View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Shortcomings of the IQ-Based Construct of Underachievement.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Shortcomings of the IQ-Based Construct of Underachievement.
Authors: Ziegler, Albert (AUTHOR), Stoeger, Heidrun (AUTHOR)
Source: Roeper Review. 2012, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p123-132. 10p.
Subjects: Intelligence levels, Underachievement, Gifted & talented education, Test theory, Talented students
Abstract: Despite being plagued by serious conceptual problems, underachievement ranks among the most popular constructs in research on the gifted. Many of its problems have their roots in the use of the IQ as the supposedly best method of measuring ability levels. Only a few decades ago the opinion was still widespread that the IQ-based construct of underachievement, having withstood neither its empirical nor its theoretical test, ought to be abandoned. Since then, some points of criticism have simply been forgotten. In this article we therefore take up and follow a few of the broken threads within the discussion. To this end, we present a thorough analysis of the implications of the IQ-based underachievement concept. First we present a definition of underachievement and provide a brief overview of the history of the construct. We then enumerate the theoretical, methodological, and empirical problems of the IQ-based construct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Roeper Review is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
Text:
  Availability: 1
Header DbId: pbh
DbLabel: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
An: 73909769
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Shortcomings of the IQ-Based Construct of Underachievement.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ziegler%2C+Albert%22">Ziegler, Albert</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Stoeger%2C+Heidrun%22">Stoeger, Heidrun</searchLink> (AUTHOR)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Roeper+Review%22">Roeper Review</searchLink>. 2012, Vol. 34 Issue 2, p123-132. 10p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subjects
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intelligence+levels%22">Intelligence levels</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Underachievement%22">Underachievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Gifted+%26+talented+education%22">Gifted & talented education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Test+theory%22">Test theory</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Talented+students%22">Talented students</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Despite being plagued by serious conceptual problems, underachievement ranks among the most popular constructs in research on the gifted. Many of its problems have their roots in the use of the IQ as the supposedly best method of measuring ability levels. Only a few decades ago the opinion was still widespread that the IQ-based construct of underachievement, having withstood neither its empirical nor its theoretical test, ought to be abandoned. Since then, some points of criticism have simply been forgotten. In this article we therefore take up and follow a few of the broken threads within the discussion. To this end, we present a thorough analysis of the implications of the IQ-based underachievement concept. First we present a definition of underachievement and provide a brief overview of the history of the construct. We then enumerate the theoretical, methodological, and empirical problems of the IQ-based construct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Roeper Review is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=pbh&AN=73909769
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/02783193.2012.660726
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 123
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Intelligence levels
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Underachievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Gifted & talented education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Test theory
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Talented students
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Shortcomings of the IQ-Based Construct of Underachievement.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Ziegler, Albert
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Stoeger, Heidrun
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 04
              Text: 2012
              Type: published
              Y: 2012
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 02783193
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 34
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Roeper Review
              Type: main
ResultId 1