Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test is a behavioral task that assesses non-verbal, analytic intelligence. Participants are presented with a display showing a matrix (e.g., a 3 x 3 grid consisting of three rows with three cells in each row). With the exception of the cell on the bottom right, each of the other cells in the display is occupied by a complex visual stimulus. Participants’ task is to determine which of eight other possible stimuli is the correct entry for the single empty cell. In order to answer correctly on each trial, participants must carefully analyze the display to determine a complex set of rules that governs the relationships among the elements that compose the stimuli. For example, both of the following rules may apply to the display in a single trial. First, the quantity of particular elements appearing in the cells of each row may increase from the left cell (one black square) to the middle cell (two black squares) to the right cell (three black squares). Second, a particular element of the complex stimuli has the same property for each cell in a given row (a rectangular bar always with the same orientation), but this property varies for cells in the left column (horizontal orientation), cells in the middle column (vertical orientation), and cells in the right column (diagonal orientation). The task advances in a progressive way such that the trials become increasingly difficult. The dependent measure is the number of correctly answered items in the entire set.
Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test is a behavioral task that measures fluid intelligence by testing people’s non-verbal, analytical abilities. Higher fluid intelligence, as measured in part with this test, has been shown to be associated with lower HIV infection rate, thereby potentially implicating health behaviors (Rindermann & Meisenberg, 2009). Higher scores are also associated with a lower likelihood of eventually becoming a smoker (Seltzer & Oechsli, 1985). Analytical intelligence is thus identified as a potential mechanism of behavior change.
[+] PMCID, PUBMED ID, or CITATION
Text Citation: Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test. Psychological Review, 97(3), 404-431.
Text Citation: Rindermann, H., & Meisenberg, G. (2009). Relevance of education and intelligence at the national level for health: The case of HIV and AIDS. Intelligence, 37, 383-395.
Text Citation: Seltzer, C. C., & Oechsli, F. W. (1985). Psychosocial characteristics of adolescent smokers before they started smoking: Evidence of self-selection. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 38(1), 17-26.
This measure has not been measured yet.
This measure has not been influenced yet.
This measure has not been validated yet.
The Science of Behavior Change (SOBC) program seeks to promote basic research on the initiation, personalization and maintenance of behavior change. By integrating work across disciplines, this effort will lead to an improved understanding of the underlying principles of behavior change. The SOBC program aims to implement a mechanisms-focused, experimental medicine approach to behavior change research and to develop the tools required to implement such an approach. The experimental medicine approach involves: identifying an intervention target, developing measures to permit verification of the target, engaging the target through experimentation or intervention, and testing the degree to which target engagement produces the desired behavior change.
Within the SOBC Measures Repository, researchers have access to measures of mechanistic targets that have been (or are in the processing of being) validated by SOBC Research Network Members and other experts in the field. The SOBC Validation Process includes three important stages of evaluation for each proposed measure: Identification, Measurement, and Influence.
The first stage of validation requires a measure to be Identified within the field; there must be theoretical support for the specific measure of the proposed mechanistic target or potential mechanism of behavior change. This evidence may include references for the proposed measure, or theoretical support for the construct that the proposed measure is intended to assess. The second stage of validation requires demonstration that the level and change in level of the chosen mechanistic target can be Measured with the proposed measure (assay). For example, if the proposed measure is a questionnaire, the score on the measure should indicate the activity of the target process, and it must have strong psychometric properties. The third stage of validation requires demonstration that the measure can be Influenced; there must be evidence that the measured target is malleable and responsive to manipulation. Evidence relating to each stage includes at least one peer-reviewed publication or original data presentation (if no peer-reviewed research is available to support the claim) and is evaluated by SOBC Research Network Members and experts in the field.
Once a measure has gone through these three stages, it will then either be Validated or Not validated according to SOBC Research Network standards. If a measure is Validated, then change in the measured target was reliably associated with Behavior Change. If a measure is Not validated, then change in the measured target was not reliably associated with Behavior Change. Why would we share measures that are not validated? The SOBC Research Network values open, rigorous, and transparent research. Our goal is to make meaningful progress and develop replicable and effective interventions in behavior change science. Therefore, the SOBC sees value in providing other researchers in the field with information regarding measures that work and measures that fall short for specific targets. Further, a measure that is not validated for one target in one population may be validated in another target or population.
Want to learn more? For any questions regarding the SOBC Validation Process or Measures Repository, please email email@example.com.
Has the mechanism been identified as a potential target for behavior change? This section summarizes theoretical support for the mechanism.
Have the psychometric properties of this measure been assessed? This section includes information such as content validity, internal consistency, and test-retest reliability.
Has a study manipulation led to change in the mechanism? This section addresses evidence that this measure is modifiable by experimental manipulation or clinical intervention.
Has a change in this mechanism been associated with behavior change? This section addresses empirical evidence that causing change in the measure reliably produces subsequent behavior change.