Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gill, R.
Right arrow Articles by Keats, D. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Elements of Intellectual Competence

Judgments by Australian and Malay University Students

Russel Gill

Macquarie University

Daphne M. Keats

University of Newcastle

Australian and Malay University students judged the relative importance of various forms of intellectual competence. The two groups agreed on the importance of four general areas of competence, giving the top two rankings to "mental abilities" (e.g., problem-solving) and "knowledge" (i.e., amount known), and ranking "skills" (e.g., speaking ability) and `arousal" (e.g., keenness) as less important. Disagreement between the groups was more marked in the ranking of specific mental abilities, specific skills, and characteristics of style. Malays, for example, placed more emphasis on social and practical skills, whereas the Australians rated more highly the academic skills, speaking, reading, and writing. Malays also placed greater emphasis on speed and creativity, while Australians stressed ability to adapt to new events. The study suggests some cultural bases for these differences and some implications for psychological testing with Malays.

Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 11, No. 2, 233-243 (1980)
DOI: 10.1177/0022022180112007
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 International Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentHome page
E. L. Grigorenko, P. W. Geissler, R. Prince, F. Okatcha, C. Nokes, D. A. Kenny, D. A. Bundy, and R. J. Sternberg
The organisation of Luo conceptions of intelligence: A study of implicit theories in a Kenyan village
International Journal of Behavioral Development, July 1, 2001; 25(4): 367 - 378.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Cross-Cultural ResearchHome page
D. M. Keats
Cross-Cultural Studies in Child Development in Asian Contexts
Cross-Cultural Research, November 1, 2000; 34(4): 339 - 350.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Psychology Developing SocietiesHome page
M. J. Chen
Chinese and Australian Concepts of Intelligence
Psychology Developing Societies, September 1, 1994; 6(2): 103 - 117.
[Abstract] [PDF]