Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T13:06:49.823Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Part VIII - Intelligence and Allied Constructs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2019

Edited by
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert J. Sternberg
Affiliation:
Cornell University, New York
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence , pp. 1009 - 1176
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

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.)

References

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22, 229–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2000). Domain-specific knowledge as the “dark matter” of adult intelligence: Gf/Gc, personality, and interest correlates. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 55B, 69–84.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2009). Personality and intelligence. In Corr, P. J. & Matthews, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 162–174). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., Beier, M. E., & Bowen, K. R. (2002). What we really know about our abilities and our knowledge. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 587–605.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. & Goff, M. (1994). Typical intellectual engagement and personality: Reply to Rocklin (1994). Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 150–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219–245.Google Scholar
Allen, T. A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality neuroscience and the Five Factor Model. In Widiger, T. A. (Ed.). Oxford handbook of the Five Factor Model (pp. 319–349). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Allen, T. A., Rueter, A. R., Abram, S. V., Brown, J. S., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Personality and neural correlates of mentalizing ability. European Journal of Personality, 31, 599–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alvidrez, J., & Weinstein, R. S. (1999). Early teacher perceptions and later student academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 731–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews-Hanna, J. R., Smallwood, J., & Spreng, R. N. (2014). The default network and self-generated thought: Component processes, dynamic control, and clinical relevance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1316(1), 29–52.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., Blas, L. D., Boies, K., & De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356–366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Vernon, P. A., & Jang, K. L. (2000). Fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, and the Openness/Intellect factor. Journal of Research in Personality, 34, 197–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, E. J., Deary, I. J., & Gibson, G. J. (1997). Relationship between ability and personality: Three hypotheses tested. Intelligence, 25, 49–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, A. J., Deary, I. J., Whiteman, M. C., Fowkes, F. G. R., Padersen, N. L., Rabbitt, P., Bent, N., & McInnes, L. (2002). Relationships between ability and personality: Does intelligence contribute positively to personal and social adjustment? Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1391–1411.Google Scholar
Baker, T. J., & Bichsel, J. (2006). Personality predictors of intelligence: Differences between young and cognitively healthy older adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 861–871.Google Scholar
Barchard, K. A. (2003). Does emotional intelligence assist in the prediction of academic success? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 840–858.Google Scholar
Bates, T. C., & Shieles, A. (2003). Crystallized intelligence as a product of speed and drive for experience: The relationship of inspection time and openness to g and Gc. Intelligence, 31, 275−287.Google Scholar
Beaty, R. E., Kaufman, S. B., Benedek, M., Jung, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., Jauk, E., … Silvia, P. J. (2016). Personality and complex brain networks: The role of openness to experience in default network efficiency. Human Brain Mapping, 37(2), 773–779.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beauducel, A., Liepmann, D., Felfe, J., & Nettelnstroth, W. (2007). The impact of different measurement models for fluid and crystallized intelligence on the correlation with personality traits. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 71–78.Google Scholar
Bergold, S., & Steinmayr, R. (2018). Personality and intelligence interact in the prediction of academic achievement. Journal of Intelligence, 6, 27.Google Scholar
Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). Nursery school personality and political orientation two decades later, Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 734–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouchard, T., Segal, N., Tellegen, A., McGue, M., Keyes, M., & Krueger, R. (2003). Evidence for the construct validity and heritability of the Wilson–Patterson conservatism scale: A reared-apart twins study of social attitudes. Personality and Individual Differences, 34, 959–969.Google Scholar
Brickenkamp, R. (1975). Handbuch psychologischer und padagogischer Tests [Handbook of Psychological and Educational Tests]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Brody, N. (2004). What cognitive intelligence is and what emotional intelligence is not. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 234–238.Google Scholar
Brugger, P. (2001). From haunted brain to haunted science. A cognitive neuroscience view of paranormal and pseudoscientific thought. In Houran, J. & Lange, R (Eds.), Hauntings and poltergeists: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 195–215). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company.Google Scholar
Bunge, S. A., & Zelazo, P. D. (2006). A brain-based account of the development of rule use in childhood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 118–121.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J. A., & Jarvis, W. B. G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals differing in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.Google Scholar
Carney, D., Jost, J., Gosling, S., & Potter, J. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29(6), 807–840.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1950). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1978). Scientific use of factor analysis in behavioral and life sciences. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Birkett, H. (1980). The known personality factors found aligned between first order T-data and second order Q-data factors, with new evidence on the inhibitory control, independence and regression traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 1, 229–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Warburton, F. W. (1967). Objective personality and motivation tests: A theoretical introduction and practical compendium. Champaign: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2005). Personality and intellectual competence. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Moutafi, J., & Furnham, A. (2005). The relationship between personality traits, subjectively-assessed and fluid intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1517–1528.Google Scholar
Chapman, B., Duberstein, P., Tindle, H. A., Sink, K. M., Robbins, J., Tancredi, D. J., & Franks, P. (2012). Personality predicts cognitive function over 7 years in older persons. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20, 612–621.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collis, J. M., & Messick, S. (Eds.) (2001). Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992a). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 653–665.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992b). NEO PI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
De Pauw, S. S. W., Mervielde, I., & Van Leeuwen, K. G. (2009). How are traits related to problem behavior in preschoolers? Similarities and contrasts between temperament and personality. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 37, 309–325.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J. (2012). Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 453–82Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., Batty, G. D., & Gale, C. R. (2008). Bright children become enlightened adults. Psychological Science, 19, 1–6.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., Penke, L., & Johnson, W. (2010). The neuroscience of human intelligence differences. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 11(3), 201–211.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2011). Intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R. J. & Kaufman, S. B. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of intelligence (pp. 711–737). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2015a). Cybernetic Big Five Theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 33–58.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2015b). Openness/Intellect: A dimension of personality reflecting cognitive exploration. In Cooper, M. L. & Larsen, R. J. (Eds.), The APA handbook of personality and social psychology: Personality processes and individual differences, Vol. 4 (pp. 369–399). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Carey, B. E., Krueger, B. F., & Ross, S. R. (2016). Ten aspects of the Big Five in the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 7, 113–123.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Grazioplene, R. G., & Peterson, J. B. (2012). From madness to genius: The Openness/Intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 63–78.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources of Openness/Intellect: Cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality, 73, 825–858.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., Séguin, J. R., Pihl, R. O., & Tremblay, R. E. (2008). Externalizing behavior and the higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 947–953.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., Peterson, J. B., & Gray, J. R. (2014). Openness to Experience, Intellect, and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 46–52.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., & Rueter, A. R. (2016). Impulsivity as a personality trait. In Vohs, K. D. & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds.). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (3rd ed., pp. 345–363). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Shamosh, N. A., Green, A. E., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2009). Intellect as distinct from Openness: Differences revealed by fMRI of working memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 883–892.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.Google Scholar
Doerfler, T., & Hornke, L. F. (2010). Working style and extraversion: New insights into the nature of item response latencies in computer-based intelligence testing. Journal of Research in Personality, 44(1), 159–162.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L. (2009). (Over and) beyond high-stakes testing. American Psychologist, 64, 279–280.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., & Yeager, D. S. (2015). Measurement matters: Assessing personal qualities other than cognitive ability for educational purposes. Educational Researcher, 44(4), 237–251.Google Scholar
Espejo, J., Day, E. A., & Scott, G. (2005). Performance evaluations, need for cognition, and the acquisition of a complex skill: An attribute–treatment interaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(8), 1867–1877.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Personality and intelligence: Psychometric and experimental approaches. In Sternberg, R. J. & Ruzgis, P. (Eds.), Personality and intelligence (pp. 3–31). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fales, C. L., Barch, D. M., Burgess, G. C., Schaefer, A., Mennin, D. S., Braver, T. S., & Gray, J. R. (2008). Anxiety and cognitive efficiency: Differential modulation of transient and sustained neural activity during a working memory task. Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8, 239–253.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 2, 290–309.Google Scholar
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42.Google Scholar
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 351–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freund, P. A., & Kasten, N. (2012). How smart do you think you are? A meta-analysis on the validity of self-estimates of cognitive ability. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 296–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frisell, T., Pawitan, Y., & Långström, N. (2012). Is the association between general cognitive ability and violent crime caused by family-level confounders? PLoS ONE, 7, e41783. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041783Google Scholar
Furnham, A., Dissou, G., Sloan, P., Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2007). Personality and intelligence in business people: A study of two personality and two intelligence measures. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22, 99–109.Google Scholar
Gabriel, M. T., Critelli, J. W., & Ee, J. S. (1994). Narcissistic illusions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal of Personality, 62, 143–155.Google Scholar
Gläscher, J., Rudrauf, D., Colom, R., Paul, L. K., Tranel, D., Damasio, H., & Adolphs, R. (2010). Distributed neural system for general intelligence revealed by lesion mapping. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(10), 4705–4709.Google Scholar
Goff, M., & Ackerman, P. L. (1992). Personality–intelligence relations: Assessment of typical intellectual engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 537–552.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The Big-Five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216–1229.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the big-five factor structure. Psychological Assessment, 4, 26–42.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In Mervielde, I., Deary, I., De Fruyt, F., & Ostendorf, F. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., & Rosolack, T. K. (1994). The big five factor structure as an integrative framework: An empirical comparison with Eysenck’s P-E-N model. In Halverson, C. F., Jr., Kohnstamm, G. A., & Martin, R. P. (Eds.), The developing structure of temperament and personality from infancy to adulthood (pp. 7–35). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. (1997a). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence, 24, 13–23.Google Scholar
Gottfredson, L. S. (1997b). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gow, A. J., Whiteman, M. C., Pattie, A., & Deary, I. J. (2005). The personality–intelligence interface: Insights from an ageing cohort. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 751–761.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A., & McNaughton, N. (2000). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hemphill, J. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitudes of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58, 78–80.Google Scholar
Hill, B. D., Foster, J. D., Elliott, E. M., Shelton, J. T., McCain, J., & Gouvier, W. D. (2013). Need for cognition is related to higher general intelligence, fluid intelligence, and crystallized intelligence, but not working memory. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(1), 22–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinson, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision making and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 298−306.Google Scholar
Hirsh, J. B., DeYoung, C. G., Xu, X., & Peterson, J. B. (2010). Compassionate liberals and polite conservatives: Associations of Agreeableness with political ideology and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 655–664.Google Scholar
Hodson, G., & Busseri, M. A. (2012). Bright minds and dark attitudes: Lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice through right-wing ideology and low intergroup contact. Psychological Science, 23, 187–195.Google Scholar
Hofstee, W. K. B., Kiers, H. A., De Raad, B., & Goldberg, L. R. (1997). A comparison of Big Five structures of personality traits in Dutch, English, and German. European Journal of Personality, 11, 15–31.Google Scholar
Holland, D. C., Dollinger, S. J., Holland, C. J., & MacDonald, D. A. (1995). The relationship between psychometric intelligence and the five-factor model of personality in a rehabilitation sample. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51, 79–88.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.Google Scholar
Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., & Yarmel, P. W. (1987). Intellectual functioning and aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 232–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jang, K. L., Hu, S., Livesley, W. J., Angleitner, A., Riemann, R., & Vernon, P. A. (2002). Genetic and environmental influences on the covariance of facets defining the domains of the five-factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 83–101.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Naumann, L. P., & Soto, C. J. (2008). Paradigm shift to the integrative Big Five trait taxonomy: History: measurement, and conceptual issue. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (Eds). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 114–158). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, J. A. (1994). Clarification of factor five with the help of the AB5C model. European Journal of Personality, 8, 311–334.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2005a). The structure of human intelligence: It’s verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid-crystallized. Intelligence, 33, 393–416.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2005b). Constructive replication of the visual–perceptual-image rotation model in Thurstone’s (1941) battery of 60 tests of mental ability, Intelligence, 33, 417–430.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2007). Sex differences in mental abilities: g masks the dimensions on which they lie. Intelligence, 35, 23–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., McGue, M., Segal, N. L., Tellegen, A., Keyes, M., & Gottesman, I. I. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on the Verbal-Perceptual-Image Rotation (VPR) model of the structure of mental abilities in the Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Intelligence, 35, 542–562.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., Nijenhuis, J., & Bouchard, T. J. (2007). Replication of the hierarchical visual–perceptual-image rotation model in de Wolff and Buiten’s (1963) battery of 46 tests of mental ability. Intelligence, 35, 69−81.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T. (2017). Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psychology, 38, 167–208.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Self estimates of general, crystallized, and fluid intelligences in an ethnically diverse population. Learning and Individual Differences, 22, 118–122.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jiménez, L., Brown, J., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116, 321–340.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2016). Openness to Experience and Intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84, 248–258.Google Scholar
Keightley, M. L., Seminowicz, D. A., Bagby, R. M., Costa, P. T., Fossati, P., & Mayberg, H. S. (2003). Personality influences limbic-cortical interactions during sad mood. NeuroImage, 20, 2031–2039.Google Scholar
Kirby, K. N. (2009). One-year temporal stability of delay-discount rates. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 457–462.Google Scholar
Koenen, K. C., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T. E., Rijsdijk, F., & Taylor, A. (2006). Genetic influences on the overlap between low IQ and antisocial behavior in young children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 787–797.Google Scholar
Koenig, L. B., & Bouchard, T. J., Jr. (2006). Genetic and environmental influences on the Traditional Moral Values Triad – Authoritarianism, Conservatism and Religiousness – as assessed by quantitative behavior genetic methods. In McNamara, P. (Ed.), Where god and science meet: How brain and evolutionary studies alter our understanding of religion, Vol. 1, Evolution, genes, and the religious brain. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Kovacs, K., & Conway, A. R. A. (2016). Process Overlap Theory: A unified account of the general factor of intelligence, Psychological Inquiry, 27, 151–177.Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking antisocial behavior, substance use, and personality: An integrative quantitative model of the adult externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 116, 645–666.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuntsi, J., Eley, T.C., Taylor, A., Hughes, C., Asherson, P., Caspi, A., et al. (2004). Co-occurrence of ADHD and low IQ has genetic origins. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 124, 41–47.Google Scholar
Leikas, S., Mäkinen, S., Lönnqvist, J. E., & Verkasalo, M. (2009). Cognitive ability × emotional stability interactions on adjustment. European Journal of Personality, 23(4), 329–342.Google Scholar
Loevinger, J. (1957). Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.Google Scholar
Ludeke, S. G., Rasmussen, S. H. R., & DeYoung, C. G. (2017). Verbal ability drives the link between intelligence and ideology in two American community samples. Intelligence, 61, 1–6.Google Scholar
Lynam, D. R., Moffitt, T. E., & Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (1993). Explaining the relation between IQ and delinquency: Class, race, test motivation, school failure, or self-control? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 102, 187–196.Google Scholar
Mahalingam, V., Stillwell, D., Kosinski, M., Rust, J., & Kogan, A. (2014). Who can wait for the future? A personality perspective. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(5), 573–583.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2012). Comparing models of intelligence in Project TALENT: The VPR model fits better than the CHC and extended Gf–Gc models. Intelligence, 40, 543–559.Google Scholar
Major, J. T., Johnson, W., & Deary, I. J. (2014). Linear and nonlinear associations between general intelligence and personality in Project TALENT. Journal of personality and social psychology, 106(4), 638–654.Google Scholar
Malka, A., Lelkes, Y., & Soto, C. J. (2017). Are cultural and economic conservatism positively correlated? A large-scale cross-national test. British Journal of Political Science, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 139–157.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 60, 197–215.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic traits? American Psychologist, 63, 503–517.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61, 204–217.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (1993). Openness to Experience as a basic dimension of personality. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 13, 39–55.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of Openness to Experience. In Hogan, R., Johnson, J., & Briggs, S. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 825–847). Boston: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F., & Tal, I. R. (2007). Schizotypy versus openness and intelligence as predictors of creativity. Schizophrenia Research, 93, 317–324.Google Scholar
Miller, J. D., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). Structural models of personality and their relation to antisocial behavior: A meta-analytic review. Criminology, 39, 765–798.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2003). Demographic and personality predictors of intelligence: A study using the NEO Personality Inventory and the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. European Journal of Personality, 17, 79–94.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Crump, J. (2006). What facets of openness and conscientiousness predict fluid intelligence score? Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 31–42.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Paltiel, L. (2004). Why is Conscientiousness negatively correlated with intelligence? Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1013–1022.Google Scholar
Moutafi, J., Furnham, A., & Tsaousis, I. (2006). Is the relationship between intelligence and trait neuroticism mediated by test anxiety? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 587–597.Google Scholar
Mussel, P. (2013). Intellect: A theoretical framework for personality traits related to intellectual achievements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(5), 885–906.Google Scholar
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Jr, Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., … & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American psychologist, 51(2), 77.Google Scholar
Nettle, D. (2006). The evolution of personality variation in humans and other animals. American Psychologist, 61, 622–631.Google Scholar
Nettle, D., & Liddle, B. (2008). Agreeableness is related to social-cognitive, but not social-perceptual, theory of mind. European Journal of Personality, 22, 323–335.Google Scholar
Nolan, S. A., Roberts, J. E., & Gotlib, I. H. (1998). Neuroticism and ruminative response style as predictors of change in depressive symptomatology. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 445–455.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, E. C., & Silvia, P. J. (2011). Are openness and intellect distinct aspects of openness to experience? A test of the O/I model. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 571–574.Google Scholar
Oltmanns, J. R., & Widiger, T. A. (2016). Self-pathology, the five-factor model, and bloated specific factors: A cautionary tale. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 423–434.Google Scholar
Onraet, E., Van Hiel, A., Dhont, K., Hodson, G., Schittekatte, M., & De Pauw, S. (2015). The association of cognitive ability with right‐wing ideological attitudes and prejudice: A meta‐analytic review. European Journal of Personality, 29(6), 599–621.Google Scholar
Osborne, D., Wootton, L. W., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). Are liberals agreeable or not? Politeness and Compassion differentially predict political conservatism via distinct ideologies. Social Psychology, 44, 354–360.Google Scholar
Ostaszewski, P. (1996). The relation between temperament and rate of temporal discounting. European Journal of Personality, 10, 161–172.Google Scholar
Ostendorf, F., & Angleitner, A. (1994). Reflections on different labels for Factor V. European Journal of Personality, 8, 341–349.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., & John, O. P. (1998). Egoistic and moralistic biases in self-perception: The interplay of self-deceptive styles with basic traits and motives. Journal of Personality, 66, 1025–1060.Google Scholar
Paulhus, D. L., Lysy, D. C., & Yik, M. S. M. (1998). Self-report measures of intelligence: Are they useful as proxy IQ tests? Journal of Personality, 66, 525–554.Google Scholar
Pedulla, J. J., Airasian, P. W., Madaus, G. F. (1980). Do teacher ratings and standardized test results of students yield the same information? American Educational Research Journal, 17, 303–307.Google Scholar
Perkins, A. M., & Corr, P. J. (2006). Cognitive ability as a buffer to neuroticism: Churchill’s secret weapon? Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 39–51.Google Scholar
Peterson, J. B., & Flanders, J. L. (2002). Complexity management theory: Motivation for ideological rigidity and social conflict. Cortex, 38, 429–458.Google Scholar
Pickering, A. D. (2004). The neuropsychology of impulsive antisocial sensation seeking personality traits: From dopamine to hippocampal function? In Stelmack, R. M. (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 453–477). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M. (2015). One century of global IQ gains: A formal meta-analysis of the Flynn effect (1909–2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(3), 282–306.Google Scholar
Pytlik Zillig, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a Big 5 trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral and cognitive processes represented in the Big 5 personality inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 847–858.Google Scholar
Raine, A., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Lynam, D. (2005). Neurocognitive impairments in boys on the life-course persistent antisocial path. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114(1), 38–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reeve, C. L., Meyer, R. D., & Bonaccio, S. (2006). Intelligence–personality associations reconsidered: The importance of distinguishing between general and narrow dimensions of intelligence. Intelligence, 34, 387–402.Google Scholar
Richards, J. B., Zhang, L., Mitchell, S., & de Wit, H. (1999). Delay and probability discounting in a model of impulsive behavior: effect of alcohol. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 71, 121–143.Google Scholar
Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using the self- and peer report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65, 449–476.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Lejuez, C., Krueger, R. F., Richards, J. M., & Hill, P. L. (2014). What is conscientiousness and how can it be assessed? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1315–1330.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. D., Schulze, R., MacCann, C. (2008). The measurement of emotional intelligence: A decade of progress? In Boyle, G., Matthews, G., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of personality theory and assessment, Vol. 2. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Rueter, A. R., Abram, S. V., MacDonald, A. W., Rustichini, A., & DeYoung, C. G. (2018). The goal priority network as a neural substrate of Conscientiousness. Human Brain Mapping, 39(9), 3574–3585.Google Scholar
Saklofske, D. H., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.) (1995). International handbook of personality and intelligence. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Santarnecchi, E., Emmendorfer, A., & Pascual-Leone, A. (2017). Dissecting the parieto-frontal correlates of fluid intelligence: A comprehensive ALE meta-analysis study. Intelligence, 63, 9–28.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (1992). Openness versus intellect: Much ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 6, 381–386.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (1994). Trapnell versus the lexical factor: More ado about nothing? European Journal of Personality, 8, 291–298.Google Scholar
Schulte, M. J., Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Not much more than g and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 1059–1068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Séguin, J. R., Boulerice, B., Harden, P., Tremblay, R. E., & Pihl, R. O. (1999). Executive functions and physical aggression after controlling for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, general memory, and IQ. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 1197–1208.Google Scholar
Shamosh, N. A., DeYoung, C. G., Green, A. E., Reis, D. L., Johnson, M. R., Conway, A. R. A. et al. (2008). Individual differences in delay discounting: Relation to intelligence, working memory, and anterior prefrontal cortex. Psychological Science, 19, 904–911.Google Scholar
Shamosh, N.A., & Gray, J.R. (2008). Delay discounting and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Intelligence, 38, 289–305.Google Scholar
Shiner, R. L., & DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The structure of temperament and personality traits: A developmental perspective. In Zelazo, P. D. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 113–141). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2008). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual differences, 44(4), 1012–1021.Google Scholar
Smillie, L. D., Varsavsky, V., Avery, R. E., & Perry, R. (2016). Trait intellect predicts cognitive engagement: Evidence from a resource allocation perspective. European Journal of Personality, 30(3), 215–226.Google Scholar
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, 117–143.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Stanek, K. C. (2014). Meta-analyses of personality and cognitive ability. Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2009). What explains boys’ stronger confidence in their intelligence? Sex Roles, 61, 736–749.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Ruzgis, P. (Eds.) (1994). Personality and intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Swann, A. C., Bjork, J. M., Moeller, F. G., & Dougherty, D. M. (2002). Two models of impulsivity: relationship to personality traits and psychopathology. Biological Psychiatry, 51, 988–994.Google Scholar
Syzmanowicz, A., & Furnham, A. (2011). Gender differences in self-estimates of general, mathematical, spatial and verbal intelligence: Four meta analyses. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 493–504.Google Scholar
Vigil-Colet, A., & Morales-Vives, F. (2005). How impulsivity is related to intelligence and academic achievement. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 8, 199–204.Google Scholar
Von Stumm, S., & Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Investment and intellect: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 841–869.Google Scholar
Wacker, J., & Smillie, L. D. (2015). Trait extraversion and dopamine function. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(6), 225–238.Google Scholar
Wainwright, M. A., Wright, M. J., Luciano, M., Geffen, G. M., & Martin, N. G. (2008). Genetic covariation among facets of openness to experience and general cognitive ability. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 11, 275–286.Google Scholar
Wallace, J. (1966). An abilities conception of personality: Some implications for personality measurement. American Psychologist, 21, 132–138.Google Scholar
Waller, N. G., DeYoung, C. G., & Bouchard, T. J. (2016). The recaptured scale technique: A method for testing the structural robustness of personality scales. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51, 433–445.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Y. J., DeYoung, C. G., & Hirsh, J. B. (2011). Gender differences in personality across the ten aspects of the Big Five. Frontiers in Personality Science and Individual Differences, 2, 178. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00178Google Scholar
Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, R. W. (2001). The Five Factor Model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.Google Scholar
Willerman, L., Turner, R. G., & Peterson, M. (1976). A comparison of the predictive validity of typical and maximal personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 10, 482–492.Google Scholar
Wilt, J., & Revelle, W. (2015). Affect, behaviour, cognition and desire in the Big Five: An analysis of item content and structure. European Journal of Personality, 29(4), 478–497.Google Scholar
Wolf, M. B., & Ackerman, P. L. (2005). Extraversion and intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 531–542.Google Scholar
Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Longley, A., Zhang, Z. X., Chiu, C. Y., & Stark, S. E. (2014). Openness to experience: Its lower level structure, measurement, and cross-cultural equivalence. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 29–45.Google Scholar
Woo, S. E., Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S. E., & Conz, G. (2014). Validity of six openness facets in predicting work behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96(1), 76–86.Google Scholar
Yamagata, S., Suzuki, A., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Kijima, N., Yoshimura, K. et al. (2006). Is the genetic structure of human personality universal? A cross-cultural twin study from North America, Europe, and Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 987–998.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2000). Intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 581–610). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, J., & Ziegler, M. (2015). Interaction effects between openness and fluid intelligence predicting scholastic performance. Journal of Intelligence, 3, 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ziegler, M., Danay, E., Heene, M., Asendorpf, J., & Bühner, M. (2012). Openness, fluid intelligence, and crystallized intelligence: Toward an integrative model. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 173–183.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, P., & Beier, M. E. (2003). Trait complexes, cognitive investment, and domain knowledge. In Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 1–30). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Ash, G. E., & Baumann, J. F. (2017). Vocabulary and reading comprehension: The nexus of meaning. In Israel, S. E. (Ed.), Handbook of research on reading comprehension (2nd ed, pp. 377–405). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Azevedo, R., & Aleven, V. (Eds.). (2013). International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Barro, R. J., & Lee, J-W. (2015). Education matters: Global schooling gains from the 19th to the 21st century. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering. London: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1983). Categorizing sounds and learning to read: A causal connection. Nature, 301, 419–421.Google Scholar
Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. (1985). Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Case, R., & Okamoto, Y. (1996). The role of central conceptual structures in the development of children’s thought. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 61(1 & 2), i–295.Google Scholar
Ceci, S. J., Barnett, S. M., & Kanaya, T. (2003). Developing childhood proclivities into adult competencies: The overlooked multiplier effect. In Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 70–93). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 448–456.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. C., Nunes, S. R., Stahl, S. A., & Willows, D. M. (2001). Systematic phonics instruction helps students learn to read: Evidence from the National Reading Panel’s meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71, 393–447.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (2003). The search for general abilities and basic capacities: Theoretical implications from the modifiability and complexity of mechanisms mediating expert performance. In Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 93–125). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (Eds.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flynn, J. R. (1998). IQ gains over time: Toward finding the causes. In Neisser, U. (Ed.), The rising curve: Long-term gains in IQ and related measures (pp. 25–66). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Flynn, J. R. (2009). What is intelligence? Beyond the Flynn effect. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, A., Yen, L., Yang, N. J., Braun, M., & O’Connor, R. E. (2001). Is reading in reading readiness programs? A randomized field trial with teachers as program implementers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 251–267.Google Scholar
Goswami, U., & Bryant, P. (1990). Phonological skills and learning to read. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Griffin, S.A., Case, R., & Siegler, R.S. (1994). Rightstart: Providing the central conceptual prerequisites for first formal learning of arithmetic to students at risk for school failure. In McGilly, K. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hinsley, D., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). From words to equations. In Carpenter, P. & Just, M. (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Holmes, J. D. (2016). Great myths of education and learning. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hunt, E. (2011). Human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., Dyson, N., Hassinger-Das, B., & Irwin, C. (2012). Building kindergartners’ number sense: A randomized controlled study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 647–660.Google Scholar
Juel, C., Griffith, P. L., & Gough, P. B. (1986). Acquisition of literacy: A longitudinal study of children in first and second grade. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 243–255.Google Scholar
Kalyuga, S. (2014). The expertise reversal principle in multimedia learning. In Mayer, R. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed, pp. 576–597). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krampe, R. T., & Baltes, P. B. (2003). Intelligence as adaptive resource development and resource allocation: A new look through the lenses of SOC and Expertise. In Sternberg, R. J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 31–70). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lipson, M. Y. (1983). The influence of religious affiliation on children’s memory for text information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 448–457.Google Scholar
Marr, M. B., & Gormley, K. (1982). Children’s recall of familiar and unfamiliar text. Reading Research Quarterly, 18, 89–104.Google Scholar
Martinez, M. E. (2000). Education as the cultivation of intelligence. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Massa, L. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2006). Testing the ATI hypothesis: Should multimedia instruction accommodate verbalizer-visualizer cognitive style? Learning and Individual Differences, 16, 321–336.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (1981). Frequency norms and structural analysis of algebra story problems into families, categories, and templates. Instructional Science, 10, 135–175.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2003a). E. L. Thorndike’s enduring contributions to educational psychology. In Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.), Educational psychology: A century of contributions (pp. 113–154). Washington, DC: American Psychology Association.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2003b). What causes individual differences in cognitive performance? In R. Sternberg, J. & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise (pp. 263–274). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and instruction (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia supported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 724–733.Google Scholar
Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.Google Scholar
Pearson, P. D., Hanson, J., & Gordon, C. (1979). The effect of background knowledge on young children’s comprehension of explicit and implicit information. Journal of Reading Behavior, 11, 201–209.Google Scholar
Pelligrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18, 22–37.Google Scholar
Ponce, H. R., Lopez, M. J., & Mayer, R. E. (2013). A computer-based spatial learning strategy approach that improves reading comprehension and writing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61, 819–840.Google Scholar
Reed, S. K. (1999). Word problems. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Riley, M., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. (1982). The development of children’s problem solving ability in arithmetic. In Ginsburg, H. (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 153–196). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schumacher, R. F., & Fuchs, L. S. (2011). Does understanding relational terminology mediate effects of intervention on compare word problems? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111, 2012, 607–628.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1990). Metaphors of mind. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds). (2003). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & The Rainbow Project Collaborators (2006). The Rainbow Project: Enhancing the SAT through assessments of analytical, practical, and creative skills. Intelligence, 34, 321–350.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L.-F. (Eds.). (2001). Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. M., & Beach, R. W. (1984). The effects of text structure instruction on middle-grade students’ comprehension and production of expository text. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 134–146.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Animal intelligence. New York: Hafner.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., & Torgesen, J. K. (1987). The nature of phonological processing and its causal role in the acquisition of reading skills. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 192–212.Google Scholar
Wentzel, K. R., & Miele, D. B. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of motivation at school. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wolf, T. H. (1973). Alfred Binet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Zwick, R. (2002). Fair game: The use of standardized admissions tests in higher education. New York: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar

References

Andreoletti, C., & Lachman, M. E. (2004). Susceptibility and resilience to memory aging stereotypes: Education matters more than age. Experimental Aging Research, 30(2), 129–148.Google Scholar
Aronson, J., Fried, C. B., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(2), 113–125.Google Scholar
Aronson, J., Lustina, M. J., Good, C., Keough, K., Steele, C. M., & Brown, J. (1999). When White men can’t do math: Necessary and sufficient factors in stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 29–46.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., & Heatherton, T. F. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological Inquiry, 7(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Twenge, J. M., & Nuss, C. K. (2002). Effects of social exclusion on cognitive processes: Anticipated aloneness reduces intelligent thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(4), 817–827.Google Scholar
Ben-Zeev, T., Fein, S., & Inzlicht, M. (2005). Arousal and stereotype threat. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(2), 174–181.Google Scholar
Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1913). A method of measuring the development of the intelligence of young children (trans. C. H. Town). Lincoln, IL: Courier.Google Scholar
Binet, A. (1909/1975). Modern ideas about children (trans. S. Heisler). Menlo Park, CA: Suzanne Heisler.Google Scholar
Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263.Google Scholar
Blair, C., & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78(2), 647–663.Google Scholar
Bosson, J. K., Haymovitz, E. L., & Pinel, E. C. (2004). When saying and doing diverge: The effects of stereotype threat on self-reported versus non-verbal anxiety. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(2), 247–255.Google Scholar
Brown, R. P., & Josephs, R. A. (1999). A burden of proof: Stereotype relevance and gender differences in math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(2), 246–257.Google Scholar
Bull, R., & Scerif, G. (2001). Executive functioning as a predictor of children’s mathematics ability: Inhibition, switching, and working memory. Developmental Neuropsychology, 19(3), 273–293.Google Scholar
Cadinu, M., Maass, A., Frigerio, S., Impagliazzo, L., & Latinotti, S. (2003). Stereotype threat: The effect of expectancy on performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(2), 267–285.Google Scholar
Cadinu, M., Maass, A., Rosabianca, A., & Kiesner, J. (2005). Why do women underperform under stereotype threat? Evidence for the role of negative thinking. Psychological Science, 16(7), 572–578.Google Scholar
Carr, P. B., & Steele, C. M. (2009). Stereotype threat and inflexible perseverance in problem solving. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 853–859.Google Scholar
Claxton, G., & Meadows, S. (2009). Brightening up: How children learn to be gifted. In Balchin, T., Hymer, B., & Matthews, D. J. (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 3–9). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Colombo, J., Shaddy, D. J., Blaga, O. M., Anderson, C. J., & Kannass, K. N. (2009). High cognitive ability in infancy and early childhood. In Horowitz, F. D., Subotnik, R. F., & Matthews, D. (Eds.), The development of gift-edness and talent across the life-span (pp. 23–42). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Conley, J. J. (1984). The hierarchy of consistency: A review and model of longitudinal findings on adult individual differences in intelligence, personality and self-opinion. Personality and Individual Differences, 5(1), 11–25.Google Scholar
Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715–730.Google Scholar
Croizet, J., & Claire, T. (1998). Extending the concept of stereotype and threat to social class: The intellectual underperformance of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(6), 588–594.Google Scholar
Cury, F., Da Fonseca, D., Zahn, I., & Elliot, A. (2008). Implicit theories and IQ test performance: A sequential mediational analysis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 783–791.Google Scholar
Cury, F., Elliot, A. J., Da Fonseca, D., & Moller, A. C. (2006). The social-cognitive model of achievement motivation and the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(4), 666–679.Google Scholar
Dai, D. Y., & Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Beyond cognitivism: Toward an integrated understanding of intellectual functioning and development. In Dai, D.Y. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 3–40). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Dar-Nimrod, I., & Heine, S. J. (2006). Exposure to scientific theories affects women’s math performance. Science, 314(5798), 435–435.Google Scholar
Darwin, C. (1859). On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Davies, P. G., Spencer, S. J., Quinn, D. M., & Gerhardstein, R. (2002). Consuming images: How television commercials that elicit stereotype threat can restrain women academically and professionally. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(12), 1615–1628.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668.Google Scholar
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). The general causality orientations scale: Self-determination in personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 19(2), 109–134.Google Scholar
Diamond, A., Barnett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318(5855), 1387–1388.Google Scholar
Dowsett, S. M., & Livesey, D. J. (2000). The development of inhibitory control in preschool children: Effects of “executive skills” training. Developmental Psychobiology, 36(2), 161–174.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16(12), 939–944.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2009a). Foreword. In Horowitz, F. D., Subotnik, R. F., & Matthews, D. (Eds.), The development of giftedness and talent across the life-span (pp. xi–xiv). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S. (2009b). Self-theories and giftedness: A reflective conversation. In Balchin, T., Hymer, B., & Matthews, D. J. (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 308–316). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256–273.Google Scholar
Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(1), 19–23.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.Google Scholar
Espy, K. A., McDiarmid, M. M., Cwik, M. F., Stalets, M. M., Hamby, A., & Senn, T. E. (2004). The contribution of executive functions to emergent mathematic skills in preschool children. Developmental Neuropsychology, 26(1), 465–486.Google Scholar
Gagné, F. (2009). Talent development as seen through the differentiated model of talent and giftedness. In Balchin, T., Hymer, B., & Matthews, D. J. (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 32–41). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Galton, F. (1883). Inquiries into human faculty and its development. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Galton, F. (1892). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gonzales, P. M., Blanton, H., & Williams, K. J. (2002). The effects of stereotype threat and double-minority status on the test performance of Latino women. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 659–670.Google Scholar
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 24(6), 645–662.Google Scholar
Gottfried, A. E. (1985). Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(6), 631–645.Google Scholar
Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 525–538.Google Scholar
Gottfried, A. E., Fleming, J. S., & Gottfried, A. W. (2001). Continuity of academic intrinsic motivation from childhood through late adolescence: A longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 3–13.Google Scholar
Grant, H., & Dweck, C. S. (2003). Clarifying achievement goals and their impact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 541–553.Google Scholar
Harter, S. (1981). A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: Motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology, 17(3), 300–312.Google Scholar
Hong, Y., Chiu, C., Dweck, C. S., Lin, D. M., & Wan, W. (1999). Implicit theories, attributions, and coping: A meaning system approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 588–599.Google Scholar
Howse, R. B., Calkins, S. D., Anastopoulos, A. D., Keane, S. P., & Shelton, T. L. (2003). Regulatory contributors to children’s kindergarten achievement. Early Education and Development, 14(1), 101–119.Google Scholar
Hymer, B. J. (2009). Beyond compare? Thoughts towards an inclusional, fluid and non-normative understanding of giftedness. In Balchin, T., Hymer, B., & Matthews, D. J. (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 299–307). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (1999). Rethinking the value of choice: A cultural perspective on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 349–366.Google Scholar
Janda, L. (1996). The psychologists’ book of self-tests. New York: Berkley Books.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Jensen, A. R. (2002). Galton’s legacy to research on intelligence. Journal of Biosocial Science, 34, 145–172.Google Scholar
Kane, M. J., Conway, A. R. A., Hambrick, D. Z., & Engle, R. W. (2007). Variation in working memory capacity as variation in executive attention and control. In Conway, A. R. A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M. J., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. N. (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 21–46). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krendl, A. C., Richeson, J. A., Kelley, W. M., & Heatherton, T. F. (2008). The negative consequences of threat: A functional magnetic resonance imaging investigation of the neural mechanisms underlying women’s underperformance in math. Psychological Science, 19(2), 168–175.Google Scholar
Lepper, M. R., Corpus, J. H., & Iyengar, S. S. (2005). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations in the classroom: Age differences and academic correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 184–196.Google Scholar
Lepper, M. R., Greene, D., & Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children’s intrinsic interest with extrinsic reward: A test of the “over-justification” hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129–137.Google Scholar
Mangels, J. A., Butterfield, B., Lamb, J., Good, C., & Dweck, C. S. (2006). Why do beliefs about intelligence influence learning success? A social cognitive neuroscience model. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1(2), 75–86.Google Scholar
McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2007). Links between behavioral regulation and preschoolers’ literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychology, 43(4), 947–959.Google Scholar
Mendoza-Denton, R., Kahn, K., & Chan, W. (2008). Can fixed views of ability boost performance in the context of favorable stereotypes? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(4), 1187–1193.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. L. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244(4907), 933–938.Google Scholar
Moser, J. S., Schroder, H. S., Heeter, C., Moran, T. P., & Lee, Y.-H. (2011). Mind your errors: Evidence for a neural mechanism linking growth mind-set to adaptive posterror adjustments. Psychological Science, 22(12), 1484–1489. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611419520Google Scholar
Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 33–52.Google Scholar
Nguyen, H. D., & Ryan, A. M. (2008). Does stereotype threat affect test performance of minorities and women? A meta-analysis of experimental evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(6), 1314–1334.Google Scholar
O’Brien, L. T., & Crandall, C. S. (2003). Stereotype threat and arousal: Effects on women’s math performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(6), 782–789.Google Scholar
Ponitz, C. C., McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A structured observation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 45(3), 605–619.Google Scholar
Ramsden, S., Richardson, F.M., Josse, G., Thomas, M., … & Price, C.J. (2011). Verbal and nonverbal intelligence changes in the teenage brain. Nature, 479(7371), 113–116.Google Scholar
Raven, J. C., Court, J. H., & Raven, J. (1977). Standard progressive matrices. London: H. K. Lewis.Google Scholar
Robins, R. W., & Pals, J. L. (2002). Implicit self-theories in the academic domain: Implications for goal orientation, attributions, affect, and self-esteem change. Self and Identity, 1(4), 313–336.Google Scholar
Rueda,  R. M., Rothbart,  M. K., McCandliss, B. D., Saccomanno, L., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 14931–14936.Google Scholar
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.Google Scholar
Sansone, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Looking beyond rewards: The problem and promise of intrinsic motivation. In Sansone, C. & Harackiewicz, J. M. (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp. 1–13). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sauce, B., & Matzel, L.D. (2018). The paradox of intelligence: Heritability and malleability coexist in hidden gene-environment interplay. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 26–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/bul0000131Google Scholar
Schmader, T., & Johns, M. (2003). Converging evidence that stereotype threat reduces working memory capacity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(3), 440–452.Google Scholar
Siegler, R. S. (1992). The other Alfred Binet. Developmental Psychology, 28(2), 179–190.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (2005). Giftedness and genetics: The emergenic-epigenetic mode and its implications. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 28, 270–286.Google Scholar
Spencer, S. J., Steele, C. M., & Quinn, D. M. (1999). Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35(1), 4–28.Google Scholar
St. Clair-Thompson, H. L., & Gathercole, S. E. (2006). Executive functions and achievements in school: Shifting, updating, inhibition, and working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(4), 745–759.Google Scholar
Steele, C. M. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance. American Psychologist, 52(6), 613–629.Google Scholar
Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797–811.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Intelligence, competence and expertise. In Elliot, A. J. & Dweck, C. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 15–30). New York: Guilford PressGoogle Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (Eds.). (2001). Environmental effects on cognitive abilities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Subotnik, R. F. (2009). Developmental transitions in giftedness and talent: Adolescence into adulthood. In Horowitz, F. D., Subotnik, R. F., & Matthews, D. (Eds.), The development of giftedness and talent across the life-span (pp. 155–170). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., & Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72(2), 271–322.Google Scholar
Terman, L. M. (1916). The measurement of intelligence: An explanation of and a complete guide for the use of the Stanford revision and extension of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Terman, L. M. (1926). Genetic studies of genius, Vol. 1. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Terman, L. M., & Oden, M. H. (1959). Genetic studies of genius: The gifted group at mid-life, Vol. 5. Oxford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Valiente, C., Lemery-Chalfant, K., Swanson, J., & Reiser, M. (2008). Prediction of children’s academic competence from their effortful control, relationships, and classroom participation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 67–77.Google Scholar
Vansteenkiste, M., Simons, J., Lens, W., Sheldon, K. M., & Deci, E. L. (2004). Motivating learning, performance, and persistence: The synergistic effects of intrinsic goal contents and autonomy-supportive contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(2), 246–260.Google Scholar
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2003). Stereotype lift. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39(5), 456–467.Google Scholar
Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96.Google Scholar
Walton, G. M., Logel, C., Peach, J. M., Spencer, S. J., & Zanna, M. P. (2015). Two brief interventions to mitigate a “chilly climate” transform women’s experience, relationships, and achievement in engineering. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 468–485.Google Scholar
Walton, G. M., & Spencer, S. J. (2009). Latent ability: Grades and test scores systematically underestimate the intellectual ability of negatively stereotyped students. Psychological Science, 20(9), 1132–1139.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1996) Eschelle d’Intelligence de Wechsler pour enfants Troisieme Edition (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Third Edition). Paris: ECPA (Original work published 1971).Google Scholar
Wolfe, R. N., & Johnson, S. D. (1995). Personality as a predictor of college performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(2), 177–185.Google Scholar

References

Aljughaiman, A, & Mowrer-Reynolds, E. (2005). Teachers’ conceptions of creativity and creative students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 17–34.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to “The Social Psychology of Creativity.” Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 36, 157–183.Google Scholar
Arenius, P., Engel, Y., & Klyver, K. (2017). No particular action needed? A necessary condition analysis of gestation activities and firm emergence. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 8, 87–92.Google Scholar
Avitia, M. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Beyond g and c: The relationship of rated creativity to long-term storage and retrieval (Glr). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 8, 293–302.Google Scholar
Baer, J. (2011). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 309–313.Google Scholar
Baer, J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2017). The Amusement Park Theoretical Model of Creativity: An attempt to bridge the domain specificity/generality gap. In Kaufman, J. C., Glăveanu, V. P., & Baer, J. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains (pp. 8–17). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Barron, F. (1963). Creativity and psychological health. Princeton: D. Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Barron, F. (1969). Creative person and creative process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Barron, F., & Harrington, D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 439–476.Google Scholar
Batey, M., & Furnham, A. (2006). Creativity, intelligence and personality: A critical review of the scattered literature. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 132, 355–429.Google Scholar
Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative justice? The relationship between prospective teachers’ prior schooling experiences and perceived importance of promoting student creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 40, 149–162.Google Scholar
Beghetto, R. A. (2007). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussions? Prospective teachers’ response preferences. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2, 1–9.Google Scholar
Benedek, M., Franz, F., Heene, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2012). Differential effects of cognitive inhibition and intelligence on creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 480–485.Google Scholar
Benedek, M., Jauk, E., Sommer, M., Arendasy, M., & Neubauer, A. C. (2014). Intelligence, creativity, and cognitive control: The common and differential involvement of executive functions in intelligence and creativity. Intelligence, 46, 73–83.Google Scholar
Blair, C. S., & Mumford, M. D. (2007). Errors in idea evaluation: Preference for the unoriginal? Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 197–222.Google Scholar
Brandau, H., Daghofer, F., Hollerer, L., Kaschnitz, W., Kirchmair, G., Krammer, I., & Schlagbauer, A. (2007). The relationship between creativity, teacher ratings on behavior, age, and gender in pupils from seven to ten years. Journal of Creative Behavior, 41, 91–113.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carson, S. H., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the creative achievement questionnaire. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 37–50.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B., & Butcher, H. (1968). The prediction of achievement and creativity. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Dul, J. (2016a). Necessary condition analysis (NCA): Logic and methodology of “necessary but not sufficient” causality. Organizational Research Methods, 19, 10–52.Google Scholar
Dul, J., Karwowski, M., & Kaufman, J. C. (in press). Necessary condition analysis in creativity research. In Dörfler, V. & Stierand, M. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods on creativity. New York: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Dumas, D. (2018). Relational reasoning and divergent thinking: An examination of the threshold hypothesis with quantile regression. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 53, 1–14.Google Scholar
Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 255–268.Google Scholar
Feldhusen, J. F., & Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity: An integrative review of theory, research, and development. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231–247.Google Scholar
Finke, R. (1990). Creative imagery: Discoveries and inventions in visualization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Finke, R. A., & Slayton, K. (1988). Explorations of creative visual synthesis in mental imagery. Memory and Cognition, 16, 252–257.Google Scholar
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. B., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Flanagan, D. P., & Ortiz, S. O. (2002). Best practices in intellectual assessment: Future directions. In Thomas, A. & Grimes, J. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 1351–1372). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.Google Scholar
Forgeard, M. J. C., & Kaufman, J. C. (2016). Who cares about imagination, creativity, and innovation, and why? A review. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10, 250–269.Google Scholar
Fuchs-Beauchamp, K. D., Karnes, M. B., & Johnson, L. J. (1993). Creativity and intelligence in preschoolers. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 113–117.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence: Explorations with gifted students. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444–454.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P. (1988). Some changes in the Structure-of-Intellect Model. Educational and Psychological Measurements, 48, 1–4.Google Scholar
Harris, A. M., Williamson, R. L., & Carter, N. T. (2018). A conditional threshold hypothesis for creative achievement: On the interaction between intelligence and openness. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000182Google Scholar
Hartman, E. (2000). Dreams and nightmares: The origin and meaning of dreams. New York: Perseus.Google Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (1989). Cognitive processes in creativity. In Glover, J. A., Ronning, R. R., & Reynolds, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 135–145). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.Google Scholar
Jauk, E., Benedek, M., Dunst, B., & Neubauer, A. C. (2013). The relationship between intelligence and creativity: New support for the threshold hypothesis by means of empirical breakpoint detection. Intelligence, 41, 212–221.Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., Czerwonka, M., & Kaufman, J. C. (2018). Does intelligence strengthen creative metacognition? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, (Advance online publication). http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/aca0000208Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., Dul, J., Gralewski, J., Jauk, E., Jankowska, D. M., Gajda, A., Chruszczewski, M. H., & Benedek, M. (2016). Is creativity without intelligence possible? A Necessary Condition Analysis. Intelligence, 57, 105–117.Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., & Gralewski, J. (2013). Threshold hypothesis: Fact or artifact? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 25–33.Google Scholar
Karwowski, M., Kaufman, J. C., Lebuda, I., Szumski, G., & Firkowska-Mankiewicz, A. (2017). Intelligence in childhood and creative achievements in middle-age: The necessary condition approach. Intelligence, 64, 36–44.Google Scholar
Kaufman, A. S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2015). Why creativity isn’t in IQ tests, why it matters, and why it won’t change anytime soon …. Probably. Journal of Intelligence 3, 59–72.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C. (2016). Creativity 101, 2nd ed. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2005). The amusement park theory of creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Baer, J. (Eds.), Creativity across domains: Faces of the muse (pp. 321–328). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2013). In praise of Clark Kent: Creative metacognition and the importance of teaching kids when (not) to be creative. Roeper Review, 35, 155–165.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., Glăveanu, V. P., & Baer, J. (Eds.) (2017). The Cambridge handbook of creativity across domains. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, J. C., Plucker, J. A., & Baer, J. (2008). Essentials of creativity assessment. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Kaufman, S. B., Quilty, L. C., Grazioplene, R. G., Hirsh, J. B., Gray, J. R., Peterson, J. B., & DeYoung, C. G. (2015). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 82, 248–258.Google Scholar
Kenett, Y. N., Anaki, D., & Faust, M. (2014). Investigating the structure of semantic networks in low and high creative persons. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 407.Google Scholar
Kim, K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16, 57–66.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A. (2007). A quantitative analysis of Beethoven as self-critic: Implications for psychological theories of musical creativity. Psychology of Music, 35, 147–172.Google Scholar
Kozbelt, A., Beghetto, R. A., & Runco, M. A. (2010). Theories of creativity. In Kaufman, J. C. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of creativity (pp. 20–47). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. (1999). Biological bases of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 137–152). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (2009). CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence, 37, 1–10.Google Scholar
Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69, 220–232.Google Scholar
Mednick, S. A. (1968). The Remote Associates Test. Journal of Creative Behavior, 2, 213–214.Google Scholar
Mednick, S. A., & Mednick, M. T. (1967). Examiner’s manual: Remote Associates Test. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Meeker, M. N. (1969). The structure of intellect: Its interpretation and uses. Columbus, OH: Merrill.Google Scholar
Mourgues, C. V., Tan, M., Hein, S., Al-Harbi, K., Aljughaiman, A., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2016). The relationship between analytical and creative cognitive skills from middle childhood to adolescence: Testing the threshold theory in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 137–147.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Lonergan, D. C., & Scott, G. M. (2002). Evaluating creative ideas: Processes, standards, and context. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 22, 21–30.Google Scholar
Mumford, M. D., Mobley, M. I., Uhlman, C. E., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Doares, L. M. (1991). Process analytic models of creative capacities. Creativity Research Journal, 4, 91–122.Google Scholar
Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2007). Contrasting intellectual patterns predict creativity in the arts and sciences. Psychological Science, 18, 948–952.Google Scholar
Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2008). Ability differences among people who have commensurate degrees matter for scientific creativity. Psychological Science, 19, 957–961.Google Scholar
Pesut, D. J. (1990). Creative thinking as a self‐regulatory metacognitive process: A model for education, training and further research. Journal of Creative Behavior, 24(2), 105–110.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A. (1999). Is the proof in the pudding? Reanalyses of Torrance’s (1958 to present) longitudinal study data. Creativity Research Journal, 12, 103–114.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A. (2016). Creative articulation. In Plucker, J. A. (Ed.), Creativity and innovation: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 151–163). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potential, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39, 83–96.Google Scholar
Plucker, J. A., & Renzulli, J. S. (1999). Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 35–60). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Preckel, F., Holling, H., & Wiese, M. (2006). Relationship of intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted students: An investigation of threshold theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 159–170.Google Scholar
Reiter-Palmon, R., & Robinson, E. J. (2009). Problem identification and construction: What do we know, what is the future? Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 43–47.Google Scholar
Renzulli, J. S. (1973). New directions in creativity. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1986). The threshold theory regarding creativity and intelligence: An empirical test with gifted and nongifted children. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 11, 212–218.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Assessing the accuracy of judgments of originality on three divergent thinking tests. Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 14, 5–14.Google Scholar
Runco, M. A., & Smith, W. R. (1992). Interpersonal and intrapersonal evaluations of creative ideas. Personality and Individual Differences, 13, 295–302.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2012). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll model of intelligence. In Flanagan, D. P. & Harrison, P. L. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (3rd ed., pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Schneider, W. J., & McGrew, K. S. (2018). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities. In Flanagan, D. P. & McDonough, E. M. (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (4th ed., pp. 99–144). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Shi, B., Wang, L., Yang, J., Zhang, M., & Xu, L. (2017). Relationship between divergent thinking and intelligence: An empirical study of the threshold hypothesis with Chinese children. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 254.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2008a). Another look at creativity and intelligence: Exploring higher-order models and probable confounds. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1012–1021.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J. (2008b). Creativity and intelligence revisited: A latent variable analysis of Wallach and Kogan (1965). Creativity Research Journal, 20, 34–39.Google Scholar
Silvia, P. J., Beaty, R. E., & Nusbaum, E. C. (2013). Verbal fluency and creativity: General and specific contributions of broad retrieval ability (Gr) factors to divergent thinking. Intelligence, 41, 328–340.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1994). Greatness: Who makes history and why. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Sligh, A. C., Conners, F. A., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, B. (2005). Relation of creativity to fluid and crystallized intelligence. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 123–136.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1981). Intelligence and nonentrenchment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 1–16.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1988). A three-facet model of creativity. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), The nature of creativity (pp. 125–147). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292–316.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2006). Creating a vision of creativity: The first 25 years. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, S, 2–12.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2010). College admissions for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2018). A triangular theory of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 12, 50–67,Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J. C., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2008). Applied intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Defying the crowd. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & O’Hara, L. A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 251–272). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & The Rainbow Project Collaborators. (2006). The Rainbow Project: Enhancing the SAT through assessment of analytical, practical and creative skills. Intelligence, 34, 321–350.Google Scholar
Swanson, H. L. (1992). The relationship between metacognition and problem solving in gifted children. Roeper Review, 15, 43–48.Google Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance Test of Creative Thinking: Directions manual and scoring guide. Verbal test booklet A. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.Google Scholar
Torrance, E. P. (2008). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Norms-Technical Manual. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.Google Scholar
Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2005). Creativity and occupational accomplishments among intellectually precocious youths: An age 13 to age 33 longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 484–492.Google Scholar
Wallach, M. A., & Kogan, N. (1965). Modes of thinking in young children: A study of the creativity-intelligence distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (2014). WISC-V Technical and interpretive manual. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
Westby, E. L., & Dawson, V. L. (1995). Creativity: Asset or burden in the classroom? Creativity Research Journal, 8, 1–10.Google Scholar
Valk, W. van der, Sumo, R., Dul, J., & Schroeder, R. (2016). When are contracts and trust necessary for innovation in buyer-supplier relationships? A Necessary Condition Analysis. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 22, 266–277.Google Scholar
Yamamoto, K. (1964). Role of creative thinking and intelligence in high school achievement. Psychological Reports, 14(3), 783–789.Google Scholar
Yu, K., Lu, Z., & Stander, J. (2003). Quantile regression: Applications and current research areas. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 52, 331–350.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1996). A theory of adult development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge. Intelligence, 22, 227–257.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2014). Adolescent and adult intellectual development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 246–251.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 219–245.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Kanfer, R. (2004). Cognitive, affective, and conative aspects of adult intellect within a typical and maximal performance framework. In Dai, D. Y. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 119–141). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Adams, M. J. (1993). Towards making it happen. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 42, 214–218.Google Scholar
Alós-Ferrer, C., & Strack, F. (2014). From dual processes to multiple selves: Implications for economic behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 41, 1–11.Google Scholar
Arkes, H. R., & Ayton, P. (1999). The sunk cost and Concorde effects: Are humans less rational than lower animals? Psychological Bulletin, 125, 591–600.Google Scholar
Bago, B., & De Neys, W. (2017). Fast logic? Examining the time course assumption of dual process theory. Cognition, 158, 90–109.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (1993). Why teach thinking?–An essay. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 42, 191–214.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and deciding (4th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baron, J. (2014). Heuristics and biases. In Zamir, E. & Teichman, D. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of behavioral economics and the law (pp. 3–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baron, J., Bazerman, M. H., & Shonk, K. (2006). Enlarging the societal pie through wise legislation. A psychological perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1, 123–132.Google Scholar
Baron, J., Scott, S., Fincher, K., & Metz, S. E. (2015). Why does the Cognitive Reflection Test (sometimes) predict utilitarian moral judgment (and other things)? Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 4, 265–284.Google Scholar
Barrett, H. C., & Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628–647.Google Scholar
Bruine de Bruin, W., Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2007). Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 938–956.Google Scholar
Burgess, G. C., Gray, J. R., Conway, A. R., & Braver, T. S. (2011). Neural mechanisms of interference control underlie the relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory span. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 674–692.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Feinstein, J., & Jarvis, W. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.Google Scholar
Camerer, C. F. (2000). Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames (pp. 288–300). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carruthers, P. (2006). The architecture of the mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory for fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1–22.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1998). Where is intelligence? Some answers from the triadic theory. In McArdle, J. J. & Woodcock, R. W. (Eds.), Human cognitive abilities in theory and practice (pp. 29–38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chein, J., & Schneider, W. (2012). The brain’s learning and control architecture. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 78–84.Google Scholar
Chuderski, A. (2014). The relational integration task explains fluid reasoning above and beyond other working memory tasks. Memory and Cognition, 42, 448–463.Google Scholar
Chuderski, A. (2015). The broad factor of working memory is virtually isomorphic to fluid intelligence tested under time pressure. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 98–104.Google Scholar
Clark, A. (2001). Mindware: An introduction to the philosophy of cognitive science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cokely, E. T., & Kelley, C. M. (2009). Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 20–33.Google Scholar
Corser, R., & Jasper, J. D. (2014). Enhanced activation of the left hemisphere promotes normative decision making. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 19(3), 368–382.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1949). Essentials of psychological testing. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Dawes, R. M. (1976). Shallow psychology. In Carroll, J. S. & Payne, J. W. (Eds.), Cognition and social behavior (pp. 3–11). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Dawes, R. M. (1998). Behavioral decision making and judgment. In Gilbert, D. T., Fiske, S. T, & Lindzey, G. (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. 1 (pp. 497–548). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J. (2000). Looking down on human intelligence: From psychometrics to the brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J. (2013). Intelligence. Current Biology, 23, R673–R676.Google Scholar
De Neys, W. (Ed.) (2018). Dual process theory 2.0. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
de Sousa, R. (2007). Why think? Evolution and the rational mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1996). Kinds of minds: Toward an understanding of consciousness. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Duncan, J. (2010). How intelligence happens. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Duncan, J., Parr, A., Woolgar, A., Thompson, R., Bright, P., Cox, S., Bishop, S., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (2008). Goal neglect and Spearman’s g: Competing parts of a complex task. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 137, 131–148.Google Scholar
Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 380–417.Google Scholar
Engel de Abreu, P. M. J., Conway, A. R. A., & Gathercole, S. E. (2010). Working memory and fluid intelligence in young children. Intelligence, 38, 552–561.Google Scholar
Engle, R. W. (2018). Working memory and executive attention: A revisit. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13, 190–193.Google Scholar
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Are adjustments insufficient? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 447–460.Google Scholar
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2006). The anchoring-and-adjustment heuristic: Why the adjustments are insufficient. Psychological Science, 17, 311–318.Google Scholar
Etzioni, Amitai. (2014). Treating rationality as a continuous variable. Society, 51, 393–400.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2006). The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13, 378–395.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2007). Hypothetical thinking: Dual processes in reasoning and judgment. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment and social cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–278.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2009). How many dual-process theories do we need? One, two, or many? In Evans, J. & Frankish, K. (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 33–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2010). Thinking twice: Two minds in one brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T. (2014). Reasoning, rationality and dual processes. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T., & Frankish, K. (Eds.). (2009). In two minds: Dual processes and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T., & Over, D. E. (2004). If. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Evans, J. St. B. T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 223–241.Google Scholar
Feldman Barrett, L. F., Tugade, M. M., & Engle, R. W. (2004). Individual differences in working memory capacity and dual-process theories of the mind. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 553–573.Google Scholar
Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Nicholson, N., Soane, E., & Willman, P. (2003). Trading on illusions: Unrealistic perceptions of control and trading performance. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 53–68.Google Scholar
Finucane, M. L., & Gullion, C. M. (2010). Developing a tool for measuring the decision-making competence of older adults. Psychology and Aging, 25, 271–288.Google Scholar
Frank, M. J., Cohen, M., & Sanfey, A. G. (2009). Multiple systems in decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 73–77.Google Scholar
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 25–42.Google Scholar
Frey, D., Johnson, E., & De Neys, W. (2018). Individual differences in conflict detection during reasoning. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71(5), 1188–1208.Google Scholar
Geary, D. C. (2005). The origin of the mind: Evolution of brain, cognition, and general intelligence. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Gignac, G. E. (2005). Openness to experience, general intelligence and crystallized intelligence: A methodological extension. Intelligence, 33, 161–167.Google Scholar
Grossmann, I. (2017). Wisdom in context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 956–972.Google Scholar
Halpern, D. (2008). Halpern Critical thinking assessment: Background and scoring standards. Unpublished manuscript. Claremont, CA: Claremont McKenna College.Google Scholar
Halpern, D. (2010). Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment: Manual Version 21. Mödling: Schuhfried.Google Scholar
Hicks, K. L., Harrison, T. L., & Engle, R. W. (2015). Wonderlic, working memory capacity, and fluid intelligence. Intelligence, 50, 186–195.Google Scholar
Hilton, D. J. (2003). Psychology and the financial markets: Applications to understanding and remedying irrational decision-making. In Brocas, I. & Carrillo, J. D. (Eds.), The psychology of economic decisions, Vol. 1, Rationality and well-being (pp. 273–297). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1967). Age differences in fluid and crystallized intelligence. Acta Psychologica, 26, 1–23.Google Scholar
Hsee, C. K., & Hastie, R. (2006). Decision and experience: Why don’t we choose what makes us happy? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 31–37.Google Scholar
Hunt, E. (2011). Human intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jacowitz, K. E., & Kahneman, D. (1995). Measures of anchoring in estimation tasks. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 1161–1167.Google Scholar
Jastrzębskia, J., Ciechanowska, I., & Chuderski, A. (2018). The strong link between fluid intelligence and working memory cannot be explained away by strategy use. Intelligence, 66, 44–53.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, R. C. (1983). The logic of decision (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, W., & Bouchard, T. J. (2005). The structure of human intelligence: It is verbal, perceptual, and image rotation (VPR), not fluid and crystallized. Intelligence, 33, 393–416.Google Scholar
Kacelnik, A. (2006). Meanings of rationality. In Hurley, S. & Nudds, M. (Eds.), Rational animals? (pp. 87–106). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York:Farrar, Straus & Giroux.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009). Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. American Psychologist, 64, 515–526.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237–251.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (2000). Choices, values, and frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kanazawa, S. (2004). General intelligence as a domain-specific adaptation. Psychological Review, 111, 512–523.Google Scholar
Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., & Conway, A. R. A. (2005). Working memory capacity and fluid intelligence are strongly related constructs: Comment on Ackerman, Beier, and Boyle (2005). Psychological Bulletin, 131, 66–71.Google Scholar
Kelman, M. (2011). The heuristics debate. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klaczynski, P. A., & Lavallee, K. L. (2005). Domain-specific identity, epistemic regulation, and intellectual ability as predictors of belief-based reasoning: A dual-process perspective. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 1–24.Google Scholar
Koehler, D. J., & Harvey, N. (Eds.). (2004). Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kokis, J., Macpherson, R., Toplak, M., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2002). Heuristic and analytic processing: Age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 83, 26–52.Google Scholar
Kovacs, K., & Conway, A. R. A. (2016). Process overlap theory: A unified account of the general factor of intelligence. Psychological Inquiry, 27, 151–177.Google Scholar
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lee, C. J. (2006). Gricean charity: The Gricean turn in psychology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 36, 193–218.Google Scholar
Levin, I. P., Gaeth, G. J., Schreiber, J., & Lauriola, M. (2002). A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 411–429.Google Scholar
Liberali, J. M., Reyna, V. F., Furlan, S., Stein, L. M., & Pardo, S. T. (2012). Individual differences in numeracy and cognitive reflection, with implications for biases and fallacies in probability judgment. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25, 361–381.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversal of preferences between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 46–55.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1973). Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in Las Vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 16–20.Google Scholar
Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (Eds.). (2006). The construction of preference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lieberman, M. D. (2009). What zombies can’t do: A social cognitive neuroscience approach to the irreducibility of reflective consciousness. In Evans, J. St. B. T. & Frankish, K. (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 293–316). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Luce, R. D., & Raiffa, H. (1957). Games and decisions. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. J., & Bennett, E. S. (2003). The fractionation of working memory maps onto different components of intelligence. Intelligence, 31, 519–531.Google Scholar
Macpherson, R., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007). Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17, 115–127.Google Scholar
Manktelow, K. I. (2004). Reasoning and rationality: The pure and the practical. In Manktelow, K. I. & Chung, M. C. (Eds.), Psychology of reasoning: Theoretical and historical perspectives (pp. 157–177). Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Maule, J., & Villejoubert, G. (2007). What lies beneath: Reframing framing effects. Thinking and Reasoning, 13, 25–44.Google Scholar
McClure, S. M., & Bickel, W. K. (2014). A dual‐systems perspective on addiction: contributions from neuroimaging and cognitive training. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1327, 62–78.Google Scholar
McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004). Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science, 306, 503–507.Google Scholar
McGrew, K. S. (2009). CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence, 37, 1–10.Google Scholar
McLaren, I. P., Forrest, C. L., McLaren, R. P., Jones, F. W., Aitken, M. R., & Mackintosh, N. J. (2014). Associations and propositions: the case for a dual-process account of learning in humans. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 108, 185–195.Google Scholar
McVay, J. C., & Kane, M. J. (2012). Why does working memory capacity predict variation in reading comprehension? On the influence of mind wandering and executive attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 302–320.Google Scholar
Milkman, K. L., Rogers, T., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Harnessing our inner angels and demons. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 324–338.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 8–14.Google Scholar
Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automaticity: A theoretical and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297–326.Google Scholar
Moshman, D. (2004). From inference to reasoning: The construction of rationality. Thinking and Reasoning, 10, 221–239.Google Scholar
Mrazek, M. D., Smallwood, J., Franklin, M. S., Chin, J. M., Baird, B., & Schooler, J. W. (2012). The role of mind-wandering in measurements of general aptitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 788–798.Google Scholar
Nigg, J. T. (2017). On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58, 361–383.Google Scholar
Nisbett, R. E., Aronson, J., Blair, C., Dickens, W., Flynn, J., Halpern, D. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2012). Intelligence: New findings and theoretical developments. American Psychologist, 67, 130–159.Google Scholar
Over, D. E. (2000). Ecological rationality and its heuristics. Thinking and Reasoning, 6, 182–192.Google Scholar
Over, D. E. (2004). Rationality and the normative/descriptive distinction. In Koehler, D. J. & Harvey, N. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 3–18). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Parker, A. M., Bruine de Bruin, W., & Fischhoff, B. (2015). Negative decision outcomes are more common among people with lower decision-making competence: an item-level analysis of the Decision Outcome Inventory (DOI). Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 363. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00363Google Scholar
Parker, A. M., & Fischhoff, B. (2005). Decision-making competence: External validation through an individual differences approach. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, 1–27.Google Scholar
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34–72.Google Scholar
Perkins, D. N. (1995). Outsmarting IQ: The emerging science of learnable intelligence. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, W. J., Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D., & Hine, D. W. (2016). Thinking styles and decision making: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142, 260–290.Google Scholar
Prado, J., & Noveck, I. A. (2007). Overcoming perceptual features in logical reasoning: A parametric functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 642–657.Google Scholar
Rand, D. G., Tomlin, D., Bear, A., Ludvig, E. A., & Cohen, J. D. (2017). Cyclical population dynamics of automatic versus controlled processing: An evolutionary pendulum. Psychological Review, 124(5), 626–642.Google Scholar
Salthouse, T. A., Atkinson, T. M., & Berish, D. E. (2003). Executive functioning as a potential mediator of age-related cognitive decline in normal adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 566–594.Google Scholar
Samuels, R. (2005). The complexity of cognition: Tractability arguments for massive modularity. In Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., & Stich, S. (Eds.), The innate mind (pp. 107–121). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Samuels, R. (2009). The magical number two, plus or minus: Dual-process theory as a theory of cognitive kinds. In Evans, J. St. B. T. & Frankish, K. (Eds.), In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (pp. 129–146). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. (2004). General mental ability in the world of work: Occupational attainment and job performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 162–173.Google Scholar
Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., & Trope, Y. (2014). Dual-process theories of the social mind. New York: Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.Google Scholar
Siegel, H. (1997). Rationality redeemed? Further dialogues on an educational ideal. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69, 99–118.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., & Peters, E. (2006). Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 322–325.Google Scholar
Slovic, S., & Slovic, P. (2015). Numbers and nerves: Information, emotion, and meaning in a world of data. Corvallis: Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1993). Dysrationalia: A new specific learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 501–515.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (1999). Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2004). The robot’s rebellion: Finding meaning in the age of Darwin. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2009). What intelligence tests miss: The psychology of rational thought. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2011). Rationality and the reflective mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2012). On the distinction between rationality and intelligence: Implications for understanding individual differences in reasoning. In Holyoak, K. & Morrison, R (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 343–365). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Why humans are (sometimes) less rational than other animals: Cognitive complexity and the axioms of rational choice. Thinking and Reasoning, 19, 1–26.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2016). The Comprehensive Assessment of Rational Thinking. Educational Psychologist, 51, 23–34.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E. (2018). Miserliness in human cognition: The interaction of detection, override, and mindware. Thinking and Reasoning, 24, 423–444.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & Toplak, M. E. (2012). Defining features versus incidental correlates of Type 1 and Type 2 processing. Mind and Society, 11, 3–13.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., Toplak, M. E., & West, R. F. (2008). The development of rational thought: A taxonomy of heuristics and biases. Advances in child development and behavior, 36, 251–285.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 342–357.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998). Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127, 161–188.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 645–726.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 672–695.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., West, R. F., & Toplak, M. E. (2016). The Rationality Quotient: Toward a test of rational thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2002). Why smart people can be so stupid. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Grigorenko, E. L., & Zhang, L. F. (2008). Styles of learning and thinking matter in instruction and assessment. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 486–506.Google Scholar
Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Scott Edwards, C. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742–752.Google Scholar
Taylor, S. E. (1981). The interface of cognitive and social psychology. In Harvey, J. H. (Ed.), Cognition, social behavior, and the environment (pp. 189–211). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H. (2015). Misbehaving: The making of behavioral economics. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, V. A., Prowse Turner, J. A., & Pennycook, G. (2011). Intuition, reason, and metacognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63, 107–140.Google Scholar
Toates, F. (2005). Evolutionary psychology: Towards a more integrative model. Biology and Philosophy, 20, 305–328.Google Scholar
Toates, F. (2006). A model of the hierarchy of behavior, cognition, and consciousness. Consciousness and Cognition, 15, 75–118.Google Scholar
Toplak, M., Liu, E., Macpherson, R., Toneatto, T., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007). The reasoning skills and thinking dispositions of problem gamblers: A dual-process taxonomy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 103–124.Google Scholar
Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2002). The domain specificity and generality of disjunctive reasoning: Searching for a generalizable critical thinking skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 197–209.Google Scholar
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2011). The Cognitive Reflection Test as a predictor of performance on heuristics and biases tasks. Memory and Cognition, 39, 1275–1289.Google Scholar
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014a). Assessing miserly processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test. Thinking and Reasoning, 20, 147–168.Google Scholar
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014b). Rational thinking and cognitive sophistication: Development, cognitive abilities, and thinking dispositions. Developmental Psychology, 50, 1037–1048.Google Scholar
Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2017). Real-world correlates of performance on heuristics and biases tasks in a community sample. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 541–554.Google Scholar
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.Google Scholar
von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). The theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2000). Intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 581–610). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, P. L. (2000). Domain-specific knowledge as the “dark matter” of adult intelligence: Gf/Gc, personality and interest correlates. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 55(2), P69-P84.Google Scholar
Aldwin, C. M., Igarashi, H., & Levenson, M. R. (2019). Wisdom as self-transcendence. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 122–143). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ardelt, M. (2003). Development and empirical assessment of a three-dimensional wisdom scale. Research on Aging, 25, 275–324.Google Scholar
Ardelt, M. (2004). Wisdom as expert knowledge system: A critical review of a contemporary operationalization of an ancient concept. Human Development, 47, 257–285.Google Scholar
Ardelt, M. (2011). Wisdom, age, and well-being. In Schaie, K. W. & Willis, S. L. (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (7th ed., pp. 279–291). San Diego: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Baltes, P. B., & Smith, J. (1990). Toward a psychology of wisdom and its ontogenesis. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Wisdom: Its nature, origins, and development (pp. 87–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Baltes, P. B., & Staudinger, U. M. (2000). Wisdom: A metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue towards excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 122–136.Google Scholar
Basseches, M. (1984). Dialectical thinking. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Bieri, J. (1955). Cognitive complexity-simplicity and predictive behavior. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51(2), 263–268.Google Scholar
Ceci, S. J., & Liker, J. K. (1986). A day at the races: A study of IQ, expertise, and cognitive complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115(3), 255–266.Google Scholar
Clayton, V. P., & Birren, J. E. (1980). The development of wisdom across the life span: A reexamination of an ancient topic. In Baltes, P. B. & Brim, J. O. G. (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior, Vol. 3 (pp. 103–135). New York: Academic Press,Google Scholar
Curnow, T. (1999). Wisdom, intuition and ethics. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406Google Scholar
Glück, J., & Baltes, P.B. (2006). Using the concept of wisdom to enhance the expression of wisdom knowledge: Not the philosopher’s dream, but differential effects of developmental preparedness. Psychology and Aging, 21, 679–690.Google Scholar
Glück, J., & Bluck, S. (2013). MORE Wisdom: A developmental theory of personal wisdom. In Ferrari, M. & Weststrate, N. (Eds.), The scientific study of personal wisdom (pp. 75–98). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Glück, J., Bluck, S., & Weststrate, N. M. (2018). More on the MORE Life Experience Model: What we have learned (so far). The Journal of Value Inquiry (Advance online publication).Google Scholar
Glück, J., König, S., Naschenweng, K., Redzanowski, U., Dorner, L., Strasser, I., & Wiedermann, W. (2013). How to measure wisdom: Content, reliability, and validity of five measures. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00405Google Scholar
Grossmann, I. (2017). Wisdom in context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(2), 233–257.Google Scholar
Grossmann, I., Gerlach, T. M., & Denissen, J. J. (2016). Wise reasoning in the face of everyday life challenges. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 7(7), 611–622.Google Scholar
Grossmann, I., & Kross, E. (2014). Exploring Solomon’s Paradox: Self-distancing eliminates the self-other asymmetry in wise reasoning about close relationships in younger and older adults. Psychological science, 25(8), 1571–1580.Google Scholar
Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnum, M. E. W., Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2013). A route to well-being: Intelligence versus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 944–953.Google Scholar
Grossmann, I., Na, J., Varnum, M. E. W., Park, D. C, Kitayama, S., & Nisbett, R. E. (2010). Reasoning about social conflicts improves into old age. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107, 7246–7250.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. Z., Oswald, F. L., Altmann, E. M., Meinz, E. J., Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2014). Deliberate practice: Is that all it takes to become an expert? Intelligence, 45, 34–45.Google Scholar
Koller, I., Levenson, M. R., & Glück, J. (2017). What do you think you are measuring? A mixed-methods procedure for assessing the content validity of test items and theory-based scaling. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 126.Google Scholar
Kross, E., & Grossmann, I. (2012). Boosting wisdom: Distance from the self enhances wise reasoning, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141, 43–48.Google Scholar
Kunzmann, U. (2019). Performance-based measures of wisdom: state of the art and future directions. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 277–296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kunzmann, U., & Baltes, P. B. (2003) Wisdom-related knowledge: Affective, motivational, and interpersonal correlates. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29(9), 1104–1119.Google Scholar
Leary, M. R., Diebels, K. J., Davisson, E. K., Jongman-Sereno, K. P., Isherwood, J. C., Raimi, K. T., Deffler, S. A., & Hoyle, R. H. (2017). Cognitive and interpersonal features of intellectual humility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(6), 793–813.Google Scholar
Levenson, R., Jennings, P. A., Aldwin, C., & Shiraishi, R.W. (2005). Self-transcendence, conceptualization and measurement. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 60, 127–143.Google Scholar
Mickler, C., & Staudinger, U. M. (2008). Personal wisdom: Validation and age-related differences of a performance measure. Psychology and Aging, 23, 787–799.Google Scholar
Oakes, H., Brienza, J. P., Elnakouri, A., & Grossmann, I. (2019). Wise reasoning: Converging evidence for the psychology of sound judgment. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 202–225). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reznitskaya, A., & Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Teaching students to make wise judgments: The “teaching for wisdom” program. In Linley, P. A. & Joseph, S. (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 181–196). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Riegel, K. F. (1973). Dialectic operations: The final period of cognitive development. Human development, 16(5), 346–370.Google Scholar
Smith, J., & Baltes, P. B. (1990). Wisdom-related knowledge: Age/cohort differences in responses to life-planning problems. Developmental Psychology, 26, 494–505.Google Scholar
Staudinger, U. M. (2019). General and personal wisdom. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 182–201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Staudinger, U. M., Dörner, J., & Mickler, C. (2005). Wisdom and personality. In Sternberg, R. J. & Jordan, J. (Eds.), A handbook of wisdom: Psychological perspectives (pp. 191–219). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Staudinger, U. M., Lopez, D., & Baltes, P. B. (1997). The psychometric location of wisdom-related performance: Intelligence, personality, and more? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 1200–1214.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Reasoning, problem solving, and intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 225–307). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1985a). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1985b). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). A balance theory of wisdom. Review of General Psychology, 2, 347–365.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Why schools should teach for wisdom: The balance theory of wisdom in educational settings. Educational Psychologist, 36(4), 227–245.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Foolishness. In Sternberg, R. J. & Jordan, J. (Eds.), A handbook of wisdom: Psychological perspectives. (pp. 331–351). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2007). A systems model of leadership: WICS. American Psychologist, 62(1), 34–42.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2019). Why people often prefer wise guys to guys who are wise: An augmented balance theory of the production and reception of wisdom. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 162–181). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Glück, J. (2019). Wisdom, morality, and ethics. In Sternberg, R. J. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 551–574). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Reznitskaya, A., & Jarvin, L. (2007). Teaching for wisdom: What matters is not just what students know, but how they use it. London Review of Education, 5(2), 143–158.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Wagner, R. K. (1993). The g-ocentric view of intelligence and job performance is wrong. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 1–5.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., Wagner, R. K., & Okagaki, L. (1993). Practical intelligence: The nature and role of tacit knowledge in work and at school. In Reese, H. & Puckett, J. (Eds.), Advances in lifespan development (pp. 205–227). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Takahashi, M., & Overton, W. F. (2002). Wisdom: A culturally inclusive developmental perspective. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26(3), 269–277.Google Scholar
Von Stumm, S., & Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Investment and intellect: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139(4), 841–869.Google Scholar
Webster, J. D. (2003). An exploratory analysis of a self-assessed wisdom scale. Journal of Adult Development, 10, 13–22.Google Scholar
Webster, J. D. (2007). Measuring the character strength of wisdom. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 65, 163–183.Google Scholar
Webster, J. D. (2019). Self-report wisdom measures: Strengths, limitations, and future directions. In Sternberg, R. & Glück, J. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of wisdom (pp. 297–320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Weststrate, N. M., & Glück, J. (2017a). Hard-earned wisdom: Exploratory processing of difficult life experience is positively associated with wisdom. Developmental Psychology, 53, 800–814.Google Scholar
Weststrate, N. M., & Glück, J. (2017b). Wiser but not sadder, blissful but not ignorant: Exploring the co-development of wisdom and well-being over time. In Robinson, M. D. & Eid, M. (Eds.), The happy mind: Cognitive contributions to well-being (pp. 459–480). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Yang, S.-Y. (2001). Conceptions of wisdom among Taiwanese Chinese. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32, 662–680.Google Scholar
Zachry, C. E., Phan, L. V., & Blackie, L. E. R., & Jayawickreme, E. (2018). Situation-based contingencies underlying wisdom-content manifestations: Examining intellectual humility in daily life. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences, 73(8), 1404–1415.Google Scholar

References

Ackerman, P. L. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 3–27.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (1988). Determinants of individual differences during skill acquisition: Cognitive abilities and information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 288–318.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2000). Domain-specific knowledge as the “dark matter” of adult intelligence: gf/gc, personality and interest correlates. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 55B(2), P69–P84.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2014a). Nonsense, common sense, and science of expert performance: Talent and individual differences. Intelligence, 45, 6–17.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L. (2014b). Facts are stubborn things. Intelligence, 45, 104–106.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Beier, M. E. (2006). Methods for studying the structure of expertise: Psychometric approaches. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 147–166). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ackerman, P. L., & Rolfhus, E. L. (1999). The locus of adult intelligence: Knowledge, abilities, and non-ability traits. Psychology and Aging, 14, 314–330.Google Scholar
Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1999). Learner profiles: Valuing individual differences within classroom communities. In Ackerman, P. L., Kyllonen, P. C., & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Process, trait, and content determinants (pp. 413–436). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
ARDMS (American Registry for Diagnostic Medical Sonography). (2019). Get certified. Registered Diagnostic Medical Sonograhper® (RDMS®). www.ardms.org/get-certified/rdms/Google Scholar
ASPPB (Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards). (2019). EPPP candidate handbook. https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.asppb.net/resource/resmgr/eppp_/eppp_cand-handbook-1_16_2019.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bahrick, H. P. (1984). Fifty years of second language attrition: Implications for programmatic research. Modern Language Journal, 68(2), 105–118.Google Scholar
Bahrick, H. P., & Hall, L. K. (1991). Lifetime maintenance of high school mathematics content. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120(1), 20–33.Google Scholar
Beier, M. E., & Ackerman, P. L. (2001). Current events knowledge in adults: An investigation of age, intelligence and non-ability determinants. Psychology and Aging, 16, 615–628.Google Scholar
Beier, M. E., & Ackerman, P. L. (2003). Determinants of health knowledge: An investigation of age, gender, abilities, personality, and interests. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 439–448.Google Scholar
Broudy, H. S. (1977). Types of knowledge and purposes of education. In Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., & Montague, W. E. (Eds.), Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 1–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1943). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40, 153–193.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1957). Personality and motivation structure and measurement. Yonkers-on-Hudson NY: World Book.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Ceci, S. J., & Liker, J. K. (1986a). A day at the races: A study of IQ, expertise, and cognitive complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 115, 255–266.Google Scholar
Ceci, S. J., & Liker, J. (1986b). Academic and nonacademic intelligence: An experimental separation. In Sternberg, R. J. & Wagner, R. K. (Eds.), Practical intelligence: Nature and origins of competence in the everyday world (pp. 119–142). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
CFA (Chartered Financial Analyst) Institute. (2008). CFA® exam information. www.cfainstitute.org/en/programs/cfa/examGoogle Scholar
Chase, W. G., & Ericsson, K. A. (1981). Skilled memory. In Anderson, J. R. (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 141–189). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Cianciolo, A. T., Matthew, C., Sternberg, R. J., & Wagner, R. K. (2006). Tacit knowledge, practical intelligence, and expertise. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 613–632). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coward, W. M., & Sackett, P. R. (1990). Linearity of ability-performance relationships: A reconfirmation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 297–300.Google Scholar
The Economist. (2008). Charter School. The Economist, June 5. www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2008/06/05/charter-schoolGoogle Scholar
Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 683–703). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49, 725–747.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.Google Scholar
Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.Google Scholar
Ferguson, G. A. (1956). On transfer and the abilities of man. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 10, 121–131.Google Scholar
Gibson, J., & Light, P. (1992). Intelligence among university scientists. In Albert, R. S. (Ed.), Genius and eminence (2nd ed., pp. 109–111). International series in experimental social psychology, 22. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York: Little, Brown and Company.Google Scholar
Gobet, F., & Charness, N. (2006). Expertise in chess. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 523–538). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Halpern, D. F., & Wai, J. (2007). The world of competitive Scrabble: Novice and expert differences in visuospatial and verbal abilities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 13, 79–94.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. Z., Campitelli, G., & Macnamara, B. N. (Eds.) (2018). The science of expertise: Behavioral, neural, and genetic approaches to complex skill. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. Z., Macnamara, B. N., Campitelli, G., Ullén, F., & Mosing, M. A. (2016). Beyond born versus made: A new look at expertise. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 64, 1–55.Google Scholar
Hambrick, D. Z., Oswald, F. L., Altmann, E. M., Meinz, E. J., Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2014). Deliberate practice: Is that all it takes to become an expert? Intelligence, 45, 34–45.Google Scholar
Hebb, D. O. (1942). The effect of early and late brain injury upon test scores, and the nature of normal adult intelligence. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 85(3), 275–292.Google Scholar
Hill, L. B. (1934). A quarter century of delayed recall. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 44, 231–238.Google Scholar
Hill, L. B. (1957). A second quarter century of delayed recall, or relearning at eighty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 65–69.Google Scholar
Hill, L. B., Rejall, A. E., & Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Practice in the case of typewriting. Pedagogical Seminary, 20, 516–529.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1968). Organization of abilities and the development of intelligence. Psychological Review, 75, 242–259.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L. (1989). Cognitive diversity: A framework of learning. In Ackerman, P. L., Sternberg, R. J., & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Learning and individual differences: Advances in theory and research (pp. 61–116). New York: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Horn, J. L., & Cattell, R. B. (1966). Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57, 253–270.Google Scholar
Horn, J., & Masunaga, H. (2006). A merging theory of expertise and intelligence. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 147–166). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Journal of Educational Psychology. (1921). Intelligence and its measurement: A symposium. Journal of Educational Psychology, 12, 123–275.Google Scholar
Kohn, M. L., & Schooler, C. (1978). The reciprocal effects of the substantive complexity of work and intellectual flexibility: A longitudinal assessment. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 24–52.Google Scholar
Krampe, R. T., & Charness, N. (2018). Aging and expertise. In Ericsson, K. A., Hoffman, R. R., Kozbelt, A., & Mark Williams, A. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 836–856). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kubeck, J. E., Delp, N. D., Haslett, T. K., & McDaniel, M. A. (1996). Does job-related training performance decline with age? Psychology and Aging, 11(1), 92–107.Google Scholar
Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2006). Study of mathematically precocious youth after 35 years: Uncovering antecedents for the development of math-science expertise. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14, 316–345.Google Scholar
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.Google Scholar
(NBA) National Basketball Association. (2009). 2007–08 player survey: Height. NBA. www.nba.com/news/survey_height_2007.htmlGoogle Scholar
Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. S. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In Anderson, J. R. (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition (pp. 1–55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Norman, G., Eva, K., Brooks, L., & Hamstra, S. (2006). Expertise in medicine and surgery. In Ericsson, A., Feltovich, P., Charness, N., & Hoffman, R. R. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook on expertise and expert performance (pp. 339–353). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nuland, S. B. (2007). The art of aging: A doctor’s prescription for well-being. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Owens, W. A., Jr. (1953). Age and mental abilities: A longitudinal study. Genetic Psychology Monograph, 48, 3–54.Google Scholar
OUP (Oxford University Press). (1971). The compact edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. New York: OUP.Google Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1966/1983). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith.Google Scholar
Robinson, R. (1950). Definition. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. (1949/2000). The concept of mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Salthouse, T. A. (1996). The processing-speed theory of adult age differences in cognition. Psychological Review, 103(3), 403–428.Google Scholar
Schaie, K. W. (1996). Intellectual development in adulthood: The Seattle longitudinal study. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schaie, K. W. (2005). Developmental influences on adult intelligence: The Seattle Longitudinal Study. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schooler, C. (2001). The intellectual effects of the demands of the work environment. In Sternberg, R. J. & Gigorenko, E. L. (Eds.), Environmental effects on cognitive abilities (pp. 363–380). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1988). Scientific genius: A psychology of science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, R. E. (1996). Aptitude development and education. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2, 536–560.Google Scholar
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–293.Google Scholar
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1989). Exposure to print and orthographic processing. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 403–433.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Intelligence as developing expertise. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 359–375.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J., & Detterman, D. K. (1986). What is intelligence? Contemporary viewpoints on its nature and definition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Stewart, N. (1947). A.G.C.T. scores of army personnel grouped by occupation. Occupations, 26, 5–41.Google Scholar
Swift, E. J. (1910). Relearning a skillful act: An experimental study in neuro-muscular memory. Psychological Bulletin, 7, 17–19.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K. (2000). Practical intelligence. In Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 380–395). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., & Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Practical intelligence in real-world pursuits: The role of tacit knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 436–458.Google Scholar
Wagner, R. K., & Sternberg, R. J. (1987). Tacit knowledge in managerial success. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1, 301–312.Google Scholar
Webb, R. M., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2007). Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 397–420.Google Scholar
Willis, S., & Tosti-Vasey, J. L. (1990). How adult development, intelligence, and motivation affect competence. In Willis, S. L. & Dubin, S. S. (Eds.), Maintaining professional competence: Approaches to career enhancement, vitality, and success throughout a work life (pp. 64–84). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Yates, F. (1966). The art of memory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×