Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T21:24:24.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Foreign language aptitude and intelligence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Marjorie Wesche ,
Henry Edwards  and
Winston Wells
Marjorie Wesche*
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Henry Edwards
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Winston Wells
Affiliation:
Public Service Commission ofCanada
*
Dr. Marjorie Wesche, Centre for Second Language Learning, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, CanadaKIN 6N5
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Notwithstanding the predictive value of foreign language aptitude measures, the underlying ability or abilities tapped by them and their relationship to measures of intelligence are not well understood. This study provides a partial characterization of the nature of language aptitude through correlations and factor analyses of the Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) and the Primary Mental Abilities Test (PMA). The subjects of the study were 793 English-speaking Canadian public servants at various stages of intensive French language training. The results revealed substantial redundancy among the subtests of the MLAT and PMA batteries and a Kaiser's Little Jiffy factor analysis yielded a one-factor solution at the second-order level. A principal factors solution, however, identified three interpretable second-order factors, characterized respectively as first language verbal knowledge, abstract reasoning ability, and ability to learn new language elements and associations. A unitary third-order factor was also identified, probably approximating Spearman's g. Taken together, the findings of the study are compatible with the conceptualization of language aptitude according to a hierarchical model which subsumes specific abilities of importance in the language classroom under a more encompassing general ability, or general intelligence.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 1982 , pp. 127 - 140
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Anastasi, A.Psychological testing. New York: MacMillan, 1968.Google Scholar
Bennett, G. K., Seashore, H. G., & Wesman, A. G., Differential Aptitude Tests. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1963.Google Scholar
Bibeau, G.General Report, Report of the independent study on the language training programmes of the Public Service of Canada, Volume 1. Ottawa: Government of Canada, 1976.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B.A factor analysis of two foreign language aptitude batteries. The Journal of General Psychology, 1958, 59, 3–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carroll, J. B. The prediction of success in intensive foreign language training. In Glaser, R. (Ed.), Training research and education. Pittsburgh, Pa.: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1962.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B.Implications of aptitude test research and psycholinguistic theory for foreign language teaching. International Journal of Psycholinguistics, 1973, 2, 5–14.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. Twenty-five years of research on foreign language aptitude. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.), Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1981.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. Studying individual differences in cognitive abilities through and beyond factor analysis. In Dillon, R. F. and Schmeck, R. R. (Eds.), Individual differences in cognition. New York: Academic Press (in press).Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M.Modern Language Aptitude Test, Form A, and Manual. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1959.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B., & Sapon, S. M.Elementary Modern Language Aptitude Test. New York: The Psychological Corporation, 1967.Google Scholar
Edwards, H. P., & Casserly, M. C.Research and evaluation of the French program: 1970–71 annual report. Report presented to the Ottawa separate schools. Ottawa, 1971.Google Scholar
Edwards, H. P., Wesche, M. B., & Smyth, F.Psychological predictors of success in second language training. Report of the independent study on the language training programmes of the Public Service of Canada, Volume 3. Ottawa: Government of Canada, 1976.Google Scholar
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E.Language aptitude, intelligence and second-language achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1965, 56, 191–199.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E.Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1972.Google Scholar
Genesee, F.The role of intelligence in second language learning. Language Learning, 1976, 26, 267–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F., & Hamayan, E.Individual differences in second language learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1980, 1, 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guilford, J. P.The nature of human intelligence. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
Hopkins, K. P., & Stanley, J. C.Educational and psychological measurement and evaluation. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1981.Google Scholar
Humphreys, L. G.The construct of general intelligence. Intelligence, 1979, 3, 105–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jakobovits, L. A.Foreign language learning: A psycholinguistic analysis of the issues. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1970.Google Scholar
Kaiser, H. F.A second generation Little Jiffy. Psychometrika, 1970, 35, 401–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matarazzo, J. D.Wechsler's measurement and appraisal of adult intelligence. Baltimore, Md.: Williams and Wilkins, 1972.Google Scholar
Montanelli, R. A., & Humphreys, L. G.Latent roots of random data correlation matrices with squared multiple correlations on the diagonal: A Monte Carlo study. Psychometrika, 1976, 41, 341–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oller, J. W.Language tests at school. London: Longman, 1979.Google Scholar
Oller, J. W., & Perkins, R.Research in language testing. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1980.Google Scholar
Petersen, C. R., & Al-Haik, A. R.The development of the Defense Language Aptitude Battery (DLAB). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1976, 36, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimsleur, P.Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery and Manual, Form S. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1966.Google Scholar
Pimsleur, P., Mosberg, L., & Morrison, A. L.Student factors in foreign language learning. Modern Language Journal, 1962, 46, 160–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pimsleur, P., Sundland, D. M., & McIntyre, R. D.Underachievement in foreign language learning. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 1964, 2, 113–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sattler, J. M.Assessment of children's intelligence. Philadelphia, Pa.: Saunders, 1974.Google Scholar
Schmid, J., and Leiman, J. M.The development of hierarchical factor solutions. Psychometrika, 1957, 22, 53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C.The thing of two factors. Psychological Review, 1914, 21, 101–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spearman, C.The abilities of man. New York: MacMillan, 1927.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L.Primary mental abilities. Chicago, III.: University of Chicago Press, 1938 (Psychometric monograph No. 1).Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, C. T.The Chicago Tests of Primary Mental Abilities, ages 11 to 17, and Manual. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1941.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, C. T.Primary Mental Abilities Test. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1962.Google Scholar
Vernon, P. E.The structure of human abilities. London: Methuen, 1960.Google Scholar
Vollmer, H. J., & Sang, F.Competing hypotheses about second language ability: A plea for caution. Berlin: Max Planck Institute, 1980.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D.Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, and Manual. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1949.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D.Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Manual. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1958.Google Scholar
Wesche, M. B. Language aptitude measures in streaming, matching students with methods, and diagnosis of learning problems. In Diller, K. C. (Ed.). Individual differences and universals in language learning aptitude. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House, 1981.Google Scholar