What is rpm in psychology?

Raven's Progressive Matrices (often referred to simply as Raven's Matrices) or RPM is a non-verbal test typically used to measure general human intelligence and abstract reasoning and is regarded as a non-verbal estimate of fluid intelligence.[1] It is one of the most common tests administered to both groups and individuals ranging from 5-year-olds to the elderly.[2] It comprises 60 multiple choice questions, listed in order of increasing difficulty.[2] This format is designed to measure the test taker's reasoning ability, the eductive ("meaning-making") component of Spearman's g (g is often referred to as general intelligence).

The tests were originally developed by John C. Raven in 1936.[3] In each test item, the subject is asked to identify the missing element that completes a pattern. Many patterns are presented in the form of a 6×6, 4×4, 3×3, or 2×2 matrix, giving the test its name.[4]

The questions consist of visual geometric design with a missing piece, with six to eight choices that fill in the piece.[5]

Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary tests were originally developed for use in research into the genetic and environmental origins of cognitive ability. Raven thought that the tests commonly in use at that time were cumbersome to administer and the results difficult to interpret. Accordingly, he set about developing simple measures of the two main components of Spearman's g: the ability to think clearly and make sense of complexity (known as eductive ability) and the ability to store and reproduce information (known as reproductive ability).

Raven's tests of both were developed with the aid of what later became known as item response theory.

Raven first published his Progressive Matrices in the United Kingdom in 1938. His three sons established Scotland-based test publisher J C Raven Ltd. in 1972. In 2004, Harcourt Assessment, Inc. a division of Harcourt Education, acquired J C Raven Ltd. Harcourt was later acquired by Pearson PLC.

The Matrices are available in three different forms for participants of different ability:

In addition, "parallel" forms of the standard and coloured progressive matrices were published in 1998. This was to address the problem of the Raven's Matrices being too well known in the general population. Items in the parallel tests have been constructed so that average solution rates to each question are identical for the classic and parallel versions. A revised version of the RSPM – the Standard Progressive Matrices Plus – was published at the same time. This was based on the "parallel" version but, although the test was the same length, it had more difficult items in order to restore the test's ability to differentiate among more able adolescents and young adults that the original RSPM had when it was first published. This new test, developed with the aid of better sampling arrangements and developments in the procedures available to implement the item response theory, has turned out to have exemplary test properties.[7]

The tests were initially developed for research purposes. Because of their independence of language and reading and writing skills, and the simplicity of their use and interpretation, they quickly found widespread practical application. For example, all entrants to the British armed forces from 1942 onwards took a twenty-minute version of the RSPM, and potential officers took a specially adapted version as part of British War Office Selection Boards. The routine administration of what became the Standard Progressive Matrices to all entrants (conscripts) to many military services throughout the world (including the Soviet Union) continued at least until the present century. It was by bringing together these data that James R. Flynn was able to place the intergenerational increase in scores beyond reasonable doubt.[8] Flynn's path-breaking publications on IQ gains around the world have led to the phenomenon of the gains being known as the Flynn effect. Among Robert L. Thorndike[9] and other researchers who preceded Flynn in finding evidence of IQ score gains was John Raven,[10] reporting on studies with the RPM.

A 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with Asperger syndrome, a high-functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher than other individuals on Raven's tests.[11] Another 2007 study provided evidence that individuals with classic autism, a low-functioning autism spectrum disorder, score higher in Raven's tests than in Wechsler tests. In addition, the individuals with classic autism were providing correct answers to the Raven's test in less time than individuals without autism, although erring as often.[12][13]

The high IQ societies Intertel and the International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE) accept the RAPM as a qualification for admission,[14][15] and so does the International High IQ Society.[16] The Triple Nine Society used to accept the Advanced Progressive Matrices as one of their admission tests. They still accept a raw score of at least 35 out of 36 on Set II of the RAPM if scored before April 2014.[17]

Raven's Progressive Matrices (often referred to simply as Raven's Matrices) or RPM is a non-verbal test typically used to measure general human intelligence and abstract reasoning and is regarded as a non-verbal estimate of fluid intelligence.

The reasonable person model (RPM) is a psychological framework which argues that people are at their best when their informational needs are met. Positing that unreasonableness is not a human trait, but rather the result of environment (context and circumstances), the RPM attempts to define the environments/actions that foster reasonableness, defining three key areas that assist with this: model building, being effective, and meaningful action.

The RPM was developed by environmental psychologists Stephen and Rachel Kaplan and integrates principles from environmental, cognitive, and evolutionary psychology.

The RPM is a psychological framework that posits human functioning is improved when the following three domains of informational needs are met:[1]

RPM states that an environment or context supportive of informational needs can foster reasonable behavior that will "bring out the best in people".[1]

The use of the term reasonable in RPM has commonalities and differences with the colloquial use of the word. In RPM, reasonableness refers to the ways in which "one would hope people behave".[2] The concept is partially conveyed by what it is not, unreasonable states such as incivility, aggression, irritability and impatience. Examples may also include "...demanding fairness for oneself while denying it to others, displaying intolerance and disrespect for others, willingness to harm or kill because of differences in beliefs, and attempting to extract the earth's resources for personal gain without regard for the needs of future generations".[3]

The RPM may be viewed as a contrary theory to rational man theory (also known as Homo Economicus) or related rational choice theory, in that it describes a landscape of mutual dependencies, such as the manner in which people treat one another. RPM assumes that information is often misunderstood, overwhelming, and unavailable. It also assumes that people are not interested in maximizing personal gain, but rather satisficing. RPM further asserts that people often have multiple concerns which cannot be reduced to a single monetary value.[4]

Reasonableness shares some themes with subjective well-being, including emphasis on positive/negative affect and quality of life. However, whereas SWB addresses self-directed feelings, RPM also considers the contexts that foster civil behavior and improve relationships between people.[5]

The world, as William James described it, is a "blooming buzzing confusion".[6] Mental models are neural structures, made of neurons and synapses, that organize our experiences into a usable form and allow us to

Mental models are built through repetition, variation, and association. Experiencing something multiple times is said to lead to an internal representation.[9] Experiencing sequences of things associates our internal representations in a mental map according to how those things occur in reality. Donald Hebb's rule put it as: Things that fire together, wire together.[10]

This refers to the skills needed over and above basic knowledge to accomplish goals and refers to a state of mind that is capable of attending to and managing information. Lack of clearheadedness is described within attention restoration theory, which states there are two attentional systems: one for attending to naturally fascinating stimuli and another that allows us to intentionally direct our attention.[11] Richard Louv's notion of nature deficit disorder describes some of the symptoms associated with a younger generation who do not spend time outdoors.[12]

RPM's third domain argues that people have a desire to use their knowledge and skills to make a difference. Fewer people have work that is directly connected to their survival yet the evolutionary desire to make a difference remains. The inability to do so can lead to learned helplessness and feeling hopeless and alone in the face of seemingly insurmountable challenges. Such a state is not amenable to effective human functioning, yet there continues to be, as Kaplan describes, a "pervasive malaise of helplessness".[2] Goldschmidt described what he termed The Human Career as: one in which humans are primarily seeking the respect of others".[13] It is argued that, in participatory contexts, the most effective strategies are ones that help people feel like they can make a difference.[14]

RPM has been applied to the following domains: