Skip to content
PaperFren

Development

Do different types of reasoning predict school grades?

Gómez-Veiga I, Vila Chaves JO, Duque G, et al. · Frontiers in psychology · 2018

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Verbal deductive reasoning is a stronger predictor of overall high school grades than visual fluid intelligence.

Study at a glance

Design
Cross-sectional — One-session reasoning/intelligence battery linked to school grades
N
N=51 · 19 girls, 32 boys aged 15.3–17.7 years
Population
Secondary-school science students
Outcome
Variance in math and non-math grades explained by reasoning measures

Structured fields used in claim comparison tables when every cited study has a complete layer.

Key findings

Together, the reasoning and intelligence assessments accounted for 33% of the variance in math grades, whereas deductive reasoning alone was the main predictor of 28% of the variance in non-math grades. On the Cognitive Reflection Test, students struggled heavily, producing 58% incorrect intuitive answers and only 33% correct ones. Additionally, those who gave intuitive errors greatly underestimated the test's difficulty, predicting that 76% of their peers would solve the problems correctly.

Methodology

Researchers evaluated 51 science students, specifically 19 girls and 32 boys aged between 15.3 and 17.7 years. They administered several reasoning assessments: the Cognitive Reflection Test, a Deductive Reasoning Test, and Raven's Progressive Matrices Test. They then retrieved the participants' school grades across seven basic subjects to compute separate mathematics and non-mathematics achievement averages.

Limitations

Because this study is correlational, it cannot establish a causal link between reasoning performance and school grades. The tiny sample size of only 51 science students from a single public high school restricts the generalizability of these findings to other educational settings or student majors. Finally, because the academic scores were based on school-issued grades rather than standardized tests, they are vulnerable to subjective evaluation biases from individual instructors.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsFluid Intelligenceconcept

    In older secondary school science students, visual fluid intelligence may play a smaller role in predicting overall academic grades compared to verbal deductive reasoning.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

  • SupportsFluid Intelligenceconcept

    There is an apparent tension regarding the predictive strength of fluid intelligence on school performance: visual fluid intelligence is a weaker predictor of grades than verbal reasoning in older secondary school science students, whereas general fluid intelligence is a direct and highly robust predictor of grades in primary school children.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Open questions

Tensions this paper is part of

From concept pages' “where studies disagree.” Disagreement means the same question; scope means different assays, populations, or outcomes.

  • Scope difference — different assays, populations, or outcomes

    There is an apparent tension regarding the predictive strength of fluid intelligence on school performance: visual fluid intelligence is a weaker predictor of grades than verbal reasoning in older secondary school science students, whereas general fluid intelligence is a direct and highly robust predictor of grades in primary school children.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.