Complex problem solving and intelligence. A meta-analysis

By Matthias Stadler, Nicolas Becker, Markus Gödker, Detlev Leutner, Samuel Greiff. 2015

112 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Abstract The purpose of this meta-analysis is to examine the nature and magnitude of the relation between complex problem-solving skills (CPS) and intelligence, a topic that has been widely discussed and that has instigated a vast array of partially contradicting findings in the past. Theoretically, researchers have hypothesized the two constructs to be everything from completely separate to identical. Over the course of almost four decades, empirical studies yielded results in support of both arguments. Our meta-analysis of 47 studies containing 60 independent samples and a total sample size of 13,740 participants revealed a substantial correlation of CPS and intelligence with an average effect size of M(g) = .433. In addition, we investigated whether the operationalization of CPS and intelligence moderated this correlation. Whereas there were no significant correlation differences considering the operationalization of intelligence, the approach used to measure CPS moderated the correlation of CPS and intelligence. Especially the most recent approach towards the assessment of CPS yielded the strongest associations between the two constructs. Implications for existing theories and future research are discussed.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ce0a59ceceeab739d5b2b9474bdc072dd78f56da

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

1. Mike W.-L. Cheung

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. Mike W.-L. Cheung
2. Ronny Scherer
3. Fazilat Siddiq
4. Jo Tondeur

In Management Science and Operations Research

1. Mike W.-L. Cheung
2. Daniel M. McNeish
3. Kristopher J Preacher
4. Timo Gnambs
5. Paul Michel Bernard Verhaeghen
6. M. Assink
7. David P. MacKinnon
8. Davood Tofighi

Citations in the corpus

• A Guide to Conducting a Meta-Analysis with Non-Independent Effect Sizes (2019, methodology): “Stadler et al. (2015) conducted their meta-analysis without taking the non-independence of the effect sizes into account.”