Standard Progressive Matrices
PURPOSE OF THE TEST -
To assess the general mental ability of the subject by administering SPM.
CASE HISTORY -
We obtained information from the semi–structure interview. The subject was a 22-year-old
female, studying MSC. She seemed calm and relaxed throughout the interview and the test.
We asked a few questions related to her academic background and performance.
The subject did 10th and 12th in science from her hometown. She did her BSc at Garware
College in Microbiology and MSc in DY Patil majoring in Bio Informatics. She did not observe
any academic progress in school and was an average kid. Then she became better
academically and scored highly in both Undergraduate and Postgraduate. While in a difficult
situation the subject tries thinking calmly and tries to find ways out of the –problem. She
sees both the positive and negative sides of the situation. Mostly the positive side. The
subject finds it easy to understand abstract concepts and ideas. The subject can solve
patterns and abstract attraction and easily answer questions like these. The subject uses
time management or timetables and then follows it. The subject has observed changes in
her cognitive thinking over time. She has experienced anxiety various times but still faced it
head on and tried to solve it. The participants did not actively participate in various
extracurricular activities.
Before handing the test booklet to the subject and reading out instructions, the subject was
asked general questions concerning his day, mood and other interests to successfully
establish a rapport with her.
INTRODUCTION -
Intelligence is a complex construct that includes a variety of cognitive capabilities and
competencies. It is typically recognized as the ability to acquire knowledge through
experience, adjust to novel circumstances, comprehend and engage with abstract ideas,
and effectively utilize knowledge to maneuver within one's environment.
Charles Spearman's two-factor theory of intelligence posits that intelligence comprises two
main components:
Spearman's Two-Factor Theory, introduced by Charles Spearman in the early 20th century,
postulates that intelligence comprises a general factor (g) alongside specific factors (s). The
g Factor signifies an individual's overarching cognitive capacity, indicative of their
proficiency across diverse tasks. Conversely, s Factors pertain to distinct abilities affiliated
with tasks or domains, such as mathematical or linguistic skills.
Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences, formulated by Howard Gardner, contends that
intelligence is not a singular construct but rather an amalgamation of various discrete types.
Gardner's initial hypothesis identified seven intelligences:
Linguistic: Proficiency in language
Logical-Mathematical: Aptitude for problem-solving and mathematical reasoning
Spatial: The ability to visualize and manipulate spatial representations
Musical: Sensitivity to rhythm, pitch, and melody
Bodily-Kinesthetic: Mastery of physical movement
Interpersonal: Capacity for understanding and engaging with others
Intrapersonal: Self-awareness and self-reflection.
Gardner subsequently expanded this framework to include additional intelligences, such
as naturalistic and existential.
Sternberg's Triarchic Theory, advanced by Robert Sternberg, delineates intelligence into
three categories:
Analytical: Skills related to problem-solving and critical thinking.
Creative: The capacity to address novel challenges and foster innovative thought.
Practical: Common sense and the ability to navigate real-world circumstances.
Sternberg underscores that intelligence encompasses more than traditional IQ
assessments; it also integrates practical application.
Guilford's Structure of Intellect Model, proposed by J.P. Guilford, classifies intelligence
into three dimensions: operations, contents, and products.
Operations: Varieties of cognitive processes (e.g., evaluation, memory, divergent thinking).
Contents: Types of information (e.g., visual, auditory, symbolic).
Products: Forms of cognitive output (e.g., units, classes, systems).
This model posits that intelligence is complex and incorporates a broad array of cognitive
faculties.
The Practical Utility of the Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM)
The Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM) is a non-verbal assessment designed to evaluate
abstract reasoning and general cognitive ability. It consists of a sequence of visual patterns
whereby participants must discern the missing component. Its practical applications
include:
Assessing g: The SPM is frequently employed as a measure of general intelligence (g factor),
as it mitigates the impact of linguistic and cultural biases.
Educational Settings: It aids educators in pinpointing students' cognitive strengths and
weaknesses, thereby informing customized teaching strategies.
Employment: Employers may utilize the SPM during recruitment to assess prospective
candidates' problem-solving capabilities and cognitive adaptability.
Clinical Assessments: In psychological evaluations, the SPM can contribute to the
diagnosis of cognitive impairments or learning disabilities.
DESCRIPTION OF THE TEST -
The Standard Progressive Matrices was developed by John C. Raven in the year 1940. The
Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM) is a non-verbal assessment instrument specifically
designed to evaluate abstract reasoning and problem-solving competencies. The
instrument comprises 60 items, organized into five distinct sets (A, B, C, D, and E), each
containing 12 items. The test displays a sequence of matrices that incorporate geometric
shapes and symbols, with one component absent. Participants are required to identify the
appropriate component from a selection of six or eight alternatives to complete the
sequence. The difficulty of the items escalates as the assessment advances, thereby
necessitating both spatial and logical reasoning abilities.
Scoring:
Each correctly solved matrix earns 1 point.
Raw scores can range from 0 to 60.
Percentile Ranks:
Raw scores are converted into percentile ranks to compare an individual’s performance
against normative data.
Higher percentile ranks indicate better performance relative to the normative sample.
Interpretation of Scores:
Scores are typically classified into categories such as:
Below Average: Scores below the 25th percentile.
Average: Scores between the 25th and 75th percentiles.
Above Average: Scores above the 75th percentile.
Psychometric Properties of SPM
1. Reliability:
The test reports two types of reliability: internal consistency and test-retest reliability.
Internal consistency, as measured in various Indian studies, showed reliability
scores of 0.84 in a study by Ganguly, 0.89 and 0.95 in studies by Sinha, and a Kuder-
Richardson correlation of 0.91 in Dey's study on talented Indian students. In terms of
test-retest reliability, the test has been extensively analyzed in over 20 papers. The
original work with the Standard Progressive Matrices (SPM) indicated reliability
scores ranging from 0.83 to 0.93, with higher reliability observed among younger
respondents. Studies demonstrated that retest reliability remained satisfactory for
periods up to one year; however, evidence beyond this period is limited primarily due
to uncertainties in sample size and participant retention.
2. Validity:
The test's criterion-oriented validity, both concurrent and predictive, varies with age.
When correlated with concurrent intelligence measures, a value of 0.58 was found.
Correlations with achievement measures, such as scholastic aptitude and tests,
were generally lower and ranged from negligible to very high. Content validity studies
by Banks and Sinha found that, for children, the average biserial correlation between
SPM and the combined results of three IQ tests was 0.45, with correlations for
different test items ranging from 0.20 to 0.80
3. Norms:
The standardization of the test was based on two major studies: the Delhi study and
the Maharashtra study. The Maharashtra study, conducted by Prof. C.G. Deshpande,
standardized norms using a sample drawn from various schools across six
parliamentary electoral constituencies in Mumbai and six legislative electoral
constituencies in Pune. The sample consisted of 10,000 subjects, with 4,825 males
and 5,275 females, ranging in age from 8 to 18 years and including students from
grades 4 to 10 and junior colleges (11th and 12th standards). Percentile norms were
established based on this data
MATERIAL -
1. SPM Booklet
2. Test Manual
3. Answer Sheet
4. Scoring Key
5. Stationary
6. Wooden Screen
TEST ADMINISTRATION -
The subject was called into the cubicle and the test administrator established rapport with
him/her and took a case history. The subject was given the test booklet to fill out the
required information. The test administrator then read the following instructions aloud,
“Fill in your name, today’s date and your age, and date of birth at the top. Remember that
all your answers should be made on the answer sheet. Please don’t mark the test booklet
in any way. Now take the test booklet - but don’t open it. This is a test of observation and
clear thinking. Please open your test booklet on the first page. You see that this is problem
number A1. Now look at your answer sheet. You will see that under the heading Set A there
is a column of numbers 1,2,3,4, through 12. This is where the answers go. Now look back
at your test booklet. The top part of problem A1 is a pattern with a bit cut out of it. Look at
the pattern, think what piece is needed to complete the pattern correctly both along and
down must be like. Then find the right piece out of six bits shown below Only one of these
pieces is perfectly correct (test administrator (TA) demonstrates for item A1). Now please
turn over to the next page of the test booklet and do problem A2 by yourselves. On every
page of the booklet there is a pattern with a piece missing; you must choose which of the
pieces below is the right one to complete the pattern. If you make a mistake, or want to
change your answer, put a cross through the incorrect answer, and then write the number
of correct answers. Do not erase the incorrect answer. The problems are simple and at the
beginning get harder as you go on. There is no catch. If you pay attention to the way the
answers to easy problems are found, you will find the later ones less difficult. Work at your
own pace and do not miss any item. When you are recording your answers, make sure you
are doing so in the right column and next to the right number for the problem you are
working on. If you are not sure, guess, as guesses are sometimes right. If you get stuck
move on to the next problem and then come back to the one you had difficulty with. Turn to
problem A3 and start. Work at your own space. You can have as much time as you like.”
Before permitting the subject to leave the testing room the administrator checked carefully
to see that every question had been marked with one and only one answer.
The test was administered to the subject, responses were scored with the help of the
scoring key, and the subject’s percentile score and discrepancy score was calculated.
PRECAUTIONS -
1. Instructions were read from the manual.
2. Rapport and case history was taken prior to conduction.
3. Informed consent was obtained from the subject.
RESULT TABLE -
Title: The subjects score obtained on SPM
Set A Set B Set C Set D Set E Total Percent Interpret
Score ile ation
Raw 12 12 10 11 10 55 95 Above
Scores Average
Discrep 12 12 11 10 8 53
ancy
Scores
INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS -
The objective of the assessment is to evaluate the general cognitive aptitude;
consequently, the Standard Progressive Matrices test was administered to an individual.
Initially, a preliminary rapport was established with the participant, followed by the
collection of the subject's case history. Subsequently, the participant was presented with
the SPM test, which she completed in 18 minutes. The assessment comprised five sets,
identified as A, B, C, D, and E.
As referring to the result table above, the subject’s raw score was 55 and percentile was
95, indicating the subject to be in the group of Definitely above average. The case history
and the final subjects are consistent with each other as she has significantly developed
academically and has grown from an average student to a topper.
No raw score exceeded the discrepancy score by more than 2 and therefore, all sets were
seen as non – discrepant.
CONCLUSION -
The subject’s results are consistent with the case history. Thus, their mental ability is
above average.
REFERENCES -
Raven, J. C.: (1936). Raven Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM) [Database record].
PsycTESTS
Davis, K., Christodoulou, J., Seider, S., & Gardner, H. E. (2011). The theory of multiple
intelligence. Davis, K., Christodoulou, J., Seider, S., & Gardner, H.(2011). The
theory of multiple intelligences. In RJ Sternberg & SB Kaufman (Eds.), Cambridge
Handbook of Intelligence, 485-503.
https://dictionary.apa.org/intelligence
Pearson, M., O’Brien, P., & Bulsara, C. (2015). A multiple intelligences approach to
counseling: Enhancing alliances with a focus on strengths. Journal of Psychotherapy
Integration, 25(2), 128–142
