4.2 Review

Why IQ is not a covariate in cognitive studies of neurodevelopmental disorders

Journal

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S1355617709090481

Keywords

Intelligence; History; Intelligence tests; Meningomyelocele; Analysis of variance; Learning disability; Attention deficit disorder with hyperactivity

Funding

  1. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [P01 HD35946, P01 HD35946-06]
  2. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [P50HD052117] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  3. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH &HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [P01HD035946] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

IQ scores are volatile indices of global functional outcome, the final common path of an individual's genes, biology, cognition, education, and experiences. In studying neurocognitive outcomes in children with neurodevelopmental disorders, it is commonly assumed that IQ can and Should be partialed Out of statistical relations or used as a covariate for specific measures of cognitive outcome. We propose that it is Misguided and generally unjustified to attempt to control to]IQ differences by matching procedures or, more commonly, by using IQ scores as covariates. We offer logical, statistical, and methodological arguments, with examples from three neurodevelopmental disorders (spina bifida meningomyelocele, learning disabilities, and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) that: (1) a historical reification of general intelligence, g, as a causal construct that measures aptitude and potential rather than achievement and performance has fostered the idea that IQ has special status and that in studying neurocognitive function in neurodevelopmental disorders; (2) IQ does not meet the requirements for a covariate; and (3) using IQ as I matching variable or covariate has produced overcorrected, anomalous, and counterintuitive findings about neurocognitive function. (JINS, 2009, 15, 33 1-343.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available