BATt-7, TEA abilities battery: description and psychometric properties

Article Sidebar

PDF (Español (España))
Published: Sep 18, 2014
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2014.n1.v2.450
Keywords:
Intelligence cognitive abilities assessment g factor

Main Article Content

Fernando Sánchez Sánchez
Dpto. IDI TEA Ediciones
David Arribas Águila
Dpto. IDI de TEA Ediciones

Abstract

BAT-7 is a new psychometric tool for assessing three intellectual domains, general factor (g), fluid intelligence (Gf) and crystallized intelligence (Gc), and eight cognitive abilities: Verbal (V), Spatial (E), Attention (A) and Concentration (CON), Reasoning (R), Numerical (N), Mechanical (M) and Orthography (O). It consists of three forms of increasing difficulty (E, M and S) and it is focused on the assessment of school and college students, as well as adults with different educational background. The present study aims to provide a description of the BAT-7 development and the main features of it, and a summary of its psychometric properties, mainly its reliability and validity. BAT-7 was administered to a Spanish standardization sample of 4,263 students (age between 12 and 18) and 1,507 adults. Reliability was studied with ordinal alpha, Cronbach’s alpha and tests information functions. Validity was explored by multigroup CFA. 3P IRT model showed a statistical fit for all items. Ordinal alpha ranged from .79 to .91 for test scores and from .91 to .97 for composite scores. The model based on CHC theory showed a good fit to the observed data (RMSEA=.034; SRMR=.026; CFI=.981). The results, in terms of TRI model fitting, reliability and validity, suggest that the BAT-7 is a useful, flexible and highly reliable test for assessing the cognitive abilities, and provide evidences supporting the use of the battery for the assessment of intellectual abilities in children and adults. An estimate of general ability (g), fluid intelligence (Gf) and crystallized intelligence (Gc) also can be obtained by applying the BAT-7.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Sánchez Sánchez, F., & Arribas Águila, D. (2014). BATt-7, TEA abilities battery: description and psychometric properties. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology. Revista INFAD De Psicología., 2(1), 353–364. https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2014.n1.v2.450
Issue
Vol. 2 No. 1 (2014): EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST
Section
Articles
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
 
a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format under the following terms:

 

Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.

 
b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
 
c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
 
The authors are responsible to obtain the appropriate permissions to reproduce material (text, images or graphics) from other publications and to quote their origin correctly.
 

References

Abad, F.J., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V. y García, C. (2011). Medición en ciencias sociales y de la salud. Madrid: Síntesis.

Arbuckle, J.L. (2007). Amos (Versión 16.0) [programa informático]. Chicago: SPSS.

Arribas, D., Santamaría, P., Sánchez-Sánchez, F. y Fernández-Pinto, I. (2013). BAT-7, Batería de aptitudes de TEA, Manual. Madrid: TEA Ediciones.

Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models and their use in inferring an examinee’s ability. En F. M. Lord y M. R. Novick (Eds.), Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison–Wesley.

Brody, N. (1997). Intelligence, schooling and society. American Psychologist, 52, 1046–1050.

Burks, S.V., Carpenter, J.P., Goette, L. y Rustichini, A. (2009). Cognitive skills affect economic preferences, strategic behavior, and job attachment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (19), 7745–7750.

Byrne, M.B. (2004). Testing for Multigroup Invariance Using AMOS Graphics: A Road Less Traveled. Structural Equation Modeling, 11, 272-300.

Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, Inglaterra: Cambridge University Press.

Carroll, J.B. (2005). The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities. En D.P. Flanagan y P.L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests and issues (2.ª Ed.). Nueva York: Guilford Press.

Cattell, R.B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth and action. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.

Cattell, R.B. (1985). Intelligence: Its structure, growth and action. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Cattell, R.B. y Horn, J.L. (1985). A check on the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence with description of new subtest designs. Journal of Educational Measurement, 15, 139-164.

Colom, R. (2002). En los límites de la inteligencia. ¿Es el ingrediente del éxito en la vida? Madrid: Pirámide.

Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.

Deary, I.J. (2012). Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 453-482.

Deary, I.J., Strand, S., Smith, P. y Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35, 13–21.

Detterman, D.K. y Thompson, L.A. (1997). IQ, Schooling, and Developmental Disabilities: What’s so Special about Special Education? American Psychologist, 52, 1082-1091.

Duckworth, A.L. y Seligman, M.E.P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944.

Duckworth, A.L., Quinn, P.D., Lynam, D.R., Loeber, R. y Stouthamer-Loeber, M. (2011). Role of test motivation in intelligence testing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 7716–7720.

Gottfredson, L.S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24, 79–132.

Gottfredson, L.S. (2000). g: highly general and highly practical. En R. Sternberg y E. Grigorenko (Ed.s), The general intelligence factor: how general is it? Nueva York: LEA.

Hambleton, R. y Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item Response Theory. Principles and Applications. Boston: Nijhoff Publishing.

Haywood, H. (2004). Thinking in, around, and about the curriculum: The role of cognitive education. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 51(3), 231.

Heise, D. R. y Bohrnstedt, G. W. (1970). Validity, invalidity and reliability. En E. F. Borgatta y G. W. Bohrnstedt (Eds.), Sociological methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Horn, J.L. (1978). Psychometric studies of aging and intelligence. En S. Gershon y A. Raskin (Eds.), Genesis and Treatment of Psychological Disorders in the Elderly, vol. 2. Nueva York: Raven.

Horn, J.L. (1988). Thinking about human abilities. En J. R. Nesselroade y R. B. Cattell (Eds.), Handbook of multivariate psychology. Nueva York: Academic Press.

Horn, J.L. (1991). Measurement of intellectual capabilities: A review of theory. En K. S. McGrew, J. K. Werder y R. W. Woodcock (Eds.), Woodcock-Johnson Technical Manual. Chicago: Riverside.

Jensen, A.R. (1981). Straight talk about mental tests. Londres: Methuen.

Jensen, A.R. (1998). The g Factor. Nueva York: Praeger.

Kuncel, N.R. y Hezlett, S.A. (2007). Standardized tests predict graduate students’ success. Science, 315, 1080–1081.

Kuncel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A. y Ones, D.S. (2001). A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the Graduate Record Examinations: Implications for graduate student selection and

performance. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 162–181.

Lord, F.M. y Novick, M. R.(1968). Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Lubinski, D. (2000). Scientific and social significance of assessing individual differences: “Sinking shafts at a few critical points.” Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 405–444.

Martínez Arias, R. (1995). Teoría de los tests psicológicos y educativos. Madrid: Síntesis.

McDonald, R.P. (1999). Test theory: a unified treatment. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.

McGrew, K.S. y Wendling, B.J. (2010). Cattell-Horn-Carroll cognitive-achievement relations: what we have learned from the past 20 years of research. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 651-675.

Navas, M. J. (2001). Métodos, diseños y técnicas de investigación psicológica. Madrid: UNED.

Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., Halpern, D. F., Loehlin, J. C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R. J. y Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77-101.

Ree, M. J. y Carretta, T. R. (2002). g2K. Human Performance, 15, 3–23.

Sackett, P. R., Borneman, M. J. y Connelly, B. S. (2008). High-stakes testing in higher education and employment: Appraising the evidence for validity and fairness. American Psychologist, 63, 215–227.

Santamaría, P., Arribas, D., Pereña, J. y Seisdedos, N. (2005). EFAI. Evaluación Factorial de las Aptitudes Intelectuales. Madrid: TEA Ediciones.

Sattler, J.M. (2001). Assessment of Children Cognitive Applications (4.ª edición). San Antonio: Sattler.

Schmidt, F.L. (2002). The role of general cognitive ability and job performance: Why there cannot be a debate. Human Performance, 15, 187–210.

Strenze, T. (2007). Intelligence and socioeconomic success: A metaanalytic review of longitudinal research. Intelligence, 35, 401–426.

Süß, H.M. (2001). Prädiktive Validität der Intelligenz im schulischen und außerschulischen Bereich. En E. Stern. y J. Guthke, (Eds.), Perspektiven der Intelligenzforschung. Lengerich: Pabst.