Associative learning predicts intelligence above and beyond working memory and processing speed

Recent evidence suggests the existence of multiple cognitive mechanisms that support the general cognitive ability factor (g). Working memory and processing speed are the two best established candidate mechanisms. Relatively little attention has been given to the possibility that associative learning is an additional mechanism contributing to g. The present study tested the hypothesis that associative learning ability, as assessed by psychometrically sound associative learning tasks, would predict variance in g above and beyond the variance predicted by working memory capacity and processing speed. This hypothesis was confirmed in a sample of 169 adolescents, using structural equation modeling. Associative learning, working memory, and processing speed all contributed significant unique variance to g, indicating not only that multiple elementary cognitive processes underlie intelligence, but also the novel finding that associative learning is one such process.     

The Gender Belief System,Authoritarianism, Social Dominance Orientation,and Heterosexuals' Attitudes Toward Lesbians and Gay Men

We tested hypotheses drawn from three theoretical perspectives—gender belief system, authoritarianism, and social dominance—concerning heterosexuals' attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Data from 122 male and 131 female heterosexual college students with mostly White, middle-class backgrounds indicated that constructs postulated by all three perspectives played important roles in predicting attitudes: Gender differences in attitudes toward lesbians and gay men were mediated by social dominance orientation and gender-role beliefs, indicating that gender role beliefs may act as legitimizing myths to justify antigay attitudes. Authoritarianism had both a direct relationship to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men and an indirect relationship mediated by gender-role beliefs.     

Implicit learning as an ability

The ability to automatically and implicitly detect complex and noisy regularities in the environment is a fundamental aspect of human cognition. Despite considerable interest in implicit processes, few researchers have conceptualized implicit learning as an ability with meaningful individual differences. Instead, various researchers (e.g., Reber, 1993; Stanovich, 2009) have suggested that individual differences in implicit learning are minimal relative to individual differences in explicit learning. In the current study of English 16–17 year old students, we investigated the association of individual differences in implicit learning with a variety of cognitive and personality variables. Consistent with prior research and theorizing, implicit learning, as measured by a probabilistic sequence learning task, was more weakly related to psychometric intelligence than was explicit associative learning, and was unrelated to working memory. Structural equation modeling revealed that implicit learning was independently related to two components of psychometric intelligence: verbal analogical reasoning and processing speed. Implicit learning was also independently related to academic performance on two foreign language exams (French, German). Further, implicit learning was significantly associated with aspects of self-reported personality, including intuition, Openness to Experience, and impulsivity. We discuss the implications of implicit learning as an ability for dual-process theories of cognition, intelligence, personality, skill learning, complex cognition, and language acquisition.     

Predicting Creativity Based on the Facets of the Theoretical Intellect Framework

The present study investigates how the construct intellect, according to the Theoretical Intellect Framework (TIF), predicts creativity. The TIF is a theoretical model describing the structure of the construct intellect, a sub‐dimension of the Big Five domain openness to experience. People (N = 2709) from two sub‐samples (undergraduate students and Amazon MTurkers) completed one of three creativity tasks (self‐reported, remote associates, or rated photo caption) and the Intellect Scale. The results support hypotheses derived from the TIF, as the operation Create, rather than the operations Think or Learn, significantly and in some cases uniquely predicted the self‐reported creativity indicators. Creativity indicators with a strong cognitive load (remote associates test and rated photo caption), however, were predicted by the operation Think. Results are discussed with regards to the nomological net of the operation Create and the construct validity of the creativity assessments. We provide implications for applied purposes and call for further examination of the TIF with additional creativity measures. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology