Perceptaal and Motor skill^, 1977, 45, 1131-1134.
@ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1977
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GESELL SCORES I N INFANCY AND PERFORMANCE ON VERBAL AND NON-VERBAL TESTS I N EARLY CHILDHOOD
University of California, Los Angeles Summary.-Since infant developmental tests are heavily loaded with perceptual-motor items and are relatively free of auditory-verbal items, it was hypothesized that performance on infant tests would correlate higher with those later tests which measure non-verbal skills and lower with those tests that measure mostly verbal skills. The Gesell performance of 26 normal, male white infants at 7 , 9 and 15 mo. correlated significantly and consistently with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale at 27 mo. and the visual-motor channel of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities at 5 yr. and showed consistently nonsignificant correlations with the Stanford Binet at 3 yr., the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test at 5 yr., and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities at 5 yr.
During the last few decades many researchers have tried to find a relationship between performance on infant developmental tests and performance on subsequent intelligence tests in childhood and adulthood. The concept underlying this search is that intelligence represents a general mental ability that is present in all of an individual's behaviors at all ages. However, review of these studies indicates that, although early developmental tests are relatively effective in detecting those infants who will later show severe mental deficiencies and neurological abnormalities (Knobloch & Pasamanick, 1960, 1963; Ireton, Thwing, & Gravem, 1970), they are much less effective in predicting intelligence for children whose abilities fall within the average to superior ranges (Stort & Ball, 1965; Hunt & Bayley, 1971; McCall, Hogarty, & Hurlburt, 1972 ). One explanation for such lack of prediction for normal children is that intelligence may not be a unitary trait but rather multidetermined and multifaceted. Therefore, the lack of prediction from infant to later tests may be attributable to the different content in the item composition of infant developmental tests from that of the later intelligence tests, that is, the early and later tests may measure different cognitive skills (Bayley, 1933; Anderson, 1933; Catalano & McCarthy, 1954; Illingworth, 1960). For example, most infant tests administered during the first year of life measure mainly the infant's visual-perceprual and visualmotor functioning, while almost all of the later intelligence tests are heavily loaded with auditory-verbal elements. Very few items of the commonly used infant tests attempt to measure the infant's auditory reception and auditory asso'The author's present address is: Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024. 'The author wishes to thank Gwenneth Rae for her work in testing the subjects when they were 5 yr. old.
K. V. ROE
ciation abilities or the infant's vocal responsiveness, even though several studies (Anderson, 1939; Catalano & McCarthy, 1954; Cameron, Livson, & Bayley, 1967; Moore, 1967; Roe, 1977) have shown that measures of infant vocalization are relatively good predictors of subsequent verbal intelligence. Since the commonly used infant developmental tests are heavily influenced by visual-perceptual and motor factors and relatively free of auditory-verbal factors, we should expect such infant tests to correlate better with those later cognitive tests which mostly measure visual-perceptual and/or perceptual-motor cognitive skills and less so with those tests which measure mostly auditory-verbal skills. In the present study the subjects were administered the Gesell Developmental Schedules at different infant age levels. Subsequently during their preschool years, they were administered a series of cognitive tests which can be classified as mostly verbal or non-verbal, depending on the degree to which success oa them requires auditory-verbal versus visual-motor coordination and/or visual-perceptual skills.
METHOD The subjects were 26 normal, first-born, white male infants who lived in a middleclass suburban area. All subjects were tested at 9 and 15 mo. Twenty-five of the subjects were tested at 27 mo., 24 at 3 yr. and 23 subjects were tested at 5 yr. of age. In addition, 13 of the subjects were also tested at ages 3, 5 and 7 mo. The same white female experimenter visited the subjects at their homes when they were 3, 5, 7, 9, and 15 mo. and administered to them the Gesell Developmental Schedules. The same experimenter visited and administered to them the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests when they were 27 mo., and the Stanford Binet, Form L-M, when they were 3 yr. old. When they were 5 yr. old a different experimenter who was unaware of the hypothesis of this study administered and scored the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. The Gesell Developmental Schedules and the Stanford-Binet are well known and no description of them is needed here, suffice it to say that the Stanford-Binet is mostly a verbal test. Following is a description of the other tests used in this study. The Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests (Stutsman, 1931) is mostly a non-verbal instrument appropriate for young preschool children, composed mainly of perceptual-motor tasks. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (Dunn, 1965) is a simple test of receptive language and measures hearing vocabulary. It is composed of 150 plates, each containing four pictures, and the subject is asked to point to the picture which best fits the stimulus word read aloud by the examiner. The Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (Kirk, McCarthy, & Kirk, 1968) tests both verbal and non-verbal abilities. One of the principal uses of this test is the assessment of the functioning of two major channels of communication, the a~ditory-vocaland the visual-motor channel. The auditory-vocal channel is assessed by the use of the subtests on Auditory Reception, Auditory Association, Verbal Expression, Grammatical Closure, and Auditory Sequential Memory. The visual-motor channel is assessed by the use of the subtests on Visual Reception, Visual Association, Manual Expression, Visual Closure, and Visual Sequential Memory.
CORRELATIONS: INFANTS' GESELL SCORES VS LATER TESTS
1133
From the foregoing test descriptions and our theoretical hypothesis on the specificity of skills, we would anticipate that performance on the Gesell during infancy would correlate higher with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests and with performance on the visual-motor channel of the Illinois test and lower with performance on the Stanford-Binet, Peabody, and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois test.
RESULTSAND CONCLUSIONS Pearson correlations between the subjects' performance on the Gesell at the various infant age levels with their performance on the different tests administered to them during their preschool years are presented in Table 1. Correlations are shown for both the Over-all Gesell Developmental Quotient (ODQ) and the Gesell Adaptive Scale Developmental Quotient (ADQ) since Gesell (1940) suggested that the items of the Adaptive scale best reflect "intelligence." Inspection of Table 1 shows that, scarting from the age of 7 mo., Gesell scores correlate significantly and consistently with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests and with performance on the visual-motor channel of the Illinois test and show consistently non-significant correlations with the Stanford-Binet, Peabody, and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois test. TABLE 1 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE ON GESELL IN INFANCY AND PERFORMANCE ON VERBALAND NON-VERBAL TESTS IN EARLYCHILDHOOD
Childhood Tests
Gesell Developmental Quotients During Infant Ages 3 Months 5 Months 7 Months 9 Months 15 Months Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Overtlve all tive all tive all tive all tive all
Merrill-Palmer, 27 mo. .38 .20 .26 .33 Stanford-Binet, 3 yr. .17 -.I5 -.06 -.I7 Peabody, 5 yr. -.28 -.26 .05 .06 Illinois Visualmotor, 5 yr. .18 .20 .41 .52 Illinois Auditoryvocal, 5 yr. .12 -.44 .05 .13 *For p .05, r = .58 for Ages 3, 5, and 7 mo. and 15 mo. ( N = 23-25).
@ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1977
CORRELATIONS BETWEEN GESELL SCORES I N INFANCY AND PERFORMANCE ON VERBAL AND NON-VERBAL TESTS I N EARLY CHILDHOOD
University of California, Los Angeles Summary.-Since infant developmental tests are heavily loaded with perceptual-motor items and are relatively free of auditory-verbal items, it was hypothesized that performance on infant tests would correlate higher with those later tests which measure non-verbal skills and lower with those tests that measure mostly verbal skills. The Gesell performance of 26 normal, male white infants at 7 , 9 and 15 mo. correlated significantly and consistently with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale at 27 mo. and the visual-motor channel of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities at 5 yr. and showed consistently nonsignificant correlations with the Stanford Binet at 3 yr., the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test at 5 yr., and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities at 5 yr.
During the last few decades many researchers have tried to find a relationship between performance on infant developmental tests and performance on subsequent intelligence tests in childhood and adulthood. The concept underlying this search is that intelligence represents a general mental ability that is present in all of an individual's behaviors at all ages. However, review of these studies indicates that, although early developmental tests are relatively effective in detecting those infants who will later show severe mental deficiencies and neurological abnormalities (Knobloch & Pasamanick, 1960, 1963; Ireton, Thwing, & Gravem, 1970), they are much less effective in predicting intelligence for children whose abilities fall within the average to superior ranges (Stort & Ball, 1965; Hunt & Bayley, 1971; McCall, Hogarty, & Hurlburt, 1972 ). One explanation for such lack of prediction for normal children is that intelligence may not be a unitary trait but rather multidetermined and multifaceted. Therefore, the lack of prediction from infant to later tests may be attributable to the different content in the item composition of infant developmental tests from that of the later intelligence tests, that is, the early and later tests may measure different cognitive skills (Bayley, 1933; Anderson, 1933; Catalano & McCarthy, 1954; Illingworth, 1960). For example, most infant tests administered during the first year of life measure mainly the infant's visual-perceprual and visualmotor functioning, while almost all of the later intelligence tests are heavily loaded with auditory-verbal elements. Very few items of the commonly used infant tests attempt to measure the infant's auditory reception and auditory asso'The author's present address is: Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90024. 'The author wishes to thank Gwenneth Rae for her work in testing the subjects when they were 5 yr. old.
K. V. ROE
ciation abilities or the infant's vocal responsiveness, even though several studies (Anderson, 1939; Catalano & McCarthy, 1954; Cameron, Livson, & Bayley, 1967; Moore, 1967; Roe, 1977) have shown that measures of infant vocalization are relatively good predictors of subsequent verbal intelligence. Since the commonly used infant developmental tests are heavily influenced by visual-perceptual and motor factors and relatively free of auditory-verbal factors, we should expect such infant tests to correlate better with those later cognitive tests which mostly measure visual-perceptual and/or perceptual-motor cognitive skills and less so with those tests which measure mostly auditory-verbal skills. In the present study the subjects were administered the Gesell Developmental Schedules at different infant age levels. Subsequently during their preschool years, they were administered a series of cognitive tests which can be classified as mostly verbal or non-verbal, depending on the degree to which success oa them requires auditory-verbal versus visual-motor coordination and/or visual-perceptual skills.
METHOD The subjects were 26 normal, first-born, white male infants who lived in a middleclass suburban area. All subjects were tested at 9 and 15 mo. Twenty-five of the subjects were tested at 27 mo., 24 at 3 yr. and 23 subjects were tested at 5 yr. of age. In addition, 13 of the subjects were also tested at ages 3, 5 and 7 mo. The same white female experimenter visited the subjects at their homes when they were 3, 5, 7, 9, and 15 mo. and administered to them the Gesell Developmental Schedules. The same experimenter visited and administered to them the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests when they were 27 mo., and the Stanford Binet, Form L-M, when they were 3 yr. old. When they were 5 yr. old a different experimenter who was unaware of the hypothesis of this study administered and scored the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test and the Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities. The Gesell Developmental Schedules and the Stanford-Binet are well known and no description of them is needed here, suffice it to say that the Stanford-Binet is mostly a verbal test. Following is a description of the other tests used in this study. The Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests (Stutsman, 1931) is mostly a non-verbal instrument appropriate for young preschool children, composed mainly of perceptual-motor tasks. The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (Dunn, 1965) is a simple test of receptive language and measures hearing vocabulary. It is composed of 150 plates, each containing four pictures, and the subject is asked to point to the picture which best fits the stimulus word read aloud by the examiner. The Illinois Test of Psycholinguistic Abilities (Kirk, McCarthy, & Kirk, 1968) tests both verbal and non-verbal abilities. One of the principal uses of this test is the assessment of the functioning of two major channels of communication, the a~ditory-vocaland the visual-motor channel. The auditory-vocal channel is assessed by the use of the subtests on Auditory Reception, Auditory Association, Verbal Expression, Grammatical Closure, and Auditory Sequential Memory. The visual-motor channel is assessed by the use of the subtests on Visual Reception, Visual Association, Manual Expression, Visual Closure, and Visual Sequential Memory.
CORRELATIONS: INFANTS' GESELL SCORES VS LATER TESTS
1133
From the foregoing test descriptions and our theoretical hypothesis on the specificity of skills, we would anticipate that performance on the Gesell during infancy would correlate higher with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests and with performance on the visual-motor channel of the Illinois test and lower with performance on the Stanford-Binet, Peabody, and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois test.
RESULTSAND CONCLUSIONS Pearson correlations between the subjects' performance on the Gesell at the various infant age levels with their performance on the different tests administered to them during their preschool years are presented in Table 1. Correlations are shown for both the Over-all Gesell Developmental Quotient (ODQ) and the Gesell Adaptive Scale Developmental Quotient (ADQ) since Gesell (1940) suggested that the items of the Adaptive scale best reflect "intelligence." Inspection of Table 1 shows that, scarting from the age of 7 mo., Gesell scores correlate significantly and consistently with performance on the Merrill-Palmer Scale of Mental Tests and with performance on the visual-motor channel of the Illinois test and show consistently non-significant correlations with the Stanford-Binet, Peabody, and the auditory-vocal channel of the Illinois test. TABLE 1 CORRELATIONS BETWEEN PERFORMANCE ON GESELL IN INFANCY AND PERFORMANCE ON VERBALAND NON-VERBAL TESTS IN EARLYCHILDHOOD
Childhood Tests
Gesell Developmental Quotients During Infant Ages 3 Months 5 Months 7 Months 9 Months 15 Months Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Over- Adap- Overtlve all tive all tive all tive all tive all
Merrill-Palmer, 27 mo. .38 .20 .26 .33 Stanford-Binet, 3 yr. .17 -.I5 -.06 -.I7 Peabody, 5 yr. -.28 -.26 .05 .06 Illinois Visualmotor, 5 yr. .18 .20 .41 .52 Illinois Auditoryvocal, 5 yr. .12 -.44 .05 .13 *For p .05, r = .58 for Ages 3, 5, and 7 mo. and 15 mo. ( N = 23-25).
