Cognitive Flexibility: Concepts, Issues and Assessment

Dear Colleagues,

Despite substantial evidence of the link between an individual’s intelligence and successful life outcomes, questions about what defines intelligence have remained the focus of heated ongoing dispute. The most common approach to understanding intelligence has been to investigate what performance on tests of intellect is and is not associated with. This psychometric approach, based on correlations and factor analysis, is widely used to validate tests, constructs, and theories. It is, however, deficient. It turns out that knowing what intelligence tests do and do not correlate with does not actually tell us much about its basis and the processes underlying it. This is not a new insight, either. It has long been recognized that the psychometric approach is incomplete without a consideration of process-oriented accounts (Borsboom et al., 2003; Cronbach, 1957; van der Maas et al., 2017).

In practice, it is primarily between-person models that inform theory and serve as the basis of psychological assessments. A common (but inadequate) attempt to address these limitations is to challenge the validity or sufficiency of the constructs that intelligence tests aim to measure. This is exemplified by the familiar laments that intelligence tests are too narrow, too broad, and simply not fit for purpose. Concepts such as “multiple intelligences”, “emotional intelligence”, and “grit” have garnered considerable attention as alternative candidate determinants of individual differences in the pathway to success. Their popularity is in no small part due to them being seen as capabilities that compensate for perceived shortcomings in cognitive abilities. However, such an approach tackles the symptom rather than addressing the root cause. The crux of the methodological problem is that the predominant use of correlations in a between-person account fails to directly specify the mechanisms and processes responsible for intelligent behavior within an individual across different circumstances and over time.

Critically, in spite of the dominance of the between-person account, the conceptualization of intelligence proposed by most theories, and what most researchers aspire to measure, is fundamentally directed at within-person processes that we argue underpin aspects of intelligence that can be thought of as cognitive flexibility. Our working definition is that cognitive flexibility determines how a person successfully adapts to the changing demands of a dynamic environment over time, and therefore, understanding within-person processes is critical.

We are interested in papers that:

1. Explicate methodological principles necessary for within-individual investigations of cognitive flexibility and its processes;
2. Consider ways to assess cognitive flexibility dynamically, in comparison to or in contrast with conventional psychometric intelligence, working memory, and other related constructs and approaches;
3. Reflect on the evidence for the malleability and developmental trajectory of cognitive flexibility (e.g., cognitive training, as a precursor to creativity or other forms of adaptability);
4. Explore notions of cognitive flexibility from different disciplines, such as neuroscience (e.g., in terms of plasticity), education, and organizational studies.

Borsboom, D., Mellenbergh, G. J., & van Heerden, J. (2003). The theoretical status of latent variables. Psychological Review, 110(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.110.2.203

Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043943

van der Maas, H., Kan, K., Marsman, M., & Stevenson, C. E. (2017). Network models for cognitive development and intelligence. Journal of Intelligence, 5(16), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5020016

Please note that the “Planned Papers” Section on the webpage does not imply that these papers will eventually be accepted; all manuscripts will be subject to the journal’s normal and rigorous peer review process.

Prof. Dr. Damian P. Birney
Prof. Dr. Jens F. Beckmann
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Intelligence is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• intelligence
• cognitive flexibility
• psychological assessments
• dynamic testing