Exploring the Relationship between JCCES and ACT Assessments: A Factor Analysis Approach

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the relationship between the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) and the American College Test (ACT) by conducting a factor analysis. The dataset consisted of 60 observations, with Pearson's correlation revealing significant associations between all variables. The factor analysis identified three factors, with the first factor accounting for 53.697% of the total variance and demonstrating the highest loadings for all variables. The results suggest that the JCCES and ACT assessments may be measuring a common cognitive construct, which could be interpreted as general cognitive ability or intelligence. However, several limitations should be considered, including the sample size, the scope of the analysis, and the use of factor analysis as the sole statistical method. Future research should employ larger samples, consider additional assessments, and explore alternative statistical techniques to validate these findings.

Keywords: Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale, American College Test, factor analysis, general cognitive ability, intelligence, college admission assessments.

Introduction

Psychometrics has long been a central topic of interest for researchers aiming to understand the underlying structure of cognitive abilities and the validity of various assessment tools. One of the most widely recognized theories in this field is the theory of general intelligence, or g-factor, which posits that an individual's cognitive abilities can be captured by a single underlying factor (Spearman, 1904). Over the years, numerous instruments have been developed to measure this general cognitive ability, with intelligence tests and college admission assessments being among the most prevalent. However, the extent to which these instruments measure the same cognitive construct remains a subject of debate.

The present study aims to investigate the factor structure of two assessments, the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES; Jouve, 2010) and the American College Test (ACT), to test the hypothesis that a single underlying factor accounts for the majority of variance in these measures. This hypothesis is grounded in the g-factor theory and is further supported by previous research demonstrating the strong correlation between intelligence test scores and academic performance (Deary, et al., 2007; Koenig, et al., 2008).

In recent years, the application of factor analysis has become a popular method for exploring the structure of cognitive assessments and identifying the dimensions that contribute to an individual's performance on these tests (Carroll, 1993; Jensen, 1998). Factor analysis allows researchers to quantify the extent to which various test items or subtests share a common underlying construct, thus providing insights into the validity and reliability of the instruments in question (Fabrigar, et al., 1999).

The selection of the JCCES and ACT assessments for this study is based on their use in academic and professional settings and their potential relevance to general cognitive ability. The JCCES is a psychometric test that measures crystallized intelligence, which is thought to reflect accumulated knowledge and skills acquired through education and experience (Cattell, 1971). The ACT, on the other hand, is a college admission assessment that evaluates students' academic readiness in various subject areas, such as English, mathematics, reading, and science (ACT, 2014). By examining the factor structure of these two assessments, the present study aims to shed light on the relationship between intelligence and college admission measures and the extent to which they tap into a common cognitive construct.

In sum, this study seeks to contribute to the ongoing discussion regarding the measurement of cognitive abilities and the relevance of psychometric theories in understanding the structure of intelligence and college admission assessments. By employing factor analysis and focusing on the JCCES and ACT, the study aims to provide a clearer understanding of the relationship between these measures and the g-factor theory. Ultimately, the results of this investigation may help inform the development and validation of future cognitive assessment tools and enhance our understanding of the complex nature of human intelligence.

Method

Research Design

The present study employed a correlational research design to examine the relationship between intelligence and college admission assessments. This design was chosen to analyze the associations between variables without manipulating any independent variables or assigning participants to experimental conditions (Creswell, 2014). The correlational design allows for the exploration of naturally occurring relationships among variables, which is particularly useful in understanding the structure and relationships of cognitive measures.

Participants

A total of 60 participants were recruited for this study, with their demographic characteristics collected, but not reported in this study. Participants were high school seniors or college students who had completed both the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) and the American College Test (ACT). There were no exclusion criteria for this study.

Materials

The study utilized two separate assessments to collect data: the JCCES and the ACT.

Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES)

The JCCES is a measure of crystallized intelligence and assesses cognitive abilities through three subtests (Jouve, 2010). The subtests include Verbal Analogies (VA), Mathematical Problems (MP), and General Knowledge (GK). The JCCES was chosen for its relevance in evaluating cognitive abilities.

American College Test (ACT)

The ACT is a standardized college admission assessment measuring cognitive domains relevant to college readiness (ACT, 2014). The test is composed of four primary sections: English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science Reasoning. The ACT was selected for its widespread use in educational settings and its ability to evaluate cognitive abilities pertinent to academic success.

Procedure

Data collection involved obtaining participants' scores on both the JCCES and ACT assessments. Participants were instructed to provide their most recent test scores from ACT upon completion of the JCCES online. Then, they were then entered into a secure database for analysis. Prior to data collection, informed consent was obtained from all participants, and they were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses. 

Statistical Methods

To analyze the data, a factor analysis was conducted to test the research hypotheses (Tabachnick, & Fidell, 2007). Pearson's correlation was used to measure the associations between variables, with principal factor analysis conducted for data extraction. Varimax rotation was employed to simplify the factor structure, with the number of factors determined automatically and initial communalities calculated using squared multiple correlations. The study employed a convergence criterion of 0.0001 and a maximum of 50 iterations.

The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy and Cronbach's alpha were calculated to assess the sample size adequacy and internal consistency, respectively. Factor loadings were computed for each variable, and the proportion of variance explained by the extracted factors was determined.

Results

The present study employed factor analysis to test the research hypotheses. Pearson's correlation was used to measure the associations between variables, and the principal factor analysis was conducted for data extraction. Varimax rotation was used to simplify the factor structure. The number of factors was determined automatically, with initial communalities calculated using squared multiple correlations. The study employed a convergence criterion of 0.0001 and a maximum of 50 iterations.

Results of the Statistical Analyses

The Pearson correlation matrix revealed significant correlations (α = 0.05) between all variables. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy indicated a KMO value of 0.809, suggesting that the sample size was adequate for conducting a factor analysis. Cronbach's alpha was calculated at 0.887, indicating satisfactory internal consistency for the variables.

The factor analysis revealed three factors with eigenvalues greater than one, accounting for 63.526% of the total variance. The first factor (F1) had an eigenvalue of 3.759, accounting for 53.697% of the variance. The second factor (F2) had an eigenvalue of 0.437, accounting for 6.242% of the variance, and the third factor (F3) had an eigenvalue of 0.251, accounting for 3.587% of the variance.

Factor loadings were calculated for each variable, with the first factor (F1) showing the highest loadings for all variables. Specifically, F1 had factor loadings of 0.631 for Verbal Analogies (VA), 0.734 for Mathematical Problems (MP), 0.651 for General Knowledge (GK), 0.802 for English (ENG), 0.881 for Mathematics (MATH), 0.744 for Reading (READ), and 0.905 for Science (SCIE). Final communalities ranged from 0.361 for VA to 0.742 for SCIE, indicating the proportion of variance in each variable explained by the extracted factors.

Interpretation of the Results

The results of the factor analysis support the research hypothesis that a single underlying factor (F1) accounts for the majority of the variance in the intelligence and college admission assessments. Specifically, F1 explained 53.697% of the total variance, with all variables loading highly on this factor. This finding suggests that the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) and the American College Test (ACT) are measuring a common cognitive construct, which may be interpreted as general cognitive ability or intelligence.

Limitations

There are several limitations to consider when interpreting the results of this study. First, the sample size of 60 observations, although adequate for factor analysis based on the KMO measure, may not be large enough to ensure the generalizability of the results. Future studies should employ larger and more diverse samples to validate these findings.

Second, this study only considered the JCCES and ACT assessments, limiting the scope of the analysis. Further research should investigate the factor structure of other intelligence and college admission assessments to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between these measures and general cognitive ability.

Lastly, the use of factor analysis as the sole statistical method may not account for potential non-linear relationships between the variables. Future studies could employ additional statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling or item response theory, to better capture the complexity of the relationships between these cognitive measures.

Discussion

Interpretation of the Results and Previous Research

The findings of the present study support the research hypothesis that a single underlying factor (F1) accounts for the majority of the variance in the intelligence and college admission assessments. Specifically, F1 explained 53.697% of the total variance, with all variables loading highly on this factor. This result is consistent with previous research, which has also demonstrated a strong relationship between general cognitive ability, or intelligence, and performance on college admission assessments (Deary et al., 2007; Koenig et al., 2008). The high factor loadings for all variables on F1 suggest that the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) and the American College Test (ACT) are measuring a common cognitive construct, which may be interpreted as general cognitive ability or intelligence.

Implications for Theory, Practice, and Future Research

The results of this study have important implications for both theory and practice. From a theoretical perspective, the findings support the idea that general cognitive ability is a key underlying factor that contributes to performance on both intelligence and college admission assessments. This suggests that efforts to improve general cognitive ability may be effective in enhancing performance on a wide range of cognitive measures, including college admission assessments.

In terms of practice, the results indicate that the JCCES and ACT assessments are likely measuring similar cognitive constructs, which may have implications for college admission processes. For instance, it may be useful for colleges and universities to consider using a single assessment to evaluate both intelligence and college readiness in applicants, potentially streamlining the admission process and reducing the burden on students.

Moreover, these findings highlight the importance of considering general cognitive ability in educational and career planning. Students, educators, and career counselors can use these insights to develop strategies and interventions aimed at improving general cognitive ability, ultimately enhancing academic and career outcomes.

Limitations and Alternative Explanations

The present study has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, the sample size of 60 observations, although adequate for factor analysis based on the KMO measure, may not be large enough to ensure the generalizability of the results. Future studies should employ larger and more diverse samples to validate these findings.

Second, this study only considered the JCCES and ACT assessments, limiting the scope of the analysis. Further research should investigate the factor structure of other intelligence and college admission assessments, such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) and the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between these measures and general cognitive ability.

Lastly, the use of factor analysis as the sole statistical method may not account for potential non-linear relationships between the variables. Future studies could employ additional statistical techniques, such as structural equation modeling or item response theory, to better capture the complexity of the relationships between these cognitive measures.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this study's results indicate that a single underlying factor (F1) accounts for the majority of the variance in the intelligence and college admission assessments, specifically, the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) and the American College Test (ACT). This finding suggests that both assessments measure a common cognitive construct, which may be interpreted as general cognitive ability or intelligence. The implications of these findings for theory and practice are significant, as they provide insight into the relationship between intelligence assessments and college admission tests, potentially guiding the development of more effective testing methods in the future.

However, some limitations should be considered. The sample size of 60 observations may not be large enough for generalizability, and the study only analyzed JCCES and ACT assessments. Future research should include larger, more diverse samples and investigate other intelligence and college admission assessments. Additionally, employing other statistical methods, such as structural equation modeling or item response theory, may better capture the complexity of the relationships between these cognitive measures.

Despite these limitations, the study highlights the importance of understanding the underlying factors that contribute to performance on intelligence and college admission assessments and opens avenues for future research to improve the assessment of general cognitive ability.

References

ACT. (2014). About the ACT. Retrieved from https://www.act.org/content/act/en/products-and-services/the-act/about-the-act.html

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571312

Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 

Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., & Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35(1), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.001

Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272

Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Jouve, X. (2010). Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale. Retrieved from http://www.cogn-iq.org/tests/jouve-cerebrals-crystallized-educational-scale-jcces

Koenig, K. A., Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2008). ACT and general cognitive ability. Intelligence, 36(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2007.03.005

Spearman, C. (1904). "General intelligence," objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 201-292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1412107

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

Relationship between Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) Crystallized Educational Index (CEI) and Cognitive and Academic Measures

Abstract

This study aimed to examine the relationships between the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) Crystallized Educational Index (CEI) and various measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement. Pearson correlation analyses were used to test the research hypotheses. The results showed strong correlations between the JCCES CEI and measures of cognitive abilities, including the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scale (RIAS), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III), Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Third Edition (WISC-III), General Ability Measure for Adults (GAMA), and Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale (SBIS). Additionally, strong correlations were observed between the JCCES CEI and measures of academic achievement, including the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), American College Test (ACT), and Graduate Record Examination (GRE). The results suggest that the JCCES CEI is an effective measure of general cognitive ability and academic achievement across different age groups.

Keywords: Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale, Crystallized Educational Index, cognitive abilities, academic achievement, Pearson correlation analyses, Scholastic Assessment Test, American College Test, Graduate Record Examination.

Introduction

Psychometrics, the scientific study of psychological measurement, has been a critical aspect of psychology since the early 20th century, with the development of the first intelligence tests by pioneers such as Binet and Simon (1905) and Wechsler (1939). These seminal works laid the foundation for the development of various instruments to assess cognitive abilities, personality traits, and educational outcomes (Anastasi & Urbina, 1997). Over the years, psychometric theories have evolved, with advancements in factor analysis, item response theory, and other methodologies contributing to the refinement of existing instruments and the development of new ones (Embretson & Reise, 2000).

One such instrument is the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES), which assesses crystallized intelligence, a key component of general cognitive ability (Cattell, 1971; Horn & Cattell, 1966). Crystallized intelligence, often considered the product of accumulated knowledge and experiences, has been shown to be a reliable predictor of academic achievement and occupational success (Deary et al., 2007; Neisser et al., 1996).

The present study aims to examine the relationships between the JCCES Crystallized Educational Index (CEI) and various other measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement, such as the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scale (RIAS), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III), the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), the American College Test (ACT), the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Third Edition (WISC-III), the General Ability Measure for Adults (GAMA), and the Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale (SBIS). Pearson correlation analyses were employed to investigate these relationships.

A comprehensive understanding of the relationships between the JCCES CEI and these well-established measures can provide valuable insight into the validity and utility of the JCCES in various contexts. Previous research has demonstrated that crystallized intelligence is a significant predictor of academic achievement (Deary et al., 2007) and is often correlated with other measures of cognitive abilities (Carroll, 1993). Therefore, the present study seeks to extend the existing literature by further examining these relationships, while also assessing the JCCES CEI's potential as an effective tool for predicting academic and cognitive outcomes.

The results of this study may have important implications for the use of the JCCES in educational and occupational settings and may contribute to the ongoing refinement of psychometric theories and methodologies. By exploring the relationships between the JCCES CEI and a range of well-established cognitive and achievement measures, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the JCCES's validity and utility within the broader context of psychometrics research.

Results

Statistical Analyses

The research hypotheses were tested using Pearson correlations to examine the relationships between the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) Crystallized Educational Index (CEI) and various other measures. Assumptions made for the Pearson correlation analyses included linearity, homoscedasticity, and normality of the data.

Presentation of Results

The results of the Pearson correlation analyses between the JCCES CEI and various measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement are presented in detail below. The majority of correlations were statistically significant at the p < .001 level, indicating strong relationships between the JCCES CEI and the respective measures.

Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scale (RIAS, N = 138): The JCCES CEI demonstrated strong correlations with the Verbal Intelligence Index (VII) (r = .859, p < .001), Guess What? (GWH) (Information) (r = .814, p < .001), and Verbal Reasoning (VRZ) (r = .859, p < .001).

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III, N =76): The JCCES CEI showed strong correlations with Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) (r = .821, p < .001), Verbal IQ (VIQ) (r = .837, p < .001), Performance IQ (PIQ) (r = .660, p < .001), Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) (r = .816, p < .001), Vocabulary (VOC) (r = .775, p < .001), Similarities (SIM) (r = .579, p < .001), and Information (INF) (r = .769, p < .001).

Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) (three different versions): The JCCES CEI exhibited strong correlations with SAT Composite scores for all three versions: <1995 (r = .814, p < .001, N = 87), 1995-2005 (r = .826, p < .001, N = 118), and >2005 (r = .858, p < .001, N = 125). Similarly, significant correlations were observed with Verbal and Mathematical scores across the three versions.

American College Test (ACT, N = 133): The JCCES CEI was significantly correlated with the ACT Composite score (r = .691, p < .001) and all subscales, including English (r = .636, p < .001), Mathematical (r = .600, p < .001), Reading (r = .676, p < .001), and Science (r = .685, p < .001).

Graduate Record Examination (GRE, N = 66): The JCCES CEI demonstrated a strong correlation with the GRE Composite score (r = .844, p < .001), Verbal (r = .768, p < .001), and Quantitative (r = .819, p < .001) scores. However, the correlation with the GRE Analytical subscale was weaker (r = .430, p = .020, N = 29).

Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT, N = 62): The JCCES CEI showed a strong correlation with the AFQT percentile converted to a deviation IQ (r = .825, p < .001).

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Third Edition (WISC-III, N = 29): The JCCES CEI had strong correlations with Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) (r = .851, p < .001), Verbal IQ (VIQ) (r = .665, p = .003, N = 18), and Performance IQ (PIQ) (r = .703, p = .001, N = 18).

General Ability Measure for Adults (GAMA, N = 64): The JCCES CEI was significantly correlated with the GAMA IQ score (r = .617, p < .001) and all subscales, including Matching (r = .467, p < .001), Analogies (r = .612, p < .001), Sequences (r = .455, p < .001), and Construction (r = .482, p <.001).

Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale (SBIS, N = 10): The JCCES CEI exhibited the strongest correlation with the SBIS Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) (r = .883, p = .001).

Interpretation of Results

Upon examining the Pearson correlation analysis results in greater detail, we can further interpret the relationships between the JCCES CEI and various cognitive and academic measures. The majority of the correlations were strong, supporting the research hypothesis that the JCCES CEI is positively related to these measures.

The strong relationships between the JCCES CEI and various intelligence scales provide further evidence that the JCCES CEI is an effective measure of general cognitive ability across different age groups. Both the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Third Edition (WISC-III) are widely recognized and well-established measures of cognitive ability, assessing various domains such as verbal comprehension, perceptual organization, working memory, and processing speed.

Intelligence Tests

1. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third Edition (WAIS-III): The WAIS-III is designed for individuals aged 16 to 89 years, assessing cognitive abilities across multiple domains. The strong correlation between the JCCES CEI and the WAIS-III Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) (r = .821, p < .001, N = 76) indicates that the JCCES CEI effectively captures general cognitive ability in adults. This positive relationship suggests that the JCCES CEI could be a useful tool for assessing cognitive abilities in various settings, such as educational, clinical, and occupational contexts.
2. Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children - Third Edition (WISC-III): The WISC-III is designed for children aged 6 to 16 years, assessing cognitive abilities across a similar range of domains as the WAIS-III. The strong correlation between the JCCES CEI and the WISC-III Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) (r = .851, p < .001, N = 29) suggests that the JCCES CEI is also effective in measuring general cognitive ability in children. This positive relationship implies that the JCCES CEI could be a valuable instrument for evaluating cognitive abilities in educational settings, as well as for identifying potential learning difficulties or giftedness in children.

Academic Tests

The Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) is a widely used standardized test for college admissions in the United States, designed to measure students' critical thinking, problem-solving, and overall academic aptitude. The strong relationships between the JCCES CEI and SAT Composite scores across all three versions suggest that the JCCES CEI is a reliable indicator of academic achievement as measured by the SAT.

The SAT has undergone several changes over the years, resulting in three distinct versions. The following details illustrate the strong relationships between the JCCES CEI and each version of the SAT:

1. SAT <1995: This version of the SAT consisted of two main sections: Verbal and Mathematical. The JCCES CEI showed a strong correlation with the SAT Composite score for this version (r = .814, p < .001, N = 87), indicating that the JCCES CEI is positively related to both verbal and mathematical abilities as measured by the SAT <1995.
2. SAT 1995-2005: This version of the SAT maintained the Verbal and Mathematical sections, but introduced a new format and scoring system. The JCCES CEI displayed a strong correlation with the SAT Composite score for this version (r = .826, p < .001, N = 118), suggesting that the JCCES CEI remains a reliable indicator of academic achievement despite changes to the SAT format.
3. SAT >2005: This version of the SAT introduced a third section, Writing, in addition to the existing Verbal (renamed as Reading) and Mathematical sections. The JCCES CEI demonstrated a strong correlation with the SAT Composite score for this version (r = .858, p < .001, N = 125), implying that the JCCES CEI is positively related to all three aspects of the SAT: Reading, Mathematical, and Writing.

The American College Test (ACT) correlations with the JCCES CEI provide further evidence that the JCCES CEI captures various aspects of academic achievement across multiple subject areas. The ACT is a standardized test that assesses high school student's general educational development and their ability to complete college-level work, covering four main subject areas: English, Mathematics, Reading, and Science.

The Pearson correlation analyses results for the ACT subscales are as follows:

1. English: The JCCES CEI exhibited a strong correlation with the ACT English subscale (r = .636, p < .001, N = 133). This suggests that the JCCES CEI is positively related to English language skills, including grammar, punctuation, sentence structure, and rhetorical skills.
2. Mathematics: The JCCES CEI displayed a strong correlation with the ACT Mathematics subscale (r = .600, p < .001, N = 133). This indicates a positive relationship between the JCCES CEI and mathematical problem-solving abilities, including knowledge of algebra, geometry, and trigonometry.
3. Reading: The JCCES CEI showed a strong correlation with the ACT Reading subscale (r = .676, p < .001, N = 133). This implies that the JCCES CEI is positively associated with reading comprehension skills, including the ability to understand and analyze complex literary and informational texts.
4. Science: The JCCES CEI demonstrated a strong correlation with the ACT Science subscale (r = .685, p < .001, N = 133). This suggests that the JCCES CEI is positively related to scientific reasoning and problem-solving skills, including the ability to interpret and analyze data from various scientific disciplines.

The moderate correlation between the JCCES CEI and the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) Analytical subscale (r = .430, p = .020, N = 29) is indeed notable, as it suggests a weaker relationship between the JCCES CEI and analytical abilities compared to the strong correlations observed with other cognitive and academic measures. Several factors might contribute to this finding, including:

1. Differences in assessed skills: The JCCES CEI, which consists of Verbal Analogies, Mathematical Problems, and General Knowledge subtests, primarily measures crystallized intelligence. Crystallized intelligence refers to the knowledge and skills acquired through experience and education, such as vocabulary and factual information. In contrast, the GRE Analytical subscale assesses analytical writing skills, including the ability to articulate complex ideas, support arguments with relevant reasons and examples, and demonstrate critical thinking. The moderate correlation between the JCCES CEI and the GRE Analytical subscale may reflect the differences in the skills assessed by these two measures.
2. Variability in the sample: The sample used in this study might have influenced the observed correlation between the JCCES CEI and the GRE Analytical subscale. The study participants might have had varying levels of exposure to analytical writing tasks, which could affect their performance on the GRE Analytical subscale. Additionally, the sample size for the GRE Analytical subscale (N = 29) was smaller than that of other measures, which might limit the generalizability of the findings.

Discussion

The present study aimed to examine the relationships between the Jouve Cerebrals Crystallized Educational Scale (JCCES) Crystallized Educational Index (CEI) and various measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement. The results of the study support the research hypothesis that the JCCES CEI is positively related to these measures. Specifically, the JCCES CEI demonstrated strong correlations with measures of verbal intelligence, information, verbal reasoning, full-scale IQ, verbal IQ, performance IQ, verbal comprehension, vocabulary, similarities, information, SAT composite scores across three different versions, ACT composite score, and subscales, GRE composite score, quantitative score, and AFQT IQ score. The JCCES CEI also exhibited strong correlations with the GAMA IQ score and all subscales, as well as the SBIS Full Scale IQ.

The strong correlations between the JCCES CEI and various intelligence scales provide further evidence that the JCCES CEI is an effective measure of general cognitive ability across different age groups. The positive relationships between the JCCES CEI and various cognitive and academic measures suggest that the JCCES CEI could be a useful tool for assessing cognitive abilities and academic achievement in various settings, such as educational, clinical, and occupational contexts (Deary et al., 2007).

The strong correlations between the JCCES CEI and the SAT Composite scores across all three versions suggest that the JCCES CEI is a reliable indicator of academic achievement as measured by the SAT. The strong correlations observed between the JCCES CEI and the ACT composite score and subscales suggest that the JCCES CEI captures various aspects of academic achievement across multiple subject areas.

The moderate correlation between the JCCES CEI and the GRE Analytical subscale suggests a weaker relationship between the JCCES CEI and analytical abilities compared to the strong correlations observed with other cognitive and academic measures. This finding may reflect differences in the skills assessed by these two measures, as well as the variability in the sample used in this study.

Implications for Theory, Practice, and Future Research

The findings of the present study have several implications for theory and practice. The strong correlations observed between the JCCES CEI and measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement support the validity and reliability of the JCCES as a measure of general cognitive ability and academic achievement. The JCCES CEI could be a valuable tool for assessing cognitive abilities and academic achievement in educational, clinical, and occupational settings.

The results of this study also have implications for future research. The present study used a cross-sectional design, and future research could use a longitudinal design to examine the stability and predictive validity of the JCCES CEI over time. Additionally, future research could explore the relationship between the JCCES CEI and other measures of academic achievement, such as high school and college GPA. Furthermore, future research could examine the factor structure of the JCCES and its relationships with other measures of cognitive abilities.

Limitations

There are several limitations to this study that may have affected the results. First, the sample size varied across the different measures, with smaller sample sizes for some of the tests. Smaller sample sizes may have limited the statistical power to detect significant correlations.

Second, selection bias may have influenced the results, as participants may have been more likely to respond to the survey if they had higher cognitive abilities or academic achievement. This could have resulted in an overestimation of the correlations between the JCCES CEI and other measures.

Finally, many samples relied on self-reported data, which may be subject to reporting biases and inaccuracies. Although the JCCES is an untimed, self-administered, open-ended test, it is possible that participants' responses were influenced by factors such as social desirability or recall biases, which may have affected the validity of the study results.

Future Research

Future research could address some of the limitations of this study, including increasing sample sizes for certain measures and using more diverse samples to improve generalizability. Additionally, future research could examine the JCCES CEI's relationship with other cognitive and academic measures not included in this study, such as measures of creativity or problem-solving ability.

Further exploration of the weaker relationship between the JCCES CEI and the GRE Analytical subscale could also be valuable. Additional research could investigate whether the moderate correlation is due to differences in the skills assessed or limitations of the sample used in this study. Future studies could also examine the JCCES CEI's relationship with other measures of analytical abilities, such as performance on analytical writing tasks or measures of critical thinking.

Implications

The results of this study have important implications for both theory and practice. The strong relationships between the JCCES CEI and various measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement provide further evidence for the construct validity of the JCCES as a measure of general cognitive ability. The JCCES CEI may be particularly useful in educational and occupational settings for assessing individuals' cognitive abilities, identifying potential learning difficulties or giftedness, and predicting academic and occupational success.

Additionally, the strong correlations between the JCCES CEI and the SAT and ACT suggest that the JCCES CEI is an effective tool for predicting academic achievement. As such, the JCCES CEI may be useful for guiding educational interventions and for identifying individuals who may benefit from academic support.

However, it is important to note that the JCCES CEI should not be used as the sole measure for assessing cognitive abilities or academic achievement. Rather, the JCCES CEI should be used in conjunction with other measures to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of an individual's strengths and weaknesses.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the results of this study provide strong evidence for the construct validity of the JCCES as a measure of general cognitive ability. The JCCES CEI demonstrated strong correlations with various measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement, including well-established measures such as the WAIS-III and the SAT. The study results suggest that the JCCES CEI may be a useful tool for assessing cognitive abilities and predicting academic and occupational success. However, the limitations of the study should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results. Future research could address some of the limitations and further explore the JCCES CEI's relationship with other measures of cognitive abilities and academic achievement.

References

Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1905). New methods for the diagnosis of the intellectual level of subnormals. L'Année Psychologique, 11, 191-244.

Cattell, R. B. (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P., & Fernandes, C. (2007). Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35(1), 13-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.001

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Wechsler, D. (1939). The measurement of adult intelligence. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins.