Psychological Aspects
and Measurement of
John F. Rauthmann
Leopold-Franzens University of Innsbruck, Austria
24.05.2010, Helsinki (Finland)
Content
[1] What is Systems Intelligence (SI)?
SI by Hämäläinen and Saarinen (2004, 2006, 2008)
[2] How conceptualize SI psychologically?
Proposing a psychological perspective on SI
[3] How measure SI psychologically?
Proposing a scale to measure Trait-SI
[4] What to do with a psychological perspective on SI?
Discussion of prospects with a psychological perspective on SI
1
What is
Systems Intelligence?
Perception-SI: Seeing oneself in the system
► Seeing oneself, one’s roles, and one’s behaviour in a system
► Seeing through the eyes of others
► Contextual awareness
Cognition-SI: Thinking systems intelligently
► Identifying and envisioning productive ways of behaviour for oneself in a system
► Self- and meta-reflection
► Deep thoughts
Action-SI: Managing and sustaining systems intelligent behaviour
► Exercising productive ways of behaviour in a system
► Continuing and fostering systems intelligent behaviour in the long run
2
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
What is Systems Intelligence psychologically?
Different construct types in personality psychology:
 Traits
 Motives
 Abilities and competencies
 Styles
► Systems Intelligence can be conceptualized differently within personality psychology.
► For now: Ability-SI and Trait-SI
3
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: Conceptualizing SI as an intelligence
Four basic questions:
(1)
What is “intelligence”?
(2)
Which “intelligences” are there?
(3)
How can SI be conceptualized as an “intelligence”?
(4)
Is SI an “intelligence”?
4
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: What is “intelligence”?
► Many different definitions of “intelligence” within psychology
► No clear consensus on what exactly “intelligence” is
Neisser et al. (1998, p. 77):

Understanding complex ideas

Adapting flexibly to the environment

Learning from experiences

Engaging into various forms of reasoning

Overcoming obstacles by taking thought
5
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: Which “intelligences” are there?
► Maybe not be just one “intelligence”, but in fact many
► No clear consensus on how many “intelligences” there are and which they are
Common intelligences:

Emotional Intelligence

Social Intelligence

Practical Intelligence

Successful Intelligence

Gardner’s multiple intelligences
6
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: How can SI be conceptualized as an intelligence?
► Different conceptualizations of “intelligence” in psychological literature
► No clear consensus on the structure of “intelligence”
Common intelligence models:

Spearman: Two factor theory (g and s)

Thurstone: Primary mental abilities (v, w, n, s, m, p, r/i)

Cattell: Fluid and crystallised intelligence

Guilford: Structure of intellect

Carroll: Three stratum theory
7
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: How can SI be conceptualized as an intelligence?
Stratum III (General):
General intelligence factor (g-factor)
Stratum II (Broad):
Fluid intelligence, crystallised intelligence,
general memory and learning,
broad visual perception, broad auditory perception,
broad retrieval ability, broad cognitive speediness and processing speed
Stratum I (Narrow):
69 narrow abilities, each related to a specific Stratum II domain
Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities (CHC theory)
Amalgamation of two similar theories about the content and structure of human cognitive abilities
Gf-Gc theory (Cattell, 1941; Horn 1965) + Three Stratum Theory (Carroll, 1993)
8
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: How can SI be conceptualized as an intelligence?
Implications of intelligence research for SI:

Distinction between intra- and interpersonal aspects

Different ability domains: cognition, affect/emotion – motivation – regulation, behavior

Distinctions between contents, operations, and outputs

Hierarchical structure of SI (g- and s-factors) with different strata
►
SI as a multidimensional and multifaceted construct
►
SI as incorporating different intelligence aspects (e.g., creativity, meta-cognitive components, etc.)
9
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: How can SI be conceptualized as an intelligence?
Stratum I:
Global undifferentiated SI-factor
g
Stratum II:
Fluid and crystallised global SI-factors
Stratum III:
Specialized SI-abilities
gf
s1
s2
gc
s3
s4
s5
s6
s7
s8
10
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Ability-SI: Is SI an “intelligence”?
Gardner’s eight criteria for an “intelligence”:
Gardner’s intelligence criteria
Currently met by SI?
Specialised brain areas

Exceptional individuals

Set of core operations
()
Distinctive development history

Evolutionary history and evolutionary plausibility
()
Support from experimental psychological tasks

Psychometric findings
Susceptibility to encoding in a symbol system
()

11
8
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Trait-SI: Conceptualizing SI as a trait
Four basic questions:
(1)
What is a “trait”?
(2)
Which debates revolving around traits are there in personality psychology?
(3)
How can SI be conceptualized as a “trait”?
(4)
How should we measure Trait-SI?
12
4
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Trait-SI: What is a “trait”?
Trait:

Enduring, stable, consistent

General description

Mental and/or behavioral characteristics
State:
Unstable, momentary, inconsistent
► Personality psychology aims at assessing (measuring) stable traits, not states.
13
4
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Trait-SI: Which debates are (were) there in personality psychology?
Four interrelated controversies:

Trait vs. state

Person vs. Situation

Structure vs. Process

Nomothetic vs. Idiographic
Implications:
Different perspectives on the human condition or how we think, feel, and act in situations
“False” dichotomisation of person vs. situation variables (cf. interactional systems)
14
4
Controversy
Trait vs.
State
Person vs.
Situation
Structure vs.
Process
Nomothetic vs.
Idiographic
Positions
Trait:

stable, long-term, enduring characteristics that describe people in general

mostly seen as (more or less central) person characteristics
State:

unstable, short-term, momentary conditions of people that can also be atypical for them

mostly seen as (more or less random) fluctuations
Person:

existence and meaningfulness of traits and personality

behavioural consistency (stability)

dominance of traits in behaviour (internal determinism)
Situation:

non-existence and non-meaningfulness of traits and personality

behavioural inconsistency (instability)

dominance of situations in behaviour (external determinism)
Structure:

traits as descriptive elements or fixed dimensions that are an accumulation of the reliable
elements of states or within-person variability

states as capricious or error and thus neglected (or avaraged out)
Process / Dynamics:

traits as dynamic processes that also integrate states and within-person variability over different
situations and time

states as part of a dispositional density distribution of a trait dimension (with mean, standard
deviation, skewness, and kurtosis)
Nomothetic:

general approach to individuals differing in certain parameters

interindividual viewing point  between-person variability
Idiographic:

person-centred approach to a unique individual

intraindividual viewing point  within-person variability and stability
15
4
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Trait-SI: How can SI be conceptualized as a “trait”?
Different highlighted aspects:

Intertwinement of “person” and “situation”

Emphasis on processes / dynamics and (emergent) structures
Implications:

Focus on person and context variables

Systemic-synergetic perspective on personality and traits

Flexible usage of different paradigms and methodology

Assessment of individual differences in SI
16
4
A psychological
conceptualization of SI
Trait-SI: How measure SI?
Different types of types of data:
Type
Data
Examples

L-data
assessment through
others



Q-data
subjective self-report
and self-evaluation



T-data
objectives measures


Best for
peer-ratings
behavioural observation (B-data)
videotaping and audio recording
autobiography, life history, CV, handwritings, etc.
Trait-SI
Ability-SI
questionnaires
also: standardised interviews
Trait-SI
physiological tests
intelligence tests
performance tests
Ability-SI
17
4
A psychological
measurement of SI
The Trait-SI Scale (TSIS): Item generation
Item content and item generation (Hämäläinen & Saarinen, 2004, 2007, 2008):

Perceptional: Perceiving oneself and reciprocal influences in systems

Cognitive and meta-cognitive: Thinking and reflecting within systems

Emotional and motivational: Intuitively guided actions, empathy, motivation to persevere

Behavioural: productive behaviours
Response format: 5-point Likert scale (“0 – I totally disagree” to “4 – I totally agree”)
Result: 30 items related to Trait-SI aspects
(e.g., “I exercise productive ways of influence within my surroundings”,
“I perceive myself as part of a whole”)
18
4
A psychological
measurement of SI
The Trait-SI Scale (TSIS): The study
Methods
Description
Procedure
Online-study (30 – 40 minutes)
Participants
N = 408 students (LFUI)
Austrian/German sample
316 women (77.50%), 93 men (22.50%)
mean age = 22.81 years (SD = 4.91; median = 21 years; range: 18 – 65 years)
Measures
Social Skills Inventory (Riggio, 1989)
Revised Self-Monitoring Scale (Laux & Renner, 2002)
Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965)
Big Five Inventory – SOEP (Schupp & Gerlitz, 2008)
Trait-SI Scale (Rauthmann, 2010)
Statistical analyses
Item statistics: M, SD, difficulties, item-scale correlations, etc.
Reliability: Internal consistency (Cronbach’s Alpha)
Factorial structure: Exploratory factor analyses
Construct validity: Bivariate zero-order correlations
19
4
Factors
I
II
III
IV
When confronted with complexity, I persevere until I have found a productive solution.
.77
.14
–.08
–.08
I do not give up until I have achieved my goal.
.70
.02
.03
–.14
I exercise productive ways of influence within my surroundings.
.67
.06
.21
–.06
I am able to manage most of my everyday activities successfully.
.65
–.06
–.07
.14
I usually have no problems dealing with difficult and complex problems when going them through step by step in my mind.
.62
.05
–.22
.21
I can influence my surroundings, be they living or not.
.52
.03
.09
.22
I tend to just do things right.
.49
–.08
.13
.14
I usually cannot influence much in my surroundings.
.46
–.20
.15
.33
My thinking is very action-oriented.
.46
.09
.06
–.21
I sometimes have the feeling that there is not much what I can influence by my own actions.
.40
–.16
.24
.21
I envision and identify productive ways of behaviour in my mind if confronted with complex problems.
.40
.37
.07
.10
I can adapt to varying situations quite flexibly.
.40
–.03
.03
.34
I often ponder on my thoughts, feelings, intentions, and actions.
.08
.72
.07
–.02
I would describe my thinking as quite “complex” and “interwoven”.
.13
.68
–.11
–.02
I am a very reflexive person.
.13
.67
–.02
.09
I often think about my role in my surroundings.
.00
.67
.19
–.08
I often ponder on others’ thoughts, feelings, intentions, and actions.
–.14
.66
–.01
.20
I am not a very self-reflexive and thoughtful person.
–.06
.27
.07
.19
I feel as part of a bigger system.
–.01
–.04
.89
–.11
I perceive myself as part of a whole.
–.02
–.09
.87
–.05
I perceive myself as part of a whole, the influence of the whole upon myself, as well as my own influence upon the whole.
.05
.03
.80
.13
I observe my own interdependence within my surroundings.
.03
.17
.67
–.07
I am very well aware that I live and interact within a complex and dynamic system.
.07
.21
.62
.12
I can easily adopt the perspective of other people and “feel” what they are thinking and feeling.
.02
.18
–.11
.68
I have difficulties seeing things from different perspectives.
–.01
.07
.07
.67
I have difficulties adjusting my thoughts, feelings, and actions to my surroundings and situations.
.21
–.26
.08
.51
I have an intuitive feeling for unspoken things.
.02
.21
.09
.49
I am usually aware of my surroundings and its influences on me.
.10
.03
.28
.48
I am usually not quite aware of the impact of my actions on my surroundings.
.01
.09
–.08
.42
I would not describe my thinking as “holistic” and “intuitive”.
.00
–.02
.36
.38
Results I
Effective systems handling (α = .85)
Systemic reflection (α = .72)
Exploratory factor analysis:
Principal components analysis
Direct-oblimin rotation (δ = 0)
Initial solution:
7 factors (57.03% variance)
Horn’s parallel analysis (1965):
4 factors (46.31% variance)
Retained factors:
Effective systems handling
Systemic reflection
Holistic systems perspective
Systemic flexibility
Holistic systems perception (α = .86)
Systemic flexibility (α = .69)
20
4
M
SD
α
SI (g)
ESH
SR
HSP
SF
Systems Intellect global (SIg)
2.75
0.42
.89
–
Effective systems handling (ESH)
2.59
0.51
.85
–
–
Systemic reflection (SR)
3.07
0.57
.72
–
.28***
–
Holistic systems perception (HSP)
2.52
0.77
.86
–
.43***
.24***
–
Systemic flexibility (SF)
2.90
0.50
.69
–
.56***
.33***
.40***
–
Emotional Expressivity
48.32
8.19
.76
.25***
.30***
–.00
.20***
.16**
Emotional Sensitivity
53.44
6.98
.76
.48***
.38***
.31***
.22***
.51***
Emotional Control
44.68
8.29
.80
.17**
.22***
.07
–.03
.18***
Social Expressivity
49.58
9.93
.88
.41***
.43***
.08
.32***
.30***
Social Sensitivity
50.20
9.08
.84
–.10*
–.26***
.25***
–.05
–.11*
Social Control
52.77
8.31
.80
.47***
.56***
.03
.27***
.39***
Expressivity
97.89
16.53
.89
.37***
.40***
.04
.29***
.26***
Sensitivity
103.64
12.15
.81
.20***
.03
.36***
.09
.22***
Control
97.45
12.69
.81
.42***
.51***
.06
.16**
.37***
Emotional Intelligence
146.44
12.95
.71
.53***
.53***
.21***
.23***
.49***
Social Intelligence
152.55
16.82
.83
.42***
.39***
.19***
.30***
.31***
Socio-emotional Intelligence
298.99
26.08
.86
.53**
.51***
.23***
.31***
.45***
Perceptiveness
2.48
0.70
.88
.43***
.51***
.08†
.18***
.36***
Impression Management
2.69
0.59
.80
.48***
.39***
.28***
.21***
.54***
Self-esteem
2.26
0.54
.90
.40***
.49***
–.03
.26***
.33***
Emotional Stability
3.64
1.23
.71
.29***
.42***
–.11*
.15**
.26***
Extraversion
4.97
1.26
.81
.37***
.41***
.05
.28***
.26***
Openness to Experiences
5.25
1.10
.68
.36***
.31***
.22***
.21***
.30***
Agreeableness
5.39
0.94
.52
.22***
.11*
.15**
.13**
.29***
Conscientiousness
4.88
1.12
.69
.34***
.38***
.07
.25***
.20***
Results II
Systems Intellect
Construct validity:
Bivariate zero-order Pearson
correlations
Socio-emotional skills
Self-Monitoring (acquisitive)
Big Five
21
4
The Trait-SI Scale (TSIS): Interpretation of findings
SI factor
SI components
Interpretation
̶
Effective systems
handling
̶
Action / behavior
̶
̶
Systemic reflection
Thought / cognition
̶
̶
̶
Holistic systems
perception
efficient and productive ways of acting
within complex and dynamic systems
exerting positive and effective control
within systems while remaining
flexible and systems-oriented
persevering and seeking actionoriented solutions despite hindrances
Socio-emotional intelligence
Self-esteem
Emotional Stability
Extraversion
Conscientiousness
reflecting upon one’s own and others’
thoughts, feelings, needs, intentions,
and behaviors
being deep in thinking and reflective
being very sensitive to surroundings
(Emotional) Sensitivity
Neuroticism
Openness
Agreeableness
Perception
Opinion / attitude
perceiving oneself within a complex
system, one’s actions within this
system, but also the feedbacks from
the system
Extraversion
having perceptional and thought
Openness
patterns of persons and environments
“working together” as one whole
“systemic and holistic” perception
̶
̶
̶
̶
Systemic flexibility
Strongest associations
Thought / cognition
Action / bevavior
̶
̶
̶
perspective-taking, empathy,
flexibility, plasticity, and adaptivity
adapting sucessfully to different
situations
adopting views and opinions different
from one’s own
being cognitively and behaviourally
more flexible
employing intuition (into acting)
Socio-emotional intelligence
Openness
22
4
Future lines of research with
a psychological take on SI
What can we do with a psychological perspective on SI?
Suggestions:

Relate the SI approach to the (broad) field of psychology in general
and to different psychological sub-disciplines in specific

Study person x situation interactions
(cf. situation psychology)

Psychometrics
(i.e., reliably and validly assessing SI in individuals, groups, organisations)

Applied contexts (i.e., education, leadership, etc.)
23
4
The End
THANK YOU!
