Title: Standard Progressive Matrices Purpose: Administration of Standard Progressive Matrices.

Introduction: Intelligence can be operationally defined as the aggregate or global capacity of the individual to act purposefully, think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment. It is aggregate or global because it is composed of elements or abilities, which though not entirely independent are quantitatively differentiable. By measurement of these abilities we ultimately evaluate intelligence. The assessment of human abilities dates back to nearly 4000 yrs when China used written exams to rate applicants for civil service. Modern mental testing began in France in the 19th century. It contributed to separating mental retardation from mental illness. Sir Francis Galton is a key figure in Modern intelligence testing. He postulated that intelligence was quantifiable and normally distributed. He coined the terms psychometrics and eugenics, and developed a method for measuring intelligence based on nonverbal sensory-motor tests. It was initially popular, but was abandoned after the discovery that it had no relationship to outcomes such as college grades. Alfred Binet During the early 1900s, the French government asked psychologist Alfred Binet to help decide which students were mostly likely to experience difficulty in schools. Faced with this task, Binet and his colleague Theodore Simon began developing a number of questions that focused on things that had not been taught in school such as attention, memory and problem-solving skills. Using these questions. Binet suggested the concept of a mental age, or a measure of intelligence based on the average abilities of children of a certain age group. This first intelligence test, referred to today as the Binet-Simon Scale, became the basis for the intelligence tests still in use today. Binet stressed the limitations of the test, suggesting that intelligence is far too broad a concept to quantify with a single number. Instead, he insisted that intelligence is influenced by a number of factors, changes over time and can only be compared among children with similar backgrounds (Siegler, 1992). The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test After the development of the Binet-Simon Scale, the test was soon brought to the United States where it generated considerable interest. Stanford University psychologist Lewis Terman took Binet's original test and standardized it using a sample of American participants. This adapted

test, first published in 1916, was called the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and soon became the standard intelligence test used in the U.S Intelligence Testing During World War I At the outset of World War I, U.S. Army officials were faced with the monumental task of screening an enormous number of army recruits. Hence they devised two tests Army Alpha and Beta tests. The Army Alpha was designed as a written test, while the Army Beta was administered orally in cases where recruits were unable to read. The Wechsler Intelligence Scales American psychologist David Wechsler published his new intelligence test known as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) in 1955. Wechsler also developed two different tests specifically for use with children: the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI). The adult version of the test has been revised since its original publication and is now known as the WAIS-IV. Rather than score the test based on chronological age and mental age, as was the case with the original Stanford-Binet, the WAIS is scored by comparing the test taker's score to the scores of others in the same age group. The average score is fixed at 100, with two-thirds of scores lying in the normal range between 85 and 115. This scoring method has become the standard technique in intelligence testing and is also used in the modern revision of the Stanford-Binet test. Raven's Progressive Matrices The Raven's Matrices (RPM) tests were originally developed by John C. Raven in 1936. It is a nonverbal group test typically used in educational settings. It is a test of persons capacity to apprehend meaningless figures, see the relation between them conceive the nature of the figure completing each system of relations, and by doing do developing a systematic method of reasoning. It consists of 60 multiple choice questions, divided into sets of 5 and listed in order of difficulty. The Matrices are available in three different forms

Standard Progressive Matrices: These were the original form of the matrices, first published in 1938. The booklet comprises five sets (A to E) of 12 items each (e.g., A1 through A12), with items within a set becoming increasingly difficult, requiring ever greater cognitive capacity to encode and analyze information. All items are presented in black ink on a white background. Coloured Progressive Matrices: Designed for children aged 5 through 11 years-of-age, the elderly, and mentally and physically impaired individuals. This test contains sets A and B from the standard matrices, with a further set of 12 items inserted between the two,

as set Ab. Most items are presented on a coloured background to make the test visually stimulating for participants. However the very last few items in set B are presented as black-on-white; in this way, if a subject exceeds the tester's expectations, transition to sets C, D, and E of the standard matrices is eased.

Advanced Progressive Matrices: The advanced form of the matrices contains 48 items, presented as one set of 12 (set I), and another of 36 (set II). Items are again presented in black ink on a white background, and become increasingly difficult as progress is made through each set. These items are appropriate for adults and adolescents of above-average intelligence.

In addition, "parallel" forms of the standard and coloured progressive matrices were published in 1998. This was to address the problem of the Raven's Matrices being too well known in the general population. Items in the parallel tests have been constructed so that average solution rates to each question are identical for the classic and parallel versions.

Application of the test. Although the tests were developed for research purposes, because of their independence of language and reading and writing skills, and the simplicity of their use and interpretation, they quickly found widespread practical application. For example, all entrants to the British armed forces from 1942 onwards took a 20 minute version of the SPM. The routine administration of what became the Standard Progressive Matrices to all entrants (conscripts) to many military services throughout the world (including the Soviet Union) continued at least until the present century. Another extremely important application of the tests in research was the Minnesota Twin Family Study which established the first reliable estimates of the heritability of g. A 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with Asperger syndrome, a highfunctioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher than other individuals on Raven's tests. Another 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with classic autism, a lowfunctioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher in Raven's tests than in Wechsler tests. In addition, the individuals with classic autism were providing correct answers to the Raven's test in less time than individuals without autism, although erring as often. Limitations: Once the participants understand the logic of a question they may just repeat the same logic for other questions without thinking.

Since it is non verbal people with physical challenges might not be able to do it.

Tool Administration: Participants Information: The test was administered on 1 female participant. She was a graduate pursuing MA Psychology. Her age was 21yrs. Instructions: The participant was asked to complete some practice items before starting the test. Once the practice items were completed, the participant was asked to start with the test. The participant was told that each item represented a pattern problem with one item missing and 6 to 8 possible solutions of which only one was correct. The test was administered for 45mins. Observations before the test: Before the test the participant seemed nervous but excited. She was eager to know how she would fare in the test. Introspective report and debriefing: The Participant scored 52 out of a possible 60. She wrongly answered 4 questions in the C set and 3 questions in the E set. The questions she got wrong in the C set were 8,10,11,12 which were difficult questions and the questions she got wrong in E set were 10,11,12. After the test the participant was debriefed about the Standard Progressive Matrices. She was told that this was a test of persons capacity to apprehend meaningless figures, see the relation between them conceive the nature of the figure completing each system of relations, and by doing do developing a systematic method of reasoning. The participant was informed about her scores. Observations during and after the test: The participant concentrated while doing the test, and was satisfied with her results.

Report Individual Profile: The test was administered on 1 female participant. She was a graduate pursuing MA Psychology. Her age was 21yrs. She came from a good socio economic background. Scoring : The scoring was conducted with the help of the manual. Each correct score was given 1 mark and this was added up to give the score. Results: She scored 52 out of a possible 60 and a she fell in the 90th percentile.

Psychometric Evaluation of The Tool: Item Analysis: Item analyses were conducted on the scores of 56 participants. Item difficulty and Item discrimination were conducted in excel. The formula used for item difficulty was =SUM(Total no of people who correctly answered the the items)/Total number of participants. The item difficulty scores were as per the trend. The difficulty of the questions increased towards the end in each set hence items in the beginning received the scores closer to 1 and those towards the end closer to 0. As can be seen in table For item discrimination first the whole data was sorted in descending order, then top 27% and bottom 27% were calculated by multiplying total number of participants with .27. These were the upper criterion and the lower criterion. Then the p value of the upper criterion and the lower criterion groups were calculated separately , then p value of the upper criterion was subtracted from p value of the lower criterion group. The values ranged from 0 to 0.73. the items with 0 means low discrimination while scores closer to 1 means high discrimination.

Reliability Analysis: The split-half reliability was used to check the internal consistency of the scores. The reliability score obtained was 0.231956 Validity: The construct validity was used to validate the test scores. Scores on the Differential Aptitude Test of Abstract reasoning form A was used to validate scores of SPM. The resulting correlation obtained was 0.098048. This shows a high correlation between the two.

Norms For Group Data: 56 participants took the SPM test out of which 5 were males and 51 were Females. The mean of the total test scores of participants was 50.08929 and the Standard Deviation was 6.713018.
The participants age ranged from 20 to 33. The average age was around 21.

References (Siegler, 1992).