Number of purchasers: 0, views: 906
Readers community rating: votes 0
1. Avanesov V.S. Forma testovyh zadanij. Uchebnoe posobie. 2 izd. Moscow: Centr testirovaniya, 2005. 156 p. (in Russian)
2. Voĭtov V.K. Raschet znacheniĭ slozhnostej zadanij dlya adaptivnogo testa intellekta. Eksperimental'naya psihologiya. 2013. V. 6. № 2. P. 120−128. (in Russian)
3. Kornilova T.V., Kornilov S.A., Zirenko M.S., CHumakova M.A. Psihometricheskie svoĭstva modificirovannoĭ batarei Internacional'nogo Resursa Kognitivnyh Sposobnosteĭ (ICAR). Nacional'nyĭ psihologicheskiĭ zhurn. 2019. № 3(35). P. 32–45. (in Russian)
4. Kuravskij L.S., Artemenkov S.L., YUr'ev G.A., Grigorenko E.L. Novyj podhod k komp'yuterizirovannomu adaptivnomu testirovaniyu. Eksperimental'naya psihologiya. 2017. V. 10. № 3. P. 33−45. (in Russian)
5. Kuravskij L.S., YUr'ev G.A., Ushakov D.V., YUr'eva N.E., Valueva E.A., Lapteva E.M. Diagnostika po testovym traektoriyam: metod patternov. Eksperimental'naya psihologiya. 2018. V. 11. № 2. P. 77−94. (in Russian)
6. Nizbett R. CHto takoe intellekt i kak ego razvivat'. Moscow: Al'pina nonfikshn, 2013. (in Russian)
7. Podd'yakov A.N. Opyt razrabotki ob"ektov, nahodyashchihsya v netranzitivnyh otnosheniyah prevoskhodstva. Kognitivnaya nauka v Moskve: novye issledovaniya. Materialy konferencii 15 iyunya 2017 g.. Ed. E.V. Pechenkova, M.V. Falikman. Moscow: OOO “Buki Vedi”, IPPiP, 2017. 596 p. (in Russian)
8. SHeronov E.A. Razrabotka psihologicheskogo instrumentariya dlya opredeleniya prigodnosti k obucheniyu na medicinskih special'nostyah. Vestnik KGU im N.A. Nekrasova, 2013. V. 19. P. 51−54. (in Russian)
9. YUsupov F.M. O sootnoshenii verbal'noj i neverbal'noj sostavlyayushchih v strukture intellekta. F.M. YUsupov. Psihologicheskij zhurnal. 1995. № 1. P. 102−106. (in Russian)
10. Carreiras M., Quiñones I., Hernández-Cabrera J.A., Duñabeitia J.A. Orthographic Coding: Brain Activation for Letters, Symbols, and Digits. Cerebral Cortex, 2015. 25. P. 4748−4760.
11. Crocker L. Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. L. Crocker, J. Algina. N.Y.: Holt, Rinehart and Wilson, 1986.
12. Cucina, J., Byle, K. The bifactor model fits better than the higher-order model in more than 90% of comparisons for mental abilities test batteries. Journ. of Intelligence. 2017. 5(27). 1–21.
13. Dubois, J., Galdi, P., Paul, L.K., Adolphs, R. A distributed brain network predicts general intelligence from resting-state human neuroimaging data. Philosophical Transaction of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2018. 373 (1756).
14. Fahrenberg J. “Ökologische Validität [ecological validity],” in Dorsch-Lexikon der Psychologie, ed. H. Wirz (Bern: Huber), 2017.
15. Gell-Mann M. The quark and the jaguar: adventures in the simple and the complex. N.Y., 1994.
16. Gottfredson L.S. Why g Matters: The Complexity of Everyday Life. Intelligence, 1997. 24 (1). Р. 79−132.
17. Green K.E., Kluever R.C. Components of Item Difficulty of Raven's Matrices. The Journal of General Psychology. 1992. 119:2. P. 189−199.
18. Greiff S., Wüstenberg S., Funke J. Dynamic problem solving – A new assessment perspective. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2012. 36. P. 189−213.
19. Gupta S., Karahanna E. Technology adoption in complex systems. 7th Annual Conference of the Southern Association for Information Systems. Savannah GA: University of Georgia, 2004.
20. Guttman L. A basis for analyzing test-retest reliability. Psychometrika. 1945. 10. P. 255−282.
21. Hammarström H. Complexity in numeral systems with an investigation into pidgins and creoles. Language complexity: typology, contact, change. Amsterdam, 2008.
22. Juola P. Assessing linguistic complexity. Language complexity: typology, contact, change. Amsterdam, 2008.
23. Kessler Y., Rac-Lubashevsky R., Lichtstein C., Markus H., Simchon A., Moscovitch M. Updating visual working memory in the change detection paradigm. Journal of Vision. 2015. 15(9). 18. P. 1−12.
24. Kirschenbaum S.S. What Makes Decision Tasks Difficult?. Newport. RI: Naval Undersea Warfare Center, 1999.
25. Kovacs, K., & Conway, A.R.A. (2016). Process overlap theory: A unified account of the general factor of intelligence. Psychological Inquiry. 27(3). 151–177.
26. Krieger F., Zimmer H.D., Greiff S., Spinath F.M., Becker N. Why are difficult figural matrices hard to solve? The role of selective encoding and working memory capacity. Intelligence. 2019. 72. P. 35−48.
27. Malone S., Altmeyer K., Vogel M., Brünken R. Homogeneous and heterogeneous multiple representations in equation-solving problems: An eye-tracking study. J Comput Assist Learn. 2020. P. 1−18.
28. McWhorter J. Linguistic simplicity and complexity: why do languages undress? Berlin, 2011.
29. Meo M., Roberts M. J. Marucci F. S. Element salience as a predictor of item difficulty for Raven’s Progressive Matrices. Intelligence. 2007. 35. P. 359−368.
30. Miestamo M. Implicational hierarchies and grammatical complexity. Language complexity as an evolving variable. Oxford, 2009.
31. Pérez-Salas C.P., Streiner D.L., Roberts M.J. A comparison between element salience versus context as item difficulty factors in Raven's Matrices. Intelligence. 2012. 40. P. 325−332.
32. Primi R. Complexity of geometric inductive reasoning tasks: Contribution to the understanding of fluid intelligence. Intelligence. 2002. 30(1). P. 41−70.
33. Ren X., Wang T., Sun S., Deng M., Schweizer K. Speeded testing in the assessment of intelligence gives rise to a speed factor. Intelligence. 2018. 66. P. 64−71.
34. Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Morey C.C., Cowan N. How to measure working memory capacity in the change detection paradigm. Psychon Bull Rev. 2011. 18(2). P. 324−330.
35. Rüsseler J., Scholz J., Jordan K., and Quaiser-Pohl C.M. Mental rotation of letters, pictures, and three-dimensional objects in German dyslexic children. Child Neuropsychology. 2005. 11. P. 497−512.
36. Sonnleitner P., Brunner M., Greiff S., Funke J., Keller U., Martin R., ... Latour T. The Genetics Lab: Acceptance and psychometric characteristics of a computer-based microworld assessing complex problem solving. Psychological Test and Assessment Modeling. 2012. 54. P. 54−72.
37. The Evolution of Cognitive Ability Tests and Score Interpretation //Applied Measurement in Education. V. 32. № 3. 2019.
38. Waldrop M.M. Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. Touchstone, New York, 1993.
39. White A. P., Zammarelli J. E. Convergence principles: Information in the answer sets of somemultiple choice tests. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1981. 5. P. 21−27.
40. Wood R.E. Task complexity: Definition of the construct. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1986. 37. Р. 60−82.