Although the Flynn effect has been recognized for 60 years and a wide range of factors has been suggested, there is still no agreement on cause. The effect is generally interpreted as a phenomenon involving changes in mental functioning as a consequence of various forms of environmental influence.
Purpose
The purpose of the account is to argue that at least part of the change in intergen-erational IQ scores is an artifact of the age-based scoring system of IQ tests, together with historical changes in age-grade patterns in school systems.
Research Design
This is a logical argument using secondary analysis to illustrate historical change in the demographic patterns at the level of the classroom, together with a survey of psychometric documents and accounts of constructing Otis-type tests to explain the role of age in calculating an IQ. A review of research focuses on whether the IQ measures age or grade and whether age change in a school population can account for an IQ change.
Conclusions/Recommendations
It is concluded that because the age-based scoring systems of IQ tests interact with generational changes of age by grade, a Flynn effect should not be interpreted as a massive intergenerational rise in mental functioning unless the two generations match age in grade in the case of school populations, and highest grades achieved in the case of adults.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AngeliniA. L., AlvesI. C., CustodioE. M., & DuarteW. F. (1989). The São Paulo norms of J. Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices.Psychological Test Bulletin, 2(2), 46–49.
2.
AngoffW. H. (1988). The nature-nurture debate, aptitudes, and group differences.American Psychologist, 43, 713–720.
3.
American Psychological Association. (1995). Stalking the wild taboo. Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns. Report of a task force established by the Board of Scientific Affairs. Retrieved April 6, 2007, from http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html
4.
AyresL. P. (1909). The money cost of the repeater.Psychological Clinic, 3, 49–57.
5.
BinetA., & SimonT. (1916). The development of intelligence in children (the Binet-Simon Scale) (KiteE., Trans.). Vineland, NJ: The Training School at Vineland.
CookeD. H. (1931). A study of school surveys with regard to age-grade distribution.Peabody Journal of Education, 8, 259–266.
12.
de LemosM. M. (1989). Effects of relative age within grade: Implications for the use of age-based norms for group tests of general ability.Bulletin of the International Test Commission, 28&29, 21–44.
13.
de LemosM. M. (1990, September). The Raven's Progressive Matrices: Does schooling make a difference?Paper presented at the Australian Psychological Society Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
14.
de LemosM. M. (1994). Not so straightforward: Interpreting the scores.Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(1&2), 69–83.
15.
ElleyW. B. (1969). Changes in mental ability in New Zealand school children, 1936–1968. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 4(2), 140–155.
16.
FlynnJ. R. (1984). The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932 to 1978.Psychological Bulletin, 95(1), 29–51.
17.
FlynnJ. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure.Psychological Bulletin101(2), 171–191.
18.
FlynnJ. R. (1988). IQ gains and New Zealand: About race, retardation and longitudinal studies. In OlssenM. (Ed.), Mental testing in New Zealand (pp. 128–151). Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
19.
FlynnJ. R. (1998). IQ gains over time: Toward finding the causes. In NeisserU. (Ed.), The rising curve: Long-term gains in IQ and related measures (pp. 25–66). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
FrederiksenB. J. (1983). Internal efficiency of school systems: A study in the use of pupil flow models for developing countries. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Lancaster, England.
22.
GaltonF. (1892). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. London: Macmillan. (Original work published 1869)
23.
GilmoreM. E. (1927). Coaching for intelligence tests.Journal of Educational Psychology, 18(2), 119–121.
24.
GrissmerD., FlanaganA., & WilliamsonS. (1998). Why did the Black-White score gap narrow in the 1970s and 1980s? In JencksC. & PhillipsM. (Eds.), The Black-White test score gap (pp. 182–226). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
25.
GrotelueschenA. (1969). Review of Otis-Lennon Mental Ability Test, by OtisArthur S. & LennonRoger T.Journal of Educational Measurement, 6(2), 111–113.
26.
HarveyO. L. (1938). Enrollment trends and population shifts.Elementary School Journal, 38, 655–662.
27.
HarveyO. L. (1939a). Use of age-grade and promotion tables in the study of enrollment trends.Elementary School Journal, 39, 751–759.
28.
HarveyO. L. (1939b). Negro representation in public school enrollments.Journal of Negro Education, 8(1), 26–30.
29.
HerrnsteinR., & MurrayC. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life.New York: Free Press.
30.
HiebertE.H. (1994). Reading recovery in the United States: What difference does it make to an age cohort?Educational Researcher, 23(9), 15–25.
31.
HolmesC. (1989). Grade level retention: A meta-analysis of research studies. In ShepardL. & SmithM. (Eds.), Flunking grades: Research and policies on retention (pp. 16–33). Lewes, England: Falmer.
32.
LennonR., & MitchellB. (1955, October). Trends in age-grade relationship: A 35-year review.School and Society, 124–125.
33.
McAfeeJ. K. (1981, April). Towards a theory of promotion: Does retaining students really work?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED204871)
34.
McDonaldG. (1989, November–December). The normal curve of intelligence: Is this a representation of promotion patterns?Paper presented at the annual meeting of the New Zealand Association for Research on Education, Central Institute of Technology, Heretaunga, New Zealand.
35.
McDonaldG. (1992). “Henry and Iain… “: A comment on a response.New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 27(1), 103–106.
36.
McDonaldG. (1993). Ages, stages and evaluation: The demography of the classroom.Evaluation and Research in Education, 7(3), 143–154.
37.
McDonaldG. (1998). “Working its magic”? IQ rise and the demography of the classroom.Oxford Review of Education, 24(2), 225–234.
38.
McIntyreG. A. (1938). The standardization of intelligence tests in Australia. Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University Press.
39.
MicceriT. (1989). The unicorn, the normal curve, and other improbable creatures.Psychological Bulletin, 105(1), 156–166.
40.
NeisserU. (Ed.). (1998). The rising curve: Long-term gains in IQ and related measures. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
41.
New Zealand Council for Educational Research. (1969). Otis Tests of Mental Ability manual of directions.Wellington: Author.
42.
O'LearyM. (2001). The effects of age-based and grade-based sampling on the relative standing of countries in comparative studies of student achievement.British Educational Research Journal, 27, 187–200.
43.
OlssenM. (Ed.) (1987). Mental testing in New Zealand: Critical and oppositional perspectives. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
44.
RedmondM., & DaviesF. R. (1940). The standardization of two intelligence tests. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
45.
ReidN., JacksonP., GilmoreA., & CroftC. (1981). Test of Scholastic Abilities: Teacher's manual.Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
46.
SchwagerM. T., MitchellD. E., MitchellT. K., & HechtJ. B. (1992). How school district policy influences grade level retention in elementary schools.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14, 421–438.
47.
Scottish Council for Research in Education. (1949). The trend of Scottish intelligence: A comparison of the 1947 and 1932 surveys of the intelligence of eleven-year-old pupils.London: University of London Press.
48.
ShepardL. A., & SmithM. L. (1985). Boulder Valley kindergarten study: Retention practices and retention effects. Boulder, CO: Boulder Valley Public Schools.
49.
ShueyA. (1966). The testing of Negro intelligence (2nd ed.). New York: Social Science Press.
50.
TeasdaleT. W., & OwenD. R. (2005). A long-term rise and recent decline in intelligence test performance: The Flynn effect in reverse.Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 837–843.
51.
TermanL. M. (1919). The measurement of intelligence. London: Harrap.
52.
ThelenE., & AdolphK. E. (1992). Arnold L. Gesell: The paradox of nature and nurture.Developmental Psychology, 28, 368–380.
53.
ThorndikeR. L. (1973). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. Third revision. Form L-M. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
