The term gifted implies a permanent superiority. However, the majority of children who score in the top few percentiles on ability and achievement tests in 1 grade do not retain their status for more than a year or 2. The tendency of those with high scores on one occasion to obtain somewhat lower scores on a later occasion is one example of regression to the mean. We first summarize some of the basic facts about regression to the mean. We then discuss major causes of regression: errors of measurement, individual differences in growth, changes in the content of the developmental score scale, and changes in the norming population across age or grade cohorts. We then show that year-to-year regression is substantial, even for highly reliable test scores. Different ways of combining achievement and ability test scores to reduce regression effects are illustrated. Implications for selection policies and research on giftedness are also discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AckermanP. L. (1989). Abilities, elementary information processes, and other sights to see at the zoo In KanferR.AckermanP. L.CudeckR. (Eds.), Abilities, motivation, and methodology: The Minnesota symposium on learning and individual differences (pp. 281–293. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum
2.
AndersonJ. E. (1939). The limitations of infant and preschool tests in the measurement of intelligenceJournal of Psychology, 3, 351–379
3.
BartonP. E. (2005). One-third of a nation: Rising dropout rates and declining opportunities.Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service, Policy Evaluation and Research Center
4.
BayleyN (1949). Consistency and variability in the growth of intelligence from birth to eighteen yearsJournal of Genetic Psychology, 25, 165–196
5.
CallahanC. M. (1992). Determining the effectiveness of educational services: Assessment issues In Challenges in gifted education: Developing potential and investing in knowledge for the 21st century (pp. 109–114). Columbus, OH: Ohio Department of Education. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. D344416)
6.
CarpenterP.JustM. A.ShellP. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices TestPsychological Review, 97, 404–431
7.
DanielM. H. (2000). Interpretation of intelligence test scores In SternbergR. J. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 477–491. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
8.
FlynnJ. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measurePsychological Bulletin, 101, 171–191
9.
FlynnJ. R. (1999). Searching for justice: The discovery of IQ gains over timeAmerican Psychologist, 54, 5–20
10.
GagnéF.St PèreF. (2001). When IQ is controlled, does motivation still predict achievement?Intelligence, 30, 71–100
11.
GustafsonJ. P. (2002). Empirical Bayes estimators as an indicator of educational effectiveness: The Bryk and Raudenbush school performance model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
12.
HaneyW.MaduasG.AbramsL.WheelockA.MiaoJ.GruiaI. (2004). The education pipeline in the United States 1970–2000.Boston: Boston College, National Board on Educational Testing and Public Policy
13.
HooverH. D.DunbarS. B.FrisbieD. A. (2001). The Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, Form A.Itasca, IL: Riverside
14.
HooverH. D.HieronymusA. N.FrisbieD. A.DunbarS. B. (1993). Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, Form K: Survey Battery.Chicago: Riverside
15.
HumphreysL. G. (1985). General intelligence: An integration of actor, test, and simplex theory In WolmanB. B. (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence: Theories, measurement, and applications (pp. 201–224. New York: Wiley
16.
HumphreysL. G.DaveyT. C. (1988). Continuity in intellectual growth from 12 months to 9 yearsIntelligence, 12, 183–197
17.
KolenM. J.BrennanR. L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking: Methods and practices (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag
18.
LohmanD. F. (2005). The role of nonverbal ability tests in the identification of academically gifted students: An aptitude perspectiveGifted Child Quarterly, 49, 111–138
19.
LohmanD. F. (in press-a). Beliefs about differences between ability and accomplishment: From folk theories to cognitive scienceRoeper Review.
20.
LohmanD. F. (in press-b). Identifying academically talented minority students (Research Monograph).Storrs, CT: The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
21.
LohmanD. F.HagenE. P. (2001). Cognitive Abilities Test (Form 6).Itasca, IL: Riverside
22.
LohmanD. F.HagenE. P. (2002). Cognitive Abilities Test (Form 6): Research handbook.Itasca, IL: Riverside
23.
LubinskiD.WebbR. M.MorelockM. J.BenbowC. P. (2001). Top 1 in 10,000: A 10-year follow-up of the profoundly giftedJournal of Applied Psychology, 86, 718–729
24.
MarshH. W.HauK.-T. (2002). Multilevel modeling of longitudinal growth and change: Substantive effects or regression toward the mean artifacts?Multivariate Behavioral Research, 37, 245–282
25.
MartinD. J. (1985). The measurement of growth in educational achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City
26.
McCallR. B.AppelbaumM.HogartyP. S. (1973). Developmental changes in mental performanceMonographs of the Society for Child Development, 38(3, Serial No. 150)
27.
McGrewK. S.WoodcockR. W. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III technical manual.Itasca, IL: Riverside
28.
MilichR.RobertsM. A.LoneyJ.CaputoJ. (1980). Differentiating practice effects and statistical regression on the Conners HyperactivityIndex. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 8, 549–552
29.
MillsJ. R.JacksonN. E. (1990). Predictive significance of early giftedness: The case of precocious readingJournal of Educational Psychology, 82, 410–419
30.
NesselroadeJ. R.StiglerS. M.BaltesP. B. (1980). Regression toward the mean and the study of changePsychological Bulletin, 88, 622–637
31.
OtisA.S.LennonR. T. (2003). Otis-Lennon School Ability Test, Eighth Edition.San Antonio, TX: Harcourt
32.
PhillipsL. M.NorrisS. P.OsmondW. C.MaynardA. M. (2002). Relative reading achievement: A longitudinal study of 187 children from first through sixth gradesJournal of Educational Psychology, 94, 3–13
33.
RaschG (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.Copenhagen, Denmark: Denmarks Paedagogiske Institut
SchaferJ. L.GrahamJ. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the artPsychological Methods, 7, 147–177
36.
SpanglerR. S.SabatinoD. A. (1995). Temporal stability of gifted children's intelligenceRoeper Review, 17, 207–210
37.
TannenbaumA. J. (1965). Review of the Culture Fair Intelligence TestThe Sixth Mental Measurements Yearbook, 445, 721–722
38.
TermanL. M.OdenM. H. (1959). The gifted at mid-life, thirty-five years follow-up of the superior child: Vol. 3. Genetic studies of genius.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press
39.
ThorndikeR. L. (1933). The effect of the interval between test and retest on the constancy of the IQJournal of Educational Psychology, 24, 543–549
40.
ThorndikeR. L. (1975). Mr. Binet's test 70 years laterEducational Researcher, 4, 3–7
41.
ThorndikeR. L.HagenE. (1993). The Cognitive Abilities Test (Form 5).Itasca, IL: Riverside
42.
TibbettsK. A. (2004). When the test fails: The invalidity of assumptions of normative stability in above-average populations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawai'i, Matnoa
43.
WainerH (1999). Is the Akebono school failing its best students? A Hawaiian adventure in regressionEducational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18, 26–31, 35
44.
WillermanL.FiedlerM. F. (1977). Intellectually precocious preschool children: Early development and later intellectual accomplishmentsJournal of Genetic Psychology, 131, 13–20
45.
WilsonR. S. (1983). The Louisville twin study: Development synchronies in behaviorChild Development, 54, 198–216
