patients with AD can be accounted for simply by postulating impaired access to semantic memory rather than degraded representations, the idea favored by Binetti et al.     

Ability-performance relationships in education and employment settings: critical tests of the more-is-better and the good-enough hypotheses

The nature of the relationship between ability and performance is of critical importance for admission decisions in the context of higher education and for personnel selection. Although previous research has supported the more-is-better hypothesis by documenting linearity of ability-performance relationships, such research has not been sensitive enough to detect deviations at the top ends of the score distributions. An alternative position receiving considerable attention is the good-enough hypothesis, which suggests that although higher levels of ability may result in better performance up to a threshold, above this threshold greater ability does not translate to better performance. In this study, the nature of the relationship between cognitive ability and performance was examined throughout the score range in four large-scale data sets. Monotonicity was maintained in all instances. Contrary to the good-enough hypothesis, the ability-performance relationship was commonly stronger at the top end of the score distribution than at the bottom end.     

The Role of Socioeconomic Status in SAT-Grade Relationships and in College Admissions Decisions

This article examines the role of socioeconomic status (SES) in the relationships among college admissions-test scores, secondary school grades, and subsequent academic performance. Scores on the SAT (a test widely used in the admissions process in the United States), secondary school grades, college grades, and SES measures from 143,606 students at 110 colleges and universities were examined, and results of these analyses were compared with results obtained using a 41-school data set including scores from the prior version of the SAT and using University of California data from prior research on the role of SES. In all the data sets, the SAT showed incremental validity over secondary school grades in predicting subsequent academic performance, and this incremental relationship was not substantially affected by controlling for SES. The SES of enrolled students was very similar to that of specific schools' applicant pools, which suggests that the barrier to college for low-SES students in the United States is a lower rate of entering the college admissions process, rather than exclusion on the part of colleges.