Matrix Tests

Author:

JOHN C. RAVEN

Degrees:

M.Sc

Affiliation:

Research Department, Royal Eastern Counties Institution, Colchester

Date:

January, 1940

Journal:

Mental health London

Citation:

Raven, J. C. (1940). Matrix Tests. Mental Health, 1(1), 10-18. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5092702/

Methods of Measuring Mental Ability

The simplest method of assessing mental ability is, of course, to ask questions, award marks and to compare the marks gained by one person with the marks gained by others. Its simplicity, range of application and possible refinements are the chief assets of this method and its chief defect is that the marking, however conscientiously it is carried out, remains arbitrary. The persons examined are really classified according to their ability to please the examiner and though this involves mental ability, training is also essential.

A more reliable method of assessing mental ability is to use a standard group of problems which persons of average ability, without previous training, are just able to solve at a given age and of such a nature that persons of more than average are able to solve them at an earlier age; while those of less than average ability if they solve them at all, succeed only at a later age. Such a series of problems, ea of which can be marked simply as solved or unsolved, provides a means to assess a person’s mental development at any given age and thence the rate at which evment is taking place. This method leads naturally to the conception of ages” and “intelligence quotients”. It has the merit of showing teexen which a bright young child and an older duller child are mentally similar and, at the same time, the way in which they are fundamentally different. rovi e a Pf is neither deliberately coached nor abnormally prevented from acquiring general information, mental age increases steadily with chronological age intelligence quotient remains relatively constant throughout life. therefore considered a means of measuring innate ability. It has two serious 1 advantages. The first is that one can give no satisfactory definition measured. The second is that one can never be sure that testees have had equal opportunities for acquiring the necessary general information. The tings o everyday life vary from place to place and so do language and educational aci i ies.

To overcome the difficulty the problems used have been made numerous an varied, but whilst this decreases the effect of any one unsuitable test it increases the possibility of unsuitable tests occurring and obscures their existence. For” t is reason other methods of measuring mental ability are used. Some tests em o y a period of practice before the marked test begins, other tests are designed to e concerned with things with which every person, in the author’s opinion, should be familiar, or, on the contrary, with material which no one is likely to have encountered. To ensure that the ability measured can be clearly defined some tests are made entirely verbal, others non-verbal; some are designed to measure the rate of mental work, others measure only the accuracy of thinking.

Each method has its advantages and limitations. The superintendent of an institution finds mental ages convenient when grouping defectives for supervision. A teacher finds tests of school attainments useful when placing scholars in suitable classes. When individuals are to be selected for special training or occupation, tests of innate ability and specific aptitude are needed. But a test is useful only in so far as its reliability is known and the ability it measures is definable.

Tests of Eduction

The work of Spearman (1927) may appear an abstract statistical controversy concerning g and s but his great contribution to practical mental testing is his clear enunciation of the laws of “eduction” or “noegenesis”. He has shown that the whole qualitative development of creative mental activity is a continuous process of?

1. Apprehending the characters of experience,

2. Educing relations between the characters apprehended, and

3. The creation of correlates bearing specific relationships to experienced characters.

The more mental activity is studied, the more clearly these three phases of eduction, interacting one upon the other, are seen to be the characteristic qualities experienced in all mental processes which are in any way ” rational ” original “adjustive”, or, in ordinary language, intelligent, as distinct from those which are purely “instinctive”, “habitual”, “reproductive”; in other words, repetitive. It follows that what is needed is a good test of eduction and good tests of repetitive ability.

To determine the best tests of eduction, testees have been trained to educe relations of different complexity (Spearman, 1927). The causes of failure and conditions of success have been studied. It has been shown that verbal (Stephenson, 1931) and performance tests (Alexander, 1935) are influenced by processes other than eduction while visually presented meaningless figures provide the most satisfactory means of estimating a person’s innate eductive ability. Perceptual tests, such as those shown in Figs. 1 to 4, may appear useless artistic stunts or obscure mathematical problems but, upon investigation, success in solving them is found to depend upon the ability for logical thought which is the essential factor in all intelligent conduct.

According to the type of problem employed and the method of testing adopted such tests can be used to measure either the rate or the accuracy of eduction. Progressive Matrices is a series of such tests designed to measure the accuracy of eduction.

Progressive Matrices

Progressive Matrices consists of sixty perceptually presented tests. Each test consists of a design or ” matrix ” from which part has been removed. The testee has to examine the matrix and decide which of the pieces given below is the right one to complete the matrix. Twelve tests complete a Set and there are five Sets, lettered A to E. Each Set develops a different theme. The initial tests in each Set are easy so as to be self evident and these are followed by tests of increasing difficulty; the order in which they are presented provides the necessary training.

Three forms of Progressive Matrices are in use. In the published form the tests are printed in black on white paper in a booklet. This is intended for use with ordinary people over six years old. The testee indicates his choice by pointing to the piece so that the psychologist can record his choice, or by writing down the number of the piece he selects on a scoring form.

For young children the Board Form of the test is used.j This consists of Sets A and B only. Each Set is in an attractive box and each test, drawn in bright colours, is in a separate folder. The matrix is on the upper part of the folder and has a real gap to be filled, the ” bits ” are in the lower part of the folder and the child picks them out and puts them into the gap. Seeing the result of his choice trains the child much better than verbal instructions. To ensure that colour discrimination does not affect success, dark patterns are used on a light ground. * H. K. Lewis & Co. Ltd., London. (Sets A, B, C, D and E.) t Board Form of Sets A and B, obtainable from the Research Dept., Royal Eastern Counties Institution, Colchester.

<?> <?> Example 1 i> ffl ?D Example 2 O-o Q> @ 0 Im Aa A A Example 3 Za) A A Example 4 From article published in Brit. Journal Med. Psychol., 1936

To prevent manipulation, the gap and the insets are asymmetrical. The advantage of the Board Form of the test is that it is almost irresistible to young children. The disadvantage is that it is difficult to make and therefore expensive. For special cases a portfolio form of the test is used. In this form the black and white prints are cut out and mounted on grey paper. The testee indicates his choice by any gesture of which he is capable, the psychologist recording his choice.

The procedure is simple. All that is required is a quiet room, a table at which the testee can sit comfortably, the most suitable form of the test, and a skilled and experienced psychologist. The psychologist watches the testee build up a system of thought under standard conditions, notes the degree to which he is successful and the nature of his errors, guides his attention with as little comment as possible, and ensures that errors, when they occur, are genuine failures of eductive ability. An average child of three is well able to solve the initial problems of Set A and the complete series of sixty problems presents difficulty to quite able adults. The whole range of eductive ability is covered and from the results the psychologist can class any testee according to where his score falls on a percentile scale. The reliability of the testee’s total score is indicated by the scores on the component Sets; the time taken and the nature of the testee’s errors are indicative of temperamental and emotional traits.

Under the guidance of an experienced psychologist one of these forms of the test can be used with almost any testee. It has been used with normal children from three to fourteen years old, with mentally defective children and physically defective children including those with partial sight. Being independent of language, satisfactory results have been obtained from deaf children and foreign children (Spanish refugees). It is equally applicable to adults.* An embossed form of Matrix Test for use with blind subjects could be prepared. For clinical purposes the test has distinct advantages. So little need be said or done that children’s tears and antagonisms are circumvented. The testee finds himself able to succeed and the co-operation of even psychotic patients is secured. * Writing in Mental Welfare (April 1939) Professor Burt says: ” Of those (intelligence tests for adults) at present available none is wholly satisfactory.” Matrix Tests, which are, of course, “judgment ” tests, have been given to only 150 adults. The results, however, have been uniformly satisfactory. Adults have not been ” resentful ” or ” embarrassed ” by any resemblance between the test and school examinations. Their comments were: “I’m doing these all right” (Feeble-minded adult); “They make you think, don’t they?” (Average adult); “You’ve got me beat this time ” (Sergeant-major); ” I’m staking on number six ” (Officer); ” What is the answer to E 8 ? ” (Student); ” What I like is the way your test grips me ” (Psycho-analyst); ” I’m sorry. I can’t say how long 1 took. I was interrupted and did the last few in my bath ” (a lady). A solicitor’s opinion was that they were ” problems of pure logic “. An artist considered them mainly questions of ” good design “. Both obtained high scores but while the solicitor apparently based his arguments on what Burt describes as ” the explicit step by step inference of the logician the artist apprehended the solution by what Burt describes as a ” complex synthetic activity, comparable to what is popularly described as ‘ intuition ‘, whereby we implicitly comprehend the intelligible character of a whole, without explicitly analysing it into its component parts or distinctly formulating their relations.” Testees frequently perceive a matrix of relations as a whole without clearly perceiving that explicit relations exist between the individual figures. It was for this reason that the writer liked the name ” Matrix Test “. PROGRESSIVE MATRICES In the form of boards for little children

Score Comparisons

For experimental work sixty-five problems were used. In Table I the mean scores for interesting groups of adults and children are shown. The scores of the university students showed little correlation with their individual scholastic attainments, but the difference between the mean score for the group of students and the mean score for the group of soldiers is significant. The Headquarter Staff of a regular Infantry Battalion was tested. The scores are approximately wnat might be expected from a group of average adults and there appears to be little growth of eductive ability after the age of thirteen. There is, however, a characteristic difference between the average score for a child of thirteen years and that of a child ?f eight years. Usually during its ninth year a child begins to solve problems similar to those shown in Figs. 3 and 4 in which it is necessary to reason by analogy. Apparently higher thought processes begin to mature, and the fact, that children over nine years need problems which are unsuitable for children under eight years of age made the construction of a continuous series of tests extremely difficult.

Table I

	University Students	Soldiers	Children 13-14 years	Children 8-9 years	Feeble-minded adults
No. tested.	24	44	178	53	25
Mean score.	54-3	44-2	42-5	20-6	19-8
Standard Deviation.	4-7	9-6	10-3	7-0	5-2

The average score for a group of high-grade feeble-minded adults is approximately equal to the score of the average child of eight years. If the simple ament is given time, and especially if he is allowed to work by trial and error, he may, like the average child of eight years or less, acquire skill in solving problems similar to those shown in Figs. 1 and 2, but in solving problems of the type shown in Figs. 3 and 4, where it is necessary to reason by analogy, the ament remains, throughout life, characteristically incompetent. The thought processes which normally begin to appear during the ninth year fail to mature and it is probably just the inability to reason by analogy which renders the majority of mentally defective adults incapable of managing themselves and their own affairs ” and mentally retarded children ‘ incapable of receiving proper benefit from instruction in ordinary schools . Boys attending London schools for the mentally defective were tested. The mean standard score for those making no progress in school work was found to be ?2’5a-*, while the mean standard score for those who were making progress was ?1 ? 5cr. Some boys over thirteen years of age, although seriously retarded in school attainments, obtained relatively normal Matrix Test scores and were clearly able to reason by analogy. It was interesting to find that the percentage of boys able to reason by analogy before leaving the school agreed with the percentage of boys “who had retained regular employment after leaving the school. r is simply a statistical unit of measurement; + if above normal, ? if below normal.

Physically defective children were tested. They were first classified according to the nature of their ailment and then sub-classified according to whether their teachers considered them normal in school work, backward due to loss of schooling or retarded due to mental dullness. The results are shown in Table II. The teacher’s ratings and the test scores both show that the association of mental dullness with congenital abnormalities is greater than its association with acquired diseases even when neurological abnormalities of whatever origin are considered as a separate class. The result is interesting because it shows the agreement between the test scores, the teacher’s ratings, and the findings of other investigators (Dawson, 1931). The teacher’s ratings show a high incidence of backward and dull children, but the mean standard score for the whole group is, as it should be, just normal. The mean score for the children classified as mentally dull is distinctly below normal but the mean score for those considered backward but not dull suggests that, as a group, they are even slightly brighter than those considered normal in school work. These findings are probably correct; in general a backward child has to be brighter than a child of average attainments if it is to impress the teacher that it is backward but not dull, and the test showed this. No child classified as backward obtained a test score significantly below normal. On the other hand one child classified as dull obtained a score of+2o*and enquiries showed that the child was genuinely intelligent, but extremely backward.

Table II Physically Defective Children

(empty cell)	Normal.	Backward.	Dull.	Total.	Mean score.
Intercurrent Disease	32	9	2	43	+0.35
Neurological Conditions	15	2	6	43	+0.1
Congenital Abnormalities	15	4	6	25	+0.05
Total	62	15	14	91	—
Mean Standard score	+0.4	+0.5	-1.0	—	+0.2

A revised and standardized series of sixty matrices and the Terman Merrill Revision of the Binet Scale was given to 131 children referred to a child guidance clinic; 57 were sent for examination before emigration and 74 were referred to the clinic on account of psychological difficulties. The children examined before emigration came from all parts of the British Isles and were chiefly orphans of good average mental ability. The children referred on account of psychological difficulties contained eighteen cases of school failure, twenty-four cases of anti-social conduct, twenty-four cases of unsatisfactory habits such as enuresis, and eight cases of emotional abnormalities, fears, etc.

For comparative purposes Terman IQs and Matrix Test scores were each converted into percentile ratings. According to both scales the group contained a rather low percentage of children of average ability, and rather high percentages of exceptionally dull and exceptionally bright children.

The correlation between the two test ratings is shown in Table III. There is considerable agreement between Terman and Matrix Test classifications, but in eight cases the ratings differ by more than one class. The case notes of these eight children are striking.

Three children obtained Terman IQs of over 130 but only average Matrix Test scores. All three had attended secondary schools, had proved failures, and had reacted by anti-social behaviour. All three showed exceptional verbal fluency.

One child, examined before emigration, obtained a Terman I.Q. of 96, but from his Matrix Test score he appeared intellectually defective. Unfortunately no case notes are available.

The remaining four cases were all children under 10| years of age who were about to emigrate. Their Matrix Test scores indicated that they were of superior mental ability but their Terman IQs ranged from 90 to 109. One child had recently come from Cornwall, another from Scotland while a third was Irish. All four were slow in following instructions and concerning one child the writer received these notes. His

“mother hates him and told me that she would do anything to get rid of him … and hoped to have him classed as subnormal mentally so that she might have him put away permanently. She tried to produce this condition in him by keeping him shut up in a bedroom. He was not allowed to go to school … any normal child subjected to the treatment this boy has received would show the effects of it.”

I.Qs. 128 and over 112 to 127 89 to 111 73 to 88 72 or less Matrix Percentile Class.* D C B Totals. Totals 14 16 52 30 19 131

A testee’s ability is estimated by comparing his score on the Matrix Tests with the scores obtained by other testees of the same age. Thus he can be classed as:

1. Class A. Intellectually superior if his score exceeds that of 95 per cent, of the testees of his own age group.

2. Class B Definitely above average if his score exceeds that of 75 per cent.

3. Class C Average ability if his score lies between that obtained by 25 to 75 per cent.

4. Clss D Definitely below average if his score is exceeded by 75 per cent, of testees o is age group.

5. Class t Intellectually defective if his score is exceeded by 95 per cent.

Commentary

To meet the difficulties and shortcomings experienced when using other mental tests a series of Progressive Matrices has been prepared and standardized. It is independent of language and training but is in no sense a ” performance test It measures educative ability which is definable and the essential creative factor in intelligent conduct.

The scores of testees have been shown to differentiate children and adults into five classes according to whether a person is intellectually defective, dull, normal, bright or of superior intellectual ability. The standard series fails to differentiate between individuals within these groups but the efficient range of each matrix is known (Raven, 1939) and it is a simple matter to design further series of matrices which can be used to differentiate between persons of approximately equal ability and to measure either the rate or the clearness of eduction.

The test provides a reliable means of differentiating between backwardness due to disorganized schooling and backwardness due to mental impairment.

An interesting finding during the experimental work merits further investigation. The scores of feeble-minded adults resemble those of a child of eight years or less, but remain characteristically unlike those of an average person of more than nine years. Psychologically they may be described as intellectually defective. “Intellectual defect” can be diagnosed directly from test results and may be defined as the permanent inability to form comparisons and reason by analogy. It does not necessarily occur in all persons certified as mentally defective, but it is probably the chief cause of social failure. “Intellectual defect” may exist in persons who, from good repetitive ability, make stable social adjustments. In such cases the certification of mental defect would be unwarranted, but the diagnosis of intellectual defect would be justified.

A somewhat similar state of affairs is found to exist at the opposite extreme of ability. A certain superficial brightness and verbal fluency appears to account for a high Terman Merrill I.Q. and for early school success, but superior intellectual as well as repetitive ability appears essential if scholastic success and social stability are to be maintained.

Matrix Tests have been designed in accordance with psychological principles. Even if these principles are disputed, the results show that in practice the tests work as they should; and this, in the end, is what matters.

The writer is indebted to Dr. L. S. Penrose and Dr LG Fildes for much helpful assistance and criticism. Thanks are also due to the Child Guidance Council. The work was carried out under the auspices of the Medical Research Council and the Darwin Trust.

Copyrights:

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits non-commercial use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

REFERENCES

1. Alexander, W. P., 1935. “Intelligence, Concrete and Abstract.” Brit. J. Psychol. Monog. Suppl., No. 19. Dawson, S., 1931.

2. “Intelligence and Disease.” Spe. Rep. Ser., Med. Res. Coun., London, No. 182. H.M. Stationery Office. Raven, J. C., 1939.

3. “The R.E.C.I. Research Series of Perceptual Tests; An experimental survey.” Brit. J. Med. Psychol., XVIII, 1. Spearman, C., 1927.

4. The Nature of Intelligence and Principles of Cognition. Macmillan & Co., Stephenson, W., 1931.

5. “Tetrad differences for verbal and non-verbal subtests.” Amer. JEduc. Psychol. 22.

Disclaimer

The historical material in this project falls into one of three categories for clearances and permissions:

1. Material currently under copyright, made available with a Creative Commons license chosen by the publisher.

2. Material that is in the public domain

3. Material identified by the Welcome Trust as an Orphan Work, made available with a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

While we are in the process of adding metadata to the articles, please check the article at its original source for specific copyrights.

See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/about/scanning/