不同年龄段智力与心理健康的关系

注：机翻，未校。

---

The Relationship Between Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being in Incoming College Students

Published: 26 July 2015

Clifton J Wigtil & Gregg R Henriques

Psychology of Well-Being volume 5, Article number: 4 (2015) Cite this article

Abstract 摘要

Background 背景

This study investigated the relationship between intelligence and psychological well-being in young adults. Contradictory findings are presented about the relationship between intelligence and PWB in children and adolescents, and qualitative findings by Lovecky (J Couns Develop 64:572–575, 1986) in adults. For young adults, the authors predicted positive linear relationships between intelligence and PWB dimensions of Environmental Mastery, Autonomy, Personal Growth, Purpose in Life, and a curvilinear relationship between intelligence and the PWB dimension of Positive Relations with Others.
本研究调查了年轻人智力与心理健康之间的关系。关于儿童和青少年智力与 PWB 之间关系的结论相互矛盾，而 Lovecky （J Couns Develop 64：572–575， 1986） 在成人中的定性发现。对于年轻人，作者预测了智力与环境掌握、自主性、个人成长、生活目标的 PWB 维度之间的正线性关系，以及智力与与他人的积极关系的 PWB 维度之间的曲线关系。

Methods 方法

These hypotheses were tested on a sample of 3,829 incoming first-year students at a large university using multiple regression of SAT scores (The College Board, SAT Reasoning Test, 1926–2005) and scores of these dimensions on a 54-item version (van Dierendonck, Personal Individ Differ 36:629–643, 2004) of Ryff’s (J Personal Soc Psychol, 57(6):1069–1081, 1989) Scales of Psychological Well-Being.
这些假设在一所大型大学的 3,829 名新生的样本中进行了检验，样本中使用了 SAT 分数的多元回归（大学理事会，SAT 推理测试，1926-2005 年），并在 Ryff 的 54 项版本（van Dierendonck，Personal Individ Differ 36：629–643,2004 年）的 Ryff （J Personal Soc Psychol， 57（6）：1069–1081， 1989） 心理健康量表。

Results 结果

Results supported a curvilinear relationship between SAT Verbal and Positive Relations with Others; significant relationships between SAT Math and Purpose in Life and Personal Growth were also discovered, but in the negative direction.
结果支持 SAT 口头关系和与他人的积极关系之间的曲线关系;还发现了 SAT 数学与生活目标和个人成长之间的显着关系，但方向是负面的。

Conculsions 凝结

Limitations, possible reasons for data trends, and potential application of results to university policy are discussed.
讨论了局限性、数据趋势的可能原因以及结果对大学政策的潜在应用。

Introduction 介绍

Intelligence and well-being are two of psychology’s most well-known constructs. Yet, although early research explored the relationship between these two constructs, the relationship remains nebulous, and, in general, few large scale quantitative studies have been conducted. Most research that has been done has explored the relationship between intelligence and mental disorders and dysfunction. However, as highlighted by the increase in research and interest in positive psychology (Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi 2000), there is much more to mental health than distress and dysfunction. Ryff (1989) created a model of one aspect of positive psychology, psychological well-being (PWB), which consists of six domains: “Self-Acceptance,” “Positive Relations with Others,” “Autonomy,” “Environmental Mastery,” “Purpose in Life,” and “Personal Growth.” Self-acceptance referred to an affirming outlook on his or her life; Positive (and secure) Relations with Others; Autonomy, the extent to which one operates independently and does not conform to public norms; Environmental Mastery, engaging in and skillfully controlling one’s environment; Purpose in Life, the extent to which one has aims and a general course to their actions; Personal Growth, the extent to which one actualize and improve oneself.
智力和幸福感是心理学最著名的两个结构。然而，尽管早期研究探讨了这两种结构之间的关系，但这种关系仍然模糊不清，而且一般来说，很少进行大规模的定量研究。已经完成的大多数研究都探讨了智力与精神障碍和功能障碍之间的关系。然而，正如对积极心理学的研究和兴趣的增加所强调的那样（Seligman 和 Csikszentmihalyi 2000），心理健康不仅仅是痛苦和功能障碍。Ryff （1989） 创建了一个积极心理学的一个方面的模型，即心理健康 （PWB），它由六个领域组成：“自我接纳”、“与他人的积极关系”、“自主性”、“环境掌握”、“生活目标”和“个人成长”。自我接纳是指对他或她的生活持肯定态度;与他人建立积极（和安全）的关系;自主性，即独立运作且不符合公共规范的程度;精通环境，参与并巧妙地控制自己的环境;人生目标，一个人的目标程度和行为的一般路线;个人成长，一个人实现和提高自我的程度。

Background 背景

Some researchers have concluded that no relationship between subjective well-being and intelligence exists; for example, Gottfredson (2008) concluded that intelligence “does not correlate with happiness (subjective well-being)”; however, less research has been done on psychological well-being and its relationship to intelligence. The purpose of the study was to explore the relationship between these dimensions of well-being and intelligence in incoming college students. Rinn and Plucker (2004) noted that further study of young adults of high ability is of special interest to higher educational institutions and their attempts to improve both scholastic and non-scholastic opportunities. This age marks the beginning of a new milestone in a person’s development, a transition out of childhood and into adulthood. Although some interest has been paid to the development of some of these dimensions of college students’ well-being (e.g., Astin and Astin 2010, studied purpose in life from a spiritual perspective as “spiritual quest”), a review of the extant literature could find none relating this well-being to intelligence in this population. Therefore, the relationship between these constructs in younger (child/adolescent) and older (adult) populations are reviewed.
一些研究人员得出结论，主观幸福感和智力之间不存在关系;例如，Gottfredson （2008） 得出结论，智力“与幸福感（主观幸福感）无关”;然而，关于心理健康及其与智力的关系的研究较少。该研究的目的是探讨即将入学的大学生的幸福感和智力的这些维度之间的关系。Rinn 和 Plucker （2004） 指出，高等教育机构对高能力年轻人的进一步研究以及他们试图改善学术和非学术机会的尝试特别感兴趣。这个年龄标志着一个人发展过程中新里程碑的开始，即从童年到成年的过渡。尽管人们对大学生幸福感的某些维度的发展产生了一些兴趣（例如，Astin 和 Astin 2010 年，从精神角度研究了人生目标作为“精神追求”），但对现有文献的回顾不会发现任何将这种幸福感与该人群的智力联系起来。因此，回顾了这些结构在年轻 （儿童/青少年） 和老年人 （成人） 人群中之间的关系。

Prior Investigations of a Possible Link Between Well-Being and Intelligence in Children 关于儿童幸福感与智力之间可能存在联系的先前调查

Intelligence has often been studied in the context of gifted education, as it is one means of identifying children as gifted (Davis and Rimm 2004, p. 86). One early line of research in gifted education into the relationship between high intelligence and mental health suggested either no difference or that intelligent children have more robust mental health. Terman (1925) explored the psychological characteristics of a group of high intellectual ability groupa,b of 643 elementary and middle-school aged children from California, with a control group. The former group had a lower level of social play, was more likely to favor older friends, and was rated by teachers to have more positive interpersonal characteristics, goal-directed behavior, and creativity.
智力经常在资优教育的背景下进行研究，因为它是识别儿童为天才的一种方式（Davis 和 Rimm 2004，第 86 页）。天才教育中一项关于高智商与心理健康之间关系的早期研究表明，要么没有区别，要么聪明的孩子具有更强大的心理健康。Terman （1925） 探讨了来自加利福尼亚的 643 名中小学生一组高智力组a、b 的心理特征，其中有一组对照组。前一组的社交游戏水平较低，更有可能偏爱年长的朋友，并且被老师评为具有更积极的人际交往特征、目标导向的行为和创造力。

Gallucci (1988) explored rates of psychopathology in 83 extremely intelligent Louisianan adolescents ages 12–16 (defined as at least the 99.2nd percentile).c Problematic behaviors were identified through the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL; Achenbach, 1991). Gallucci also compared the rate of psychopathology between 31 children with IQs between the 99.2nd and 99.6th percentilesd and 18 children with IQs above the 99.96th percentile.e Neither comparison yielded significant differences on CBCL scores, suggesting no PWB-intelligence relationship.
Gallucci （1988） 探讨了 83 名 12-16 岁（定义为至少第 99.2 个百分位数）的极其聪明的路易斯安那青少年的精神病理学发生率。c 通过儿童行为检查表 （CBCL;Achenbach， 1991）。Gallucci 还比较了 31 名智商在第 99.2 至第 99.6 个百分位数d 之间的儿童与 18 名智商高于第 99.96 个百分位数的儿童之间的精神病理学发生率。e 两项比较均未在 CBCL 评分上产生显着差异，表明 PWB 与智力没有关系。

Richards et al. (2003) studied Australian adolescent students of normal and high intelligence with respect to their interpersonal, intrapersonal, and environmental activity as measured by the Behaviour Assessment System for Children (BASC; Reynolds and Kamphaus 1992), which uses ratings from children, parents, and teachers on these aforementioned domains. The authors contrasted scores on two groups, those at or above the 96th percentilef on IQ tests and those who did not. Ratings across the BASC subscales indicated either more or equally adaptive parent and teacher ratings for the intelligent students in domains of emotions and behavior. Together, this line of literature suggested, a positive relationship between intelligence and Ryff’s Autonomy, Positive Relations with Others, Environmental Mastery, Purpose in Life, and Personal growth dimensions of PWB.
Richards 等人（2003 年）研究了澳大利亚智力正常和高智商的青少年学生的人际关系、人际关系和环境活动，由儿童行为评估系统 （BASC;Reynolds 和 Kamphaus 1992），该研究使用了儿童、家长和教师对上述领域的评分。作者对比了两组的分数，一组在智商测试中处于或高于第 96 个百分位f 的组，另一组则没有。BASC 分量表的评分表明，聪明学生在情绪和行为领域的家长和教师评分更具或同等适应性。总之，这一系列文献表明，智力与 Ryff 的自主性、与他人的积极关系、环境掌握、生活目标和 PWB 的个人成长维度之间存在正相关关系。

Grossberg and Cornell (1988) noted that this line of research is contradicted by another line of findings, beginning with Hollingworth (1942), who detailed several case studies of children above 180 IQ (original Stanford-Binet, ratio IQ). She found such children were generally more autonomous but had difficulties in normal social development (suggesting lower levels on Ryff’s Positive Relations with Others). To Hollingworth, these difficulties went hand in hand with the extremity of their intelligence, an observation she generalized to a lower limit just above 160 IQ (original Stanford-Binet).g She believed that the apparent difficulty in highly intelligent children’s social functioning had to do with their cognitive content being different and rare, in contrast to their age-mates’. Given that IQ scores become rarer in curvilinear fashion as they deviate from the mean, this suggests a curvilinear relationship between intelligence and social functioning.h
Grossberg 和 Cornell （1988） 指出，这一研究路线与另一一系列发现相矛盾，首先是 Hollingworth （1942），他详细介绍了 180 智商以上儿童的几个案例研究（最初的 Stanford-Binet，智商比率）。她发现这些孩子通常更自主，但在正常的社交发展方面有困难（表明 Ryff 与他人的积极关系水平较低）。对霍林沃斯来说，这些困难与他们的智力极限密切相关，她将这一观察结果推广到略高于 160 智商的下限（最初的斯坦福-比奈）。g 她认为，高智商儿童的社交功能明显困难与他们的认知内容不同且罕见有关，这与他们的同龄人相比。鉴于智商分数在偏离平均值时以曲线方式变得更加罕见，这表明智力和社会功能之间存在曲线关系。h

Affirming Hollingworth’s characterization, Kline and Meckstroth (1985) argued that very intelligent children may experience psychological difficulties. Basing their conclusions on their clinical psychological and school consulting experience, they argued that such childreni are in jeopardy of cognitive, affective, and interpersonal issues, which are in proportion to the level of intelligence. They also argued that such issues may be related to the others’ inability to comprehend these children, and coping with the hopes that their elders have for them.
Kline 和 Meckstroth （1985） 肯定了 Hollingworth 的描述，认为非常聪明的孩子可能会遇到心理困难。根据他们的临床心理学和学校咨询经验得出结论，他们认为这些孩子处于认知、情感和人际关系问题的危险之中，这些问题与智力水平成正比。他们还认为，这些问题可能与其他人无法理解这些孩子以及应对长辈对他们的希望有关。

Paralleling this view, Betts (1986) argued that school programs for intelligent (he did not suggest a cutoff) children need to address their special needs of affective and interpersonal development. Many of these needs overlap with some of Ryff’s dimensions of well-being, such as “awareness, understanding, and acceptance of self…and others…and interpersonal skills”. According to Betts, intelligent children also have needs related to original ideation and working out one’s difficulties, unwinding, and optical imagination, and maintaining supportive milieus.
与这一观点相呼应，Betts （1986） 认为，针对聪明（他没有建议一个截止值）儿童的学校课程需要解决他们在情感和人际关系发展方面的特殊需求。其中许多需求与 Ryff 的一些幸福感维度重叠，例如“对自我的意识、理解和接受…和其他…和人际交往能力”。根据贝茨的说法，聪明的孩子也有与原创构思和解决困难、放松和视觉想象力以及维持支持性环境有关的需求。

Neihart (1999) exhaustively reviewed empirical literature with respect to the relationship between intelligence and well-being, and agreed with Richards et al. that the empirical evidence supports the view that high intelligence either has no effect or has a beneficial factor to psychological well-being. She included in well-being such components as a lack of deviant behavior, depression, anxiety, and psychiatric disorders, as well as the (healthy) presence of social competence. Nonetheless, in general Neihart argued that overall the literature supports the first line of research (that highly intelligent children are generally as well or better adjusted than the general population).
Neihart （1999） 详尽地回顾了有关智力与幸福感之间关系的实证文献，并同意 Richards 等人的观点，即实证证据支持高智力对心理健康没有影响或有益因素的观点。她将缺乏越轨行为、抑郁、焦虑和精神疾病以及社交能力的（健康）存在等因素纳入了幸福感。尽管如此，总的来说，Neihart 认为，总体而言，文献支持第一线研究（即高智商儿童通常与普通人群一样好或适应得更好）。

However, Neihart also cited research supporting the idea that highly intelligent children experience social difficulty. Specifically, she cited Dauber and Benbow’s (1990) study comparing students achieving at least the 99.99th percentile on either the verbal or mathematics component of the SAT (College Board, 1926–2005) vs. those who only met a lower standard, the 95th percentile on one component. The authors found that highly intelligent students rated themselves as less socially adept, more inhibited, and more introverted than their counterparts of above-average intelligence.
然而，Neihart 还引用了支持高智商儿童会遇到社交困难这一观点的研究。具体来说，她引用了 Dauber 和 Benbow （1990） 的研究，该研究比较了在 SAT 的口头或数学部分至少达到第 99.99 个百分位的学生（大学理事会，1926-2005 年）与仅达到较低标准的学生，即一个部分的第 95 个百分位。作者发现，与智力高于平均水平的学生相比，高智商学生认为自己的社交能力较差、更内敛、更内向。

More recently, Gross (2004), in her research on 15 very intelligent children (6–13 years at or above the 99.997th percentile of intelligencej), finding that such children were that they generally evaluated themselves higher in scholastic ability, but lower interpersonally. Unfortunately, the children in her research, as in Hollingworth’s, were referred by parents, teachers, and psychologists responding to advertising for the study, thus potentially creating a sampling bias.
最近，Gross （2004） 在她对 15 个非常聪明的孩子（6-13 岁达到或高于智力的第 99.997 个百分位）的研究中发现，这些孩子通常认为自己的学习能力较高，但人际交往能力较低。不幸的是，她研究中的孩子，就像 Hollingworth 的研究一样，是由父母、老师和心理学家推荐来回应该研究的广告，因此可能会产生抽样偏差。

Vialle et al. (2007) compared 65 intelligent adolescents (defined in this study as those in the 90th percentile of each of two tests of reading and mathematical achievement) and a comparison group of normal intelligence on self-reported social measures. The intelligent adolescents in Vialle et al.’s study rated themselves higher on measures of sadness (measured by the PANAS-X; Watson and Clark 1991) and lower on the self-reported set of social support variables (quantity and quality measured by the Social Support Questionnaire; Sarason et al. 1983). Teachers, however, rated that the intelligent adolescents as less prone to affective disturbance and had higher general adjustment relative to students of normal intelligence. Thus, while teachers reported that these students exhibited little maladaptive behavior, the students themselves reported that they have poor social support.
Vialle 等人（2007 年）比较了 65 名聪明的青少年（在本研究中定义为阅读和数学成绩两项测试中分别处于第 90 个百分位的青少年）和一组智力正常的对照组在自我报告的社会测量上。Vialle 等人研究中聪明的青少年在悲伤指标上给自己打分较高（通过 PANAS-X 测量;Watson 和 Clark 1991 年）和较低的自我报告的社会支持变量集（由社会支持问卷衡量的数量和质量;Sarason 等人，1983 年）。然而，教师认为，与智力正常的学生相比，聪明的青少年不太容易受到情感干扰，并且具有更高的一般适应能力。因此，虽然老师报告说这些学生几乎没有表现出适应不良的行为，但学生自己报告说他们的社会支持很差。

Norman et al. (1999) compared students within the intelligence range of the 84th–98th percentilesk to those above the 98th percentile,l and then a separate comparison of students ranging from 84th to 99.4th percentiles with those above the 99.4th.m The dependent variables were several social subscales of a self-report instrument, as well as two separate measures, one of “emotional autonomy” from their parents and the other of anxiety. The students were recruited from summer programs for intelligent students. The authors did not observe significant differences between the groups in either comparison.
Norman et al. （1999） 将智力范围在第 84 至第 98 个百分位数k 范围内的学生与智力范围在第 98 个百分位数以上的学生进行了比较，然后将第 84 个至第 99.4 个百分位数的学生与第 99.4 个百分位数以上的学生进行了单独比较。m 因变量是自我报告工具的几个社会分量表，以及两个独立的测量，一个是来自父母的“情绪自主”，另一个是焦虑。这些学生是从聪明学生的暑期课程中招募的。作者在两次比较中均未观察到两组之间的显著差异。

Thus, a pattern emerges with respect to Ryff’s well-being and high intelligence in children and adolescents. Some literature suggests that highly intelligent children appear to have higher levels of Ryff’s Autonomy (though adult expectations may derail this to an extent; Betts 1986), Environmental Mastery, Personal Growth, Positive Relations with Others, and Purpose in Life. This would possibly correspond to the application of superior cognitive ability to manage one’s own affairs and master one’s immediate environment, and some theoreticians have linked constructs similar to these PWB dimensions, such as resilience, to intelligence (e.g., Bland and Sowa 1994). Given the affective comorbidity associated with mental retardation mentioned earlier, this line of research suggests a general relationship between intelligence and PWB. On the other hand, the second line of research and theory, suggests that intelligence, as it becomes more extreme, may be a hindrance to one’s level of Positive Relations with Others.
因此，出现了一种关于 Ryff 在儿童和青少年中的健康状况和高智商的模式。一些文献表明，高智商儿童似乎具有更高水平的 Ryff 自主性（尽管成人的期望可能会在一定程度上破坏这一点;贝茨 1986 年）、环境掌握、个人成长、与他人的积极关系和人生目标。这可能对应于应用卓越的认知能力来管理自己的事务和掌握自己的直接环境，一些理论家将与这些 PWB 维度的结构（例如弹性）与智力联系起来（例如，Bland 和 Sowa 1994）。鉴于前面提到的与智力低下相关的情感合并症，这一研究方向表明智力和 PWB 之间存在一般关系。另一方面，第二条研究和理论路线表明，随着智力变得更加极端，可能会阻碍一个人与他人的积极关系水平。

Together, these studies and perspectives appear to be contradictory with respect to a potential relationship between PWB and intelligence. There are some possible reasons for this. First, some of the studies in this review suffered methodological limitations. After the publication of some of these studies, MacCallum et al. (2002) suggested that the use of ANOVA and t-tests rather regression on continuous variables (such as intelligence) generally lowers the statistical power of the analysis. Next, these studies did not always focus on PWB (for example, the CBCL in Gallucci’s study focuses primarily on problematic behavior, not mental wellness), or intelligence (e.g., Vialle et al. used achievement tests) per se. Nonetheless, it remains possible that no relationship exists between these constructs, which may be indicated by the nonsignificant findings of Norman et al.
总之，这些研究和观点在 PWB 和智力之间的潜在关系方面似乎是矛盾的。这有一些可能的原因。首先，本综述中的一些研究存在方法学局限性。在其中一些研究发表后，MacCallum 等人（2002 年）建议，使用方差分析和 t 检验而不是对连续变量（如智力）进行回归通常会降低分析的统计功效。其次，这些研究并不总是关注 PWB（例如，Gallucci 研究中的 CBCL 主要关注问题行为，而不是心理健康）或智力（例如，Vialle 等人使用成就测试）本身。尽管如此，这些结构之间仍然存在不存在关系，这可能由 Norman 等人的不重要发现所表明。

Distal Causes of Intelligence-Based Differences in Psychological Well-Being in Adults 成人心理健康基于智力差异的远端原因

Some empirical studies have explored the relationship between intelligence and PWB in adulthood quantitatively. Parker et al. (2008), for example, found a relationship between a correlate of intelligence (brain size) and apparent indicators of psychological well-being (e.g., “feeling useful”). In a sample of schizophrenic adults, Lysaker et al. (2001) found small correlations between tests of specialized cognitive abilities and the well-being subtest score of the Attitude Questionnaire. Plescia-Pikus et al. (1988) found higher intelligence in both adult children of alcoholics who reported high well-being and controls, compared to adult children of alcoholics who reported low well-being.
一些实证研究定量探讨了成年期智力和 PWB 之间的关系。例如，Parker 等人（2008 年）发现智力（大脑大小）与心理健康的明显指标（例如，“感觉有用”）之间存在相关性之间的关系。在精神分裂症成人样本中，Lysaker 等人（2001 年）发现专业认知能力测试与态度问卷的幸福感子测试分数之间存在微小的相关性。Plescia-Pikus 等人 （1988） 发现，与报告低健康状况的酗酒者的成年子女相比，报告高幸福感的酗酒者的成年子女和对照组的智力更高。

These studies did not reflect the population of interest to this study, the general population of adults, nor did these studies explicitly consider well-being in Ryff’s theoretical framework. A literature review of general characteristics of adults with above-average intelligence instead finds mostly observational findings, with few quantitative studies of well-being. Of the former, Lovecky’s (1986) discussion of intelligent adults and well-being reflects most of the literature on this subject, which will provide the theoretical basis on adults for the hypotheses in the present study.
这些研究没有反映本研究感兴趣的人群，即一般成年人群，这些研究也没有在 Ryff 的理论框架中明确考虑幸福感。相反，对智力高于平均水平的成年人的一般特征的文献综述发现，大部分是观察性发现，很少有关于幸福感的定量研究。在前者中，Lovecky （1986） 对智能成年人和幸福感的讨论反映了关于该主题的大部分文献，这将为本研究中的假设提供关于成年人的理论基础。

Lovecky posited social and emotional needs of intelligent adults based on her (1) discussions with gifted adults and observations in counseling them, and (2) extending previous work with gifted and creative children by Paul Torrance (1962). She believed that intelligent adults are marked by intensity of five qualities: “divergency, excitability, sensitivity, perceptivity, and entelechy,” of which all but the second seem relevant to dimensions of PWB.
Lovecky 根据她 （1） 与天才成年人的讨论和对他们咨询的观察，以及 （2） 扩展 Paul Torrance （1962） 之前对天才和有创造力的儿童的研究，提出了聪明成年人的社会和情感需求。她认为，聪明的成年人以五种品质的强度为标志：“发散性、兴奋性、敏感性、洞察力和洞察力”，除了第二种品质外，其他所有品质似乎都与 PWB 的维度有关。

Lovecky argued that one’s divergency (of thought) makes adults “highly independent”, who “find creative solutions to a wide variety of problems, including interpersonal problems”, but also creates “difficulty in situations where group consensus is important”. To the extent that intelligence correlates with specialized cognitive abilities, greater intelligence would improve the ability to think divergently. Sensitivity, which Lovecky described as “depth of feeling that results in a sense of identification with others”, creates personal bonds with others and a drive to improve society. However, she held that this same sensitivity could lead to being dismissive of another’s personal requirements if they seem shallow, and that others could hide problems from intelligent friends, for fear of losing room for their own feelings in the face of such high emotional sensitivity. Lovecky observed that intense intrapersonal and interpersonal perceptivity allows intelligent adults a greater degree of objectivity in their relations with others; at the same time, however, others may fear being well-perceived. This same perceptivity allows intelligent adults to grasp the essence of a subject. Additionally, she believed that intelligent adults’ perceptivity clarifies their own desires. With respect to intelligent adults’ unusually high entelechy, (“motivation, inner strength, and vital force directing life and growth”), Lovecky suggested that others may respond to this desire with a heightened entelechy of their own, dependent on the former’s example and support, creating tension for the intelligent adult between personal growth and supporting others.
洛夫基认为，一个人的（思想）分歧使成年人“高度独立”，他们“为各种各样的问题找到创造性的解决方案，包括人际关系问题”，但也造成了“在群体共识很重要的情况下的困难”。在智力与特殊认知能力相关的程度上，更高的智力会提高发散性思考的能力。Lovecky 将敏感性描述为“导致对他人的认同感的深度感受”，它创造了与他人的个人纽带和改善社会的动力。然而，她认为，如果他人的个人要求看起来很肤浅，这种同样的敏感性也可能导致对他人的个人要求不屑一顾，而其他人可能会向聪明的朋友隐瞒问题，因为害怕在如此高的情感敏感性面前失去自己的感受空间。洛夫基观察到，强烈的人际内在和人际感知使聪明的成年人在与他人的关系中具有更大程度的客观性;然而，与此同时，其他人可能害怕被人看齐。同样的洞察力使聪明的成年人能够掌握主题的本质。此外，她认为聪明的成年人的感知能力可以澄清他们自己的欲望。关于聪明成年人异常高的智力（“指导生活和成长的动力、内在力量和生命力”），洛夫基建议其他人可以用他们自己更高的智力来回应这种愿望，依赖于前者的榜样和支持，在个人成长和支持他人之间为聪明的成年人制造紧张。

Why might the qualities Lovecky proposed exist in intelligent adults? Luthar et al. (1992) suggested that a positive relationship between intelligence and the number of cognitive schemas produced by an individual would lead the more intelligent to categorize their experiences into a greater number of existing schemas, leading to better adjustment. This may explain divergency of thought (e.g., more schemas allowing for multiple ways to interpret and synthesize information), but this model alone, however, does not appear to be sufficient to explain other qualities (e.g., sensitivity) observed by Lovecky.
为什么 Lovecky 提出的品质可能存在于聪明的成年人身上？Luthar et al. （1992） 认为，智力与个体产生的认知图式数量之间的正相关关系将导致更聪明的人将他们的经验归类为更多的现有图式，从而更好地进行调整。这也许可以解释思想的分歧（例如，更多的图式允许以多种方式解释和综合信息），但仅靠这个模型似乎不足以解释 Lovecky 观察到的其他品质（例如，敏感性）。

Lovecky thus hypothesized about prominent qualities in intelligent adults that affect their social and emotional functioning, and would seem to have both positive and negative relationships with Ryff’s PWB, and these qualities appear to be somewhat supported by the literature. Unfortunately, she gave no indication of the percentiles of intelligence at which these qualities would emerge. Nonetheless, each of these qualities appears to generally have a positive relationship with intelligence in adults, except for social functioning, in which a curvilinear relationship to intelligence seems indicated by the literature.
因此，洛夫基假设了聪明成年人的突出品质会影响他们的社交和情感功能，并且似乎与 Ryff 的 PWB 有积极和消极的关系，这些品质似乎在某种程度上得到了文献的支持。不幸的是，她没有说明这些品质会在哪个百分位数的智力中出现。尽管如此，这些品质中的每一种似乎通常都与成年人的智力呈正相关，但社会功能除外，其中与智力的曲线关系似乎由文献表明。

Of the qualities that Lovecky mentioned in intelligent adults, each suggests a relationship between intelligence and at least one of Ryff’s dimensions of PWB. Divergency and entelechy suggest a positive relationship between intelligence and Autonomy (“resistance to enculturation”). Perceptivity and entelechy suggest a positive relationship between intelligence and Environmental Mastery. Entelechy suggests a positive relationship between intelligence and Personal Growth. Sensitivity and perceptivity suggest a positive relationship between intelligence and Purpose in Life. Sensitivity, divergency, perceptivity, and entelechy suggested a curvilinear relationship between intelligence and Positive Relations with Others.
在 Lovecky 提到的聪明成年人的品质中，每一种都表明了智力与 Ryff 的 PWB 的至少一个维度之间的关系。Divergency 和 entelechy 表明智能和自主性之间存在正向关系（“对文化化的抵抗”）。感知力和洞察力表明智力与环境掌握之间存在正相关关系。Entelechy 认为智力和个人成长之间存在正相关关系。敏感性和洞察力表明智力和人生目标之间存在正相关关系。敏感性、发散性、感知力和感知性表明智力和与他人的积极关系之间存在曲线关系。

Purpose of the Current Study 本研究的目的

The present study examines in a sample of young adults the relationship between intelligence and those dimensions of Psychological Well-Being which previous research suggests may be related to it. It is desirable to examine the relationship in young adults between intelligence and PWB using quantitative methods with larger samples that are more sensitive to subtle effects. A literature review of older and younger populations revealed studies that yielded positive, negative, and nonsignificant relationships, yet did not include curvilinear effects (possibly due to smaller sample sizes). Additionally, it may be helpful to investigate the construct of intelligence as a continuous phenomenon, rather than a categorical phenomenon yielding groups of typical ability, moderate giftedness, or high giftedness.
本研究在年轻人样本中考察了智力与心理健康维度之间的关系，先前的研究表明这可能与此有关。最好使用对细微影响更敏感的较大样本的定量方法来检查年轻人智力和 PWB 之间的关系。对老年人群和年轻人群的文献综述揭示了产生正、负和不显著关系的研究，但不包括曲线效应（可能是由于样本量较小）。此外，将智力的结构作为一个连续的现象进行研究，而不是一个产生典型能力、中等天赋或高天赋的群体的分类现象，可能会有所帮助。

Next, it is desirable to extend findings with respect to intelligence and PWB from a developmental perspective. This study sought to answer whether related research on the population of intelligent children and adolescents extend in a logical manner to young adults. It may be that results are similar to previous results found for adolescents, or instead change for some reason during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood. Likewise, results from this study could be informative based on whether they align with prior observations of intelligent adults.
接下来，希望从发展的角度扩展有关智力和 PWB 的研究结果。本研究试图回答关于聪明儿童和青少年人群的相关研究是否以合乎逻辑的方式延伸到年轻人。结果可能与以前发现的青少年结果相似，或者在从青春期到青年期的过渡期间由于某种原因发生了变化。同样，这项研究的结果可能具有参考价值，因为它们是否与先前对聪明成年人的观察一致。

This study was also conducted for its usefulness to higher education. As mentioned, Rinn and Plucker (2004) note that this specific population is of special interest to higher educational institutions and their attempts to improve “honors”, “early entrance”, and “personal counseling” programs for intelligent young adults. If a relationship exists between PWB and intelligence, it would suggest the need for these services to be specialized to such students’ unique PWB.
进行这项研究也是因为它对高等教育有用。如前所述，Rinn 和 Plucker （2004） 指出，高等教育机构及其为聪明的年轻人改进“荣誉”、“早期入学”和“个人咨询”计划的尝试特别关注这一特定人群。如果 PWB 和情报之间存在关系，则表明这些服务需要专门针对这些学生独特的 PWB。

Finally, it is also desirable to determine whether these effects of intelligence, if any, may be replicated in a newer population. Many of the aforementioned studies were conducted some time ago.
最后，确定智力的这些影响（如果有的话）是否可以在新的人群中复制也是可取的。上述许多研究都是在前段时间进行的。

The previous research often seemed contradictory, but overall, the literature seemed to suggest a positive relationship between intelligence and psychological well-being. The exception was the dimension of Positive Relations with Others, which generally had positive relationships at elevated levels of intelligence, and negative relationships at extremely high levels of intelligence. Therefore, the following hypotheses were proposed:
以前的研究往往看起来相互矛盾，但总的来说，文献似乎表明智力和心理健康之间存在正相关关系。例外是与他人的积极关系维度，它通常在高智力水平上具有积极关系，而在极高智力水平上具有消极关系。因此，提出了以下假设：

H1: Intelligence has a positive relationship with Ryff’s Autonomy.
H1：智能与 Ryff 的 Autonomy 呈正相关。

H2: Intelligence has a positive relationship with Ryff’s Environmental Mastery.
H2：Intelligence 与 Ryff 的 Environmental Mastery 呈正相关。

H3: Intelligence has a positive relationship with Ryff’s Purpose in Life.
H3：智力与 Ryff 的人生目标有正相关。

H4: Intelligence has a positive relationship with Ryff’s Personal Growth.
H4：智力与 Ryff 的个人成长呈正相关。

H5: Intelligence has a negative quadratic relationship with Ryff’s Positive Relations with Others.
H5：智力与 Ryff 的 Positive Relations with Others 呈负二次关系。

Methods 方法

Population, Sample, and Procedures 总体、样本和程序

Three samples of incoming first-year (freshmen) students at a central Virginia university were given a series of assessments for the university’s annual “assessment days” in 2003, 2004, and 2005, given the weekend before the start of their first classes in the fall term. Assessments were given for the purposes of program improvement and evaluation of the university’s general education program (as part of an assessment mandate from Virginia). These assessments are ultimately required for the students to graduate, but student performance on these assessments did not have consequences for the students; there was no extrinsic motivator for student performance on the assessments themselves (“low-stakes”). Students completed an informed consent form before taking the assessments. Invitations were sent to 3,465 students in 2003, 3,351 in 2004, and 3,807 in 2005. Invited students represented a near-census of incoming first-year students at the university.
弗吉尼亚州中部一所大学的三名新生（新生）在 2003 年、2004 年和 2005 年的年度“评估日”接受了一系列评估，给定于秋季学期第一节课开始前的周末。进行评估的目的是为了改进项目和评估大学的通识教育项目（作为弗吉尼亚州评估任务的一部分）。这些评估最终是学生毕业所必需的，但学生在这些评估中的表现不会对学生产生影响;学生在评估本身的表现没有外在动机（“低风险”）。学生在参加评估前填写了一份知情同意书。2003 年向 3,465 名学生发出了邀请，2004 年向 3,351 名学生发出了邀请，2005 年向 3,807 名学生发出了邀请。受邀学生代表了该大学即将入学的一年级学生的近一次普查。

Students were randomly assigned to take different series of assessments, some of which included the Scales of Psychological Well-Being (see below), referred to as the Well-Being Scale (WBS) on the assessment form. In 2003, 1,089 students took the WBS; 1,387 in 2004; and 1,560 in 2005. Most students’ WBS scores could be matched to valid SAT scores, yielding a dataset with 3,829 students across all 3 years, after the removal of two univariate outliers (on the PR and EM subscales) from the data set. No cases were flagged as being multivariate outliers. To test the influence of these outliers, analyses were also run both with and without univariate outliers, which did not appreciably alter the results. For students with available gender data, 65% were female, 35% male. The mean age was 18.4 years. Because ethnicity data for the sample itself was not available, such data of first-year students was aggregated across cohorts to establish a close representation of the sample. African-Americans, American Indians, Asian/Pacific Islanders, Caucasians, and Hispanics represented 2.7, 0.2, 5.1, 84.6, and 2.2% of this aggregate, respectively (ethnicity data was not unavailable for 2.2% of the cohort). Less than 1% of students reported being non-resident aliens. Students had mean SAT Math and SAT Verbal scores of 552 and 550, respectively, and standard deviations of 69.3 and 71.3, respectively.
学生被随机分配参加不同系列的评估，其中一些包括心理健康量表（见下文），在评估表上称为幸福感量表 （WBS）。2003 年，有 1,089 名学生参加了 WBS;2004 年为 1,387 人;2005 年为 1,560 人。大多数学生的 WBS 分数可以与有效的 SAT 分数相匹配，在从数据集中删除两个单变量异常值（在 PR 和 EM 子量表上）后，产生一个包含所有 3 年中 3,829 名学生的数据集。没有个案被标记为多变量异常值。为了检验这些异常值的影响，还运行了有和没有单变量异常值的分析，这并没有明显改变结果。对于有可用性别数据的学生，65% 是女性，35% 是男性。平均年龄为 18.4 岁。由于样本本身的种族数据不可用，因此将一年级学生的此类数据跨队列汇总，以建立样本的紧密代表。非裔美国人、美洲印第安人、亚洲/太平洋岛民、白种人和西班牙裔分别占该总人数的 2.7%、0.2%、5.1%、84.6% 和 2.2%（2.2% 的队列的种族数据不可用）。不到 1% 的学生报告是非居民外国人。学生的平均 SAT 数学和 SAT 语言成绩分别为 552 和 550，标准差分别为 69.3 和 71.3。

Measures 措施

Scales of Psychological Well-Being (SPWB) 心理健康量表 （SPWB）

A reduced, 54-item version of Ryff’s (1989) SPWB (cf. Kaliski 2006; van Dierendonck 2004) was used as the measure of PWB in this study. On a sample of psychology undergraduate students, van Dierendonck (2004) found Cronbach’s α reliability values of 0.83, 0.77, 0.78, 0.77, 0.73, and 0.65 for the Self Acceptance (SA), Positive Relations with Others (PR), Autonomy (AU), Environmental Mastery (EM), Purpose in Life (PL), and Personal Growth (PG) subscales. Of these, Peterson (1994) noted varying extant recommendations for Cronbach’s α reliability, but that 0.7 is often considered the minimum acceptable level for reliability.
在本研究中，Ryff （1989） SPWB（参见 Kaliski 2006;van Dierendonck 2004）的简化版 54 项被用作 PWB 的衡量标准。在心理学本科生的样本中，van Dierendonck （2004） 发现自我接纳 （SA）、与他人的积极关系 （PR）、自主性 （AU）、环境掌握 （EM）、生活目标 （PL） 和个人成长 （PG） 分量表的 Cronbach α信度值为 0.83、0.77、0.78、0.77、0.73 和 0.65。其中，Peterson （1994） 指出了对 Cronbach α 可靠性的不同现有建议，但 0.7 通常被认为是可靠性的最低可接受水平。

Out-of-range SPWB scores were recoded as missing (listwise deletion was used in analyses). Theoretically, this measure ought to yield a factor structure of 6 factors, corresponding to Ryff’s theorized dimensions of well-being, and also a higher-order factor of overall psychological well-being. Springer and Hauser (2006) find little model fit evidence for a higher-order factor in the 54-item version of the SPWB which was used in the present study, instead finding better fit for models that include a “negatively worded items” factor. Lindfors et al. (2006) found that a six-factor correlated factor model best fit data in the 120-item version, but did not test a negatively worded item factor. More recently, Kaliski (2006) conducted a comprehensive investigation into the factor structure of the 54-item SPWB. In her own research on four samples who had been administered the 54-item version of the SPWB, many of which were included in this study, she championed a seven-factor model, including Ryff’s dimensions but also “a negatively-worded method effect factor”. However, any structure is only useful to the extent that external validity evidence (i.e., the relationship between scores on the SPWB and external measures) is gathered. Though Strauser et al. (2008) recently found that, together, the subscales of Ryff’s 84-item SPWB accounted for significant variance in work personality, vocational identity, and career thoughts, further external validity studies are needed.
超出范围的 SPWB 分数被重新编码为缺失 （分析中使用列表删除）。从理论上讲，这个衡量标准应该产生一个由 6 个因素组成的因素结构，对应于 Ryff 的理论化幸福感维度，也是整体心理健康的更高阶因素。Springer 和 Hauser （2006） 在本研究中使用的 54 项版本的 SPWB 中发现几乎没有模型拟合证据证明高阶因子，相反，它发现包含“消极措辞项目”因子的模型拟合更好。Lindfors 等人（2006 年）发现，六因素相关因子模型最适合 120 项版本中的数据，但没有测试否定措辞的项目因子。最近，Kaliski （2006） 对 54 项 SPWB 的因子结构进行了全面调查。在她自己对四个接受了 54 项 SPWB 版本的样本的研究中，其中许多样本都包含在这项研究中，她倡导了一个七因素模型，包括 Ryff 的维度，但也包括“一个措辞消极的方法效应因子”。然而，任何结构仅在收集外部有效性证据（即 SPWB 分数与外部测量之间的关系）的范围内有用。尽管 Strauser 等人（2008 年）最近发现，Ryff 的 84 项 SPWB 的分量表共同解释了工作个性、职业身份和职业思想的显着差异，但需要进一步的外部效度研究。

SAT (The College Board, 1926–2005) SAT（美国大学理事会，1926-2005 年）

Frey and Detterman (2004) reported significant correlations between SAT (known for the sample of their study as the Scholastic Assessment Test) total score (combined verbal and mathematics scores) scores and IQ. Similar results were found by Bilder et al. (2006), in their study of cognitive development in schizophrenia, who reported a correlation of 0.82 between SAT and Full-scale WAIS IQ for their control (non-schizophrenic) group. SAT scores were considered to be a reasonable proxy for intelligence in the sample for the proposed study. In general, the earliest of the SAT scores were chosen in order to not favor those students who took the SAT more than once.
Frey 和 Detterman （2004） 报告了 SAT（以他们的研究样本为学术评估测试）总分（语言和数学综合分数）分数与智商之间的显着相关性。Bilder et al. （2006） 在他们对精神分裂症认知发展的研究中发现了类似的结果，他们报告了他们的对照组（非精神分裂症）SAT 和全面 WAIS IQ 之间的相关性为 0.82。SAT 分数被认为是拟议研究样本中智力的合理代表。一般来说，选择最早的 SAT 分数是为了不偏袒那些多次参加 SAT 的学生。

Data Analysis 数据分析

The purpose of the large sample was to capture a large number of students with high SAT scores, in order for there to be enough power to detect curvilinear results at the high end of the SAT distribution. Multiple regression was conducted on the following SPWB subscales, using SAT component scores (Verbal and Math) as predictors entered into the regression equations simultaneously for five of the SPWB subscales: Autonomy (AU), Environmental Mastery (EM), Purpose in Life (PL), Personal Growth (PG), and Positive Relations with Others (PR); for Positive Relations with Others, squared SAT component scores were also added simultaneously to test for curvilinear effects. To control for Type 1 error across the five hypotheses, alpha was Bonferroni-adjusted to 0.01 (=0.05/5).
大样本的目的是捕获大量 SAT 分数较高的学生，以便有足够的能力来检测 SAT 分布高端的曲线结果。在以下 SPWB 分量表上进行了多元回归，使用 SAT 组成部分分数（语言和数学）作为预测因子同时输入五个 SPWB 分量表的回归方程中：自主性 （AU）、环境掌握 （EM）、生活目标 （PL）、个人成长 （PG） 和与他人的积极关系 （PR）;对于 Positive Relations with Others，还同时添加了平方 SAT 成分分数以检验曲线效应。为了控制五个假设中的 1 类错误，alpha 被 Bonferroni 调整为 0.01 （=0.05/5）。

Additional exploratory analyses were conducted for three effects. The first exploratory analysis was for the relative contributions of each SAT component score (Verbal and Math). Next, as SAT component scores may moderate one another, the interaction between them was tested for significance. Scatterplots of SAT component scores with each dimension of PWB were visually analyzed to estimate the degree of linearity of the relationship between the components and the dimension of psychological well-being. The third exploratory analysis tested for gender differences in the relationship between SPWB subscale and SAT component scores. These analyses may be useful to practitioners and may aid in future investigations of well-being.
对 3 种效应进行了额外的探索性分析。第一次探索性分析是针对每个 SAT 组成部分分数 （Verbal 和 Math） 的相对贡献。接下来，由于 SAT 组成部分分数可能相互调节，因此测试了它们之间的交互作用的显著性。对 PWB 每个维度的 SAT 组成部分分数的散点图进行可视化分析，以估计各组成部分与心理健康维度之间关系的线性程度。第三项探索性分析检验了 SPWB 分量表与 SAT 成分分数之间关系的性别差异。这些分析可能对从业者有用，并可能有助于未来的幸福感调查。

Results 结果

Regression Assumptions 回归假设

All subscale scores associated with hypotheses [Autonomy (AU), Environmental Mastery (EM), Personal Growth (PG), Positive Relations with Others (PR), and Purpose in Life (PL)] were negatively skewed (−0.104 to −0.835). Kurtosis ranged from −0.300 to 0.502. Visual analysis of histograms revealed apparent ceiling effects of the Personal Growth, Purpose in Life, and especially the Positive Relations with Others subscales. These dimensions had more negative skewness. While these statistics indicate violations of the normality assumption of multiple regression, Tabachnick and Fidell (2007, p. 80) note that small departures from normality of approximately this size do not appreciably bias statistics.
与假设 [自主性 （AU）、环境掌握 （EM）、个人成长 （PG）、与他人的积极关系 （PR） 和生活目的 （PL）] 相关的所有子量表分数均呈负偏态（-0.104 至 -0.835）。峰度范围为 -0.300 至 0.502。直方图的视觉分析揭示了个人成长、生活目标，尤其是与他人的积极关系分量表的明显天花板效应。这些维度具有更多的负偏度。虽然这些统计数据表明违反了多元回归的正态性假设，但 Tabachnick 和 Fidell （2007， p. 80） 指出，与大约这种大小的正态性的微小偏差不会明显偏倚统计数据。

Inspection of the standardized residuals for all of the hypothesized relationships did not reveal heteroscedasticity of data.
检查所有假设关系的标准化残差并未揭示数据的异方差性。

SAT Math and Verbal scores had a mild positive correlation (N = 3,821, r = 0.406, p < 0.0005). Correlations between SPWB subscales ranged from 0.319 (PR–AU) to 0.688 (SA–EM; for all inter-subscale correlations, p < 0.0005; N ranged from 3,734 to 3,776 due to listwise deletion). Table 1 summarizes the subscale correlations.
SAT 数学和语言分数具有轻微的正相关 （N = 3,821，r = 0.406，p < 0.0005）。SPWB 分量表之间的相关性范围从 0.319 （PR-AU） 到 0.688 （SA-EM;对于所有子量表间相关性，p < 0.0005;由于按列表删除，N 范围从 3,734 到 3,776）。表 1 总结了子量表相关性。

Table 1 SPWB intercorrelations
表 1 SPWB 互相关

From: The Relationship Between Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being in Incoming College Students

	AU	EM	PG	PR	PL
EM	0.438
PG	0.407	0.529
PR	0.319	0.561	0.546
PL	0.347	0.614	0.606	0.526
SA	0.453	0.688	0.559	0.652	0.582

Autocorrelations are omitted. All correlations significant at an alpha of 0.0005.

Reliability 可靠性

Cronbach’s alpha for the SPWB subscales calculated to the following: AU, 0.774; EM, 0.771; PG, 0.736; PL, 0.776; PR, 0.808.
SPWB 分量表的 Cronbach’s alpha 计算如下：AU，0.774;EM，0.771;PG，0.736;PL，0.776;公关，0.808。

Exploratory Analyses 探索性分析

No statistically significant SAT component score interactions were observed (p > 0.05); these interactions were removed from the regression equations in tests of hypotheses.
未观察到具有统计学意义的 SAT 成分评分交互作用 （p > 0.05）;这些交互作用已从假设检验的回归方程中删除。

Gender interactions with all SAT component scores (or their squares) were not found to be statistically significant (p > 0.05), and were removed from the regression equations in tests of hypotheses. Several gender differences were observed in SPWB subscale scores. Women had significantly lower AU scores (standardized coefficient = −0.072, p < 0.0005, RΔ2=0.004), but higher EM (standardized coefficient: 0.054, p < 0.005, RΔ2=0.002) and PL, PR, and PG scores (standardized coefficients: 0.187, 0.193, and 0.189, respectively; RΔ2=0.032,0.034, and 0.033, respectively; p < 0.0005 for all three coefficients).
与所有 SAT 组成部分分数（或其平方）的性别交互未发现具有统计学意义 （p > 0.05），并且在假设检验中将其从回归方程中删除。在 SPWB 子量表分数中观察到几种性别差异。女性的 AU 评分显著较低 （标准化系数 = −0.072，p < 0.0005）， RΔ2=0.004 但 EM （标准化系数：0.054，p < 0.005， RΔ2=0.002 ） 和 PL、PR 和 PG 评分（标准化系数：分别为 0.187、0.193 和 0.189; RΔ2=0.032,0.034, and 0.033, 分别;p <所有三个系数均为 0.0005）。

Hypotheses 假设

See Table 2 for F ratios, standardized coefficients (the standard deviation change in the dependent variable for every standard deviation increase in the predictor) for SAT component scores (and squared scores in the case of hypothesis 5) for each SPWB subscale, and their probabilities. None of the current study’s hypotheses using only SAT component scores exceeded 2.0% of explained variance, reflected in the small semi-partial correlations between each component score and dimension of PWB (Table 3): semi-partial correlations represent the percentage of unique SPWB subscale variance for which each component score accounts.
每个 SPWB 分量表的 F 比率、标准化系数（预测变量中每个标准差增加的因变量的标准差变化）以及它们的概率见表 2。当前研究仅使用 SAT 成分分数的假设均不超过解释方差的 2.0%，这反映在每个成分分数和 PWB 维度之间的小半偏相关中（表 3）：半偏相关表示每个成分分数占的唯一 SPWB 子量表方差的百分比。

Table 2 Statistical tests and standardized coefficients of hypotheses
表 2 统计检验和标准化假设系数

From: The Relationship Between Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being in Incoming College Students

Table 3 Squared semi-partial correlations of predictors
表 3 预测变量的平方半偏相关

From: The Relationship Between Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being in Incoming College Students

Hypothesis	SAT Math	SAT Verbal	(SAT Math)2 (H5 only)	(SAT Verbal)2 (H5 only)
H1 (AU)	0.0013	0.0022	N/A	N/A
H2 (EM)	0.0007	0.0035	N/A	N/A
H3 (PL)	0.0142	0.0003	N/A	N/A
H4 (PG)	0.0151	0.0010	N/A	N/A
H5 (PR)	0.0092	0.0019	<0.0001	0.0018

H1: Multiple regression analysis revealed that SAT Math and SAT Verbal component scores predicted AU subscale scores (F 2, 3785 = 4.804, p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.003). Exploratory analyses revealed that the standardized regression coefficient for SAT Math was negative, but positive for SAT Verbal. Thus, hypothesis 1 was generally not supported, as one standardized coefficient was positive (as predicted), but the other, contrary to expectations, was negative.
H1：多元回归分析显示，SAT 数学和 SAT 语言成分分数预测 AU 分量表分数 （F2,3785 = 4.804，p < 0.01，R 2 = 0.003）。 探索性分析显示，SAT 数学的标准化回归系数为负，但 SAT Verbal 的标准化回归系数为正。因此，假设 1 通常不受支持，因为一个标准化系数为正（如预测），但另一个标准化系数与预期相反为负。

H2: Multiple regression analysis revealed that SAT Math and SAT Verbal component scores significantly predicted EM subscale scores (F 2, 3787 = 12.565, p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.007). Both SAT Math and Verbal had negative standardized coefficients. Thus, hypothesis 2 was not supported, because the relationships observed were negative rather than positive. However, neither SAT Verbal nor its square was a significant predictor of Environmental Mastery in further exploratory analysis after controlling for Positive Relations with Others and another exploratory analysis which excluding an apparently social item from the former.
H2：多元回归分析显示，SAT 数学和 SAT 语言成分分数显着预测 EM 分量表分数 （F2,3787 = 12.565，p < 0.01，R 2 = 0.007）。 SAT Math 和 Verbal 的标准化系数均为负值。因此，假设 2 不受支持，因为观察到的关系是负的而不是积极的。然而，在控制了与他人的积极关系和另一项从前者中排除明显社会项目的探索性分析之后，SAT Verbal 及其平方都不是环境掌握的重要预测因子。

H3: Multiple regression analysis revealed that SAT Math and SAT Verbal component scores significantly predicted PL subscale scores (F 2, 3792 = 37.072, p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.019). Both SAT Math and Verbal scores had negative standardized coefficients. Hypothesis 3 was thus not supported, as the relationship between SAT component scores and PL was negative.
H3：多元回归分析显示，SAT 数学和 SAT 语言成分分数显着预测 PL 分量表分数 （F2,3792 = 37.072，p < 0.01，R 2 = 0.019）。 SAT 数学和语言分数的标准化系数均为负值。因此，假设 3 不受支持，因为 SAT 组成部分分数与 PL 之间的关系呈负相关。

H4 (PG): Multiple regression analysis revealed that SAT Math and SAT Verbal component scores significantly predicted PG subscale scores (F 2, 3751 = 29.430, p < 0.01, R 2 = 0.015). Exploratory analyses revealed that the standardized regression coefficient for SAT Math was negative, but was positive (though nonsignificant) for SAT Verbal. Thus, hypothesis 4 was not supported, because the significant relationship was negative.
H4 （PG）：多元回归分析显示，SAT 数学和 SAT 语言成分分数显着预测 PG 子量表分数 （F2,3751 = 29.430，p < 0.01，R 2 = 0.015）。 探索性分析显示，SAT Math 的标准化回归系数为负，但 SAT Verbal 的标准化回归系数为正（尽管不显著）。因此，假设 4 不受支持，因为显著性关系是负的。

H5: Prior to conducting multiple regression analysis to test the quadratic term, both SAT Math and SAT Verbal scores were centered. Squares of these variables were then created and entered into the analysis along with the centered component scores. Multiple regression analysis revealed that centered SAT Math and SAT Verbal scores and their squares significantly predicted PR scores (F 4, 3783 = 18.008, p < 0.01, R2 = 0.019). All predictors had negative standardized coefficients; three, Math, Verbal, and squared Verbal, were significant, suggesting a curvilinear relationship unlikely to have arisen by chance. Thus, hypothesis 5 was supported.
H5： 在进行多元回归分析以检验二次项之前，SAT 数学和 SAT Verbal 分数都是居中的。然后创建这些变量的平方，并与居中的分量分数一起输入到分析中。多元回归分析显示，居中 SAT 数学和 SAT 语言分数及其平方显着预测 PR 分数 （F4,3783 = 18.008，p < 0.01，R2 = 0.019）。 所有预测变量的标准化系数均为负值;3，Math、Verbal 和 Squared Verbal 都很重要，这表明曲线关系不太可能偶然出现。因此，假设 5 得到支持。

Additionally, Hollingworth’s suggested cut-point for social difficulty as the 99.9th percentile of IQ at the Positive Relations for Others was not supported by visual analysis of the data. Instead, visual inspection of scatterplots suggested “risk areas” for PR (in which PR scores appeared to trend downward from the remaining SAT score ranges) above approximately 1.5 standard deviations above the mean (94th percentile), and below the mean (50th SAT percentile) of SAT component scores.
此外，Hollingworth 建议的社交困难切点作为 Positive Relations for Others 智商的第 99.9 个百分位，并未得到数据的可视化分析的支持。相反，对散点图的目视检查表明 PR 的“风险区域”（其中 PR 分数似乎从剩余的 SAT 分数范围呈下降趋势）高于平均值（第 94 个百分位数）约 1.5 个标准差，低于 SAT 组成部分分数的平均值（第 50 个 SAT 百分位数）。

Discussion 讨论

Prior studies suggested that in children and adolescents, intelligence is generally positively related to PWB, but may have a negative curvilinear relationship to Ryff’s Positive Relations with Others dimension. In adults, theory suggested generally positive relationships between PWB and intelligence, but possibly a curvilinear relationship with Positive Relations with Others. This study addressed the relationship between these constructs in young adults. Contrary to expectations, the relationship between intelligence and PWB in young adults in this study was found to be somewhat negative.
先前的研究表明，在儿童和青少年中，智力通常与 PWB 呈正相关，但可能与 Ryff 的与他人的正关系维度呈负曲线关系。在成年人中，理论表明 PWB 和智力之间通常是正关系，但可能与与他人的积极关系之间存在曲线关系。这项研究解决了这些结构在年轻人中之间的关系。与预期相反，本研究发现年轻人的智力和 PWB 之间的关系有些负。

SAT Verbal SAT 口语

Each indicator of intelligence correlated with PWB in different ways. Such differences in how SAT Math and SAT Verbal scores relate to dimensions of PWB are of special significance to research into intelligence. Because verbal ability is one of the most robust predictors of general intelligence, bivariate correlations and standardized coefficients between SAT Verbal and dimensions of PWB likely reflect the latter’s relationships to general intelligence. Recall that SAT Verbal had a positive bivariate correlation with Autonomy (p < 0.05) and significant negative bivariate correlations with Environmental Mastery, Positive Relations with Others, and Purpose in Life. Only the standardized SAT Verbal coefficients for Environmental Mastery and Autonomy were significant (α = 0.05), but SAT Verbal squared was a significant predictor of Positive Relations with Others.
每个智力指标都以不同的方式与 PWB 相关。SAT 数学和 SAT 语言分数与 PWB 维度相关的这种差异对于智力研究具有特殊意义。因为语言能力是一般智力最稳健的预测因素之一，所以 SAT Verbal 和 PWB 维度之间的双变量相关性和标准化系数可能反映了后者与一般智力的关系。回想一下，SAT Verbal 与自主性呈正二元相关 （p < 0.05），与环境掌握、与他人的积极关系和生活目标呈显著负二元相关。只有环境掌握和自主性的标准化 SAT 语言系数是显着的 （α = 0.05），但 SAT 语言平方是与他人积极关系的重要预测因子。

Recall that EM scores were not predicted by SAT Verbal after controlling for PR scores, meaning that the covariance between Environmental Mastery that was accounted for by its relationship with SAT Verbal was not statistically significant after controlling for its relationship with Positive Relations with Others. Put another way, most of the variance shared between SAT Verbal with Environmental Mastery is also shared by Positive Relations with Others. Indeed, controlling for SAT Verbal scores, the EM subscale remained related to PR. This might suggest that the portion of verbal ability, and likely overall intelligence, negatively related to Environmental Mastery is social in nature, which could mean that the more intelligent a person is, the greater challenges the social challenges in their environment.
回想一下，在控制了 PR 分数后，SAT Verbal 没有预测 EM 分数，这意味着在控制了它与 SAT Verbal 的关系后，由它与 SAT Verbal 的关系所解释的环境掌握之间的协方差在统计学上没有显着性。换句话说，SAT Verbal 与 Environmental Mastery 之间共享的大部分差异也被与他人的积极关系共享。事实上，控制 SAT Verbal 分数，EM 分量表仍然与 PR 相关。这可能表明，与环境掌握呈负相关的语言能力部分，可能还有整体智力，本质上是社会性的，这可能意味着一个人越聪明，他们环境中的社会挑战就越大。

Finally, SAT Verbal also had opposite relationships with Autonomy (positive) and Positive Relations with Others (negative curvilinear), which suggests that the two constructs would be somewhat more strongly correlated if their relationship with SAT Verbal were accounted for. These relationships, based on self-report, parallel Geake and Gross’s (2004) findings that teachers perceived high intellectual ability in their students as negatively correlated with the students’ social functioning and conformity. Geake and Gross theorized that this relationship can be explained by evolutionary psychology. Individuals with superior language ability would be generally be viewed with mistrust, as their ability could “affect, manipulate, exploit, or even distort the group’s social relationships”. This theory may also be sufficient to explain the relationships between Environmental Mastery and Positive Relations with Others and SAT Verbal in this study. Although higher intelligence might allow a greater ability to attract friends and influence one’s environment (increasing these latter PWB dimensions), the reactions to intelligence by group members may be more than enough to counteract these effects. Furthermore, such a trend would be more expected for the square of scores of verbal ability, as higher verbal ability becomes more salient to members of the group.
最后，SAT Verbal 也与 Autonomy （positive） 和 Positive Relations with Others（负曲线）有相反的关系，这表明如果考虑到它们与 SAT Verbal 的关系，这两个结构的相关性会更强一些。这些关系基于自我报告，与 Geake 和 Gross （2004） 的发现平行，即教师认为学生的高智力与学生的社会功能和从众呈负相关。Geake 和 Gross 理论上，这种关系可以用进化心理学来解释。具有卓越语言能力的个体通常会被视为不信任，因为他们的能力可以“影响、操纵、利用甚至扭曲群体的社会关系”。这个理论也可能足以解释本研究中环境掌握与与他人的积极关系以及 SAT Verbal 之间的关系。尽管更高的智力可能允许更强的能力来吸引朋友和影响一个人的环境（增加这些后 PWB 维度），但群体成员对智力的反应可能足以抵消这些影响。此外，对于语言能力分数的平方来说，这种趋势将更容易预期，因为较高的语言能力对群体成员来说变得更加突出。

Other explanations for this phenomenon may be more parsimonious, however. For example, the more intelligent a student is, the more likely it is that cultural stereotypes of the social problems and lack of environmental mastery in intelligent people (e.g., “the absent-minded professor”) become internalized by that student. Second, in elementary and secondary school, educational interventions for intelligent students, such as grade- or subject-acceleration (“skipping”) are underutilized (cf. Colangelo et al. 2004). This would lead to less interaction with students of similar cognitive speed and content (e.g., their intelligent agemates, or older students), thus leading the more intelligent to feel isolated, as suggested by Hollingworth, and thus to have a lower overall level of Positive Relations with Others. Furthermore, this lack of challenge could cause students to feel out of control of their educational environment (likely one of the most salient environments for such students). Either explanation could be viewed as hopeful news for brighter students as they meet new people in college, since they are likely to meet those of similar intelligence levels, and who are counterexamples to the stereotype.
然而，对这种现象的其他解释可能更为简洁。例如，一个学生越聪明，对聪明人（例如，“心不在焉的教授”）的社会问题和缺乏环境掌握的文化刻板印象就越有可能被该学生内化。其次，在小学和中学，针对聪明学生的教育干预措施，如成绩或科目加速（“跳槽”）没有得到充分利用（参见 Colangelo 等人，2004 年）。这将导致与认知速度和内容相似的学生（例如，他们聪明的同龄人或年长的学生）的互动减少，从而导致更聪明的人感到孤立，正如 Hollingworth 所建议的那样，因此与他人的积极关系总体水平较低。此外，这种缺乏挑战可能会导致学生对他们的教育环境感到失控（可能是此类学生最突出的环境之一）。这两种解释都可以被视为对更聪明的学生来说充满希望的消息，因为他们在大学里遇到了新朋友，因为他们很可能会遇到智力水平相似的学生，并且是刻板印象的反例。

SAT Math SAT 数学

SAT Math scores related negatively to all dimensions of PWB, both in terms of bivariate correlations and standardized coefficients (controlling for their SAT Math’s relationship to SAT Verbal). Four bivariate correlations were statistically significant at an alpha of 0.05, as were three standardized coefficients: PL, PG, and PR. While more research is needed to investigate whether SAT Math consistently relates negatively to these three dimensions in particular, the following three hypotheses are proposed for this effect.
SAT 数学分数与 PWB 的所有维度呈负相关，包括双变量相关性和标准化系数（控制其 SAT 数学与 SAT Verbal 的关系）。在 0.05 的 alpha 值下，四个双变量相关性具有统计学意义，三个标准化系数：PL 、 PG 和 PR 也是如此。虽然需要更多的研究来调查 SAT 数学是否始终与这三个维度呈负相关，但针对这种影响，提出了以下三个假设。

The first hypothesis is that students with high mathematical ability, in pursuit of lucrative fields such as finance or engineering, take advanced high school mathematical courses associated with these fields, to the exclusion of liberal arts classes, such as literature and philosophy. Such classes may nurture reflection about one’s “goals, intentions, [and] a sense of directedness” (Ryff’s Purpose in Life) and “one’s potential…to grow and expand as a person” (Personal Growth). Exposure to others’ ideas and worldviews in such classes may provide additional perspectives with which to understand others, potentially improving their Positive Relations with Others. Students with high mathematical ability may be less likely to have the opportunity brought by these classes to increase these dimensions. This hypothesis is generally compatible with Luthar et al.’s (1992) discussion of schemas and how they may moderate the relationship between intelligence and psychosocial adjustment. Students of high mathematical ability, though generally more able to create schemas when properly nurtured, are less likely to take those classes which provide this opportunity for growth.
第一个假设是，具有高数学能力的学生，为了追求金融或工程等利润丰厚的领域，会参加与这些领域相关的高级高中数学课程，而不包括文科课程，例如文学和哲学。这样的课程可以培养对一个人的“目标、意图 [和] 定向感”（Ryff 的《人生目标》）和“一个人的潜力…作为一个人成长和扩展“（个人成长）。在此类课程中接触他人的思想和世界观可能会提供额外的视角来理解他人，从而有可能改善他们与他人的积极关系。数学能力高的学生可能不太可能获得这些课程带来的机会来增加这些维度。这个假设与 Luthar 等人 （1992） 对图式以及它们如何调节智力和社会心理调整之间关系的讨论基本兼容。数学能力高的学生，虽然在适当培养的情况下通常更能创建图式，但不太可能参加那些提供这种成长机会的课程。

An alternative hypothesis is that mathematical ability is positively related to metacognition, which could mean that individuals high in mathematical ability are able to perceive, and therefore report, their own deficits in these three dimensions of PWB (Kruger and Dunning 1999). Metacognition may influence well-being in those with higher mathematical ability, but not verbal ability, for two reasons. First, one’s metacognition about these dimensions may simply be more closely related to his or her mathematical ability than verbal ability. Alternatively, verbal ability may allow for the articulation and justification of one’s long-term direction in life (cf. Henriques 2003). Thus, while high verbal ability increases metacognition, and thus indirectly creates lower levels of these PWB dimensions, this high verbal ability may directly increase these same dimensions of PWB via justification. This hypothesis is also compatible with Luthar et al.’s schema-mediation hypothesis about the relationship between intelligence and psychosocial adjustment, if verbal ability is directly tied to schema development.
另一种假设是数学能力与元认知呈正相关，这可能意味着数学能力高的个体能够感知并因此报告自己在 PWB 的这三个维度上的缺陷（Kruger 和 Dunning 1999）。元认知可能会影响数学能力较高的人的幸福感，但不会影响语言能力的人的幸福感，原因有两个。首先，一个人对这些维度的元认知可能只是与他或她的数学能力比语言能力更密切相关。或者，语言能力可能允许表达和证明一个人的长期生活方向（参见 Henriques 2003）。因此，虽然高语言能力增加了元认知，从而间接创造了这些 PWB 维度的较低水平，但这种高语言能力可能通过辩解直接增加了 PWB 的这些相同维度。如果语言能力与图式发展直接相关，那么这个假设也与 Luthar 等人关于智力和社会心理适应之间关系的图式中介假说兼容。

A third hypothesis is that individuals with higher SAT Math scores are differentially reinforced for intellectual, “thinking” responses rather than affective responses to stressors (e.g., problem-solving). This may also account for squared SAT Verbal’s relationships with Positive Relations with Others and Environmental Mastery. This hypothesis could also be compatible with Luthar et al.’s schema-mediation hypothesis, if it can be shown that higher intelligence not only directly benefits schema-creation, but also the creation of environmental contingencies which hinder the development of affective schemas.
第三个假设是，SAT 数学分数较高的个体在智力、“思考”反应方面受到差异强化，而不是对压力源（例如，解决问题）的情感反应。这也可以解释 SAT Verbal 与 Positive Relations with Others 和 Environmental Mastery 的平方关系。如果可以证明更高的智能不仅直接有利于图式的创建，而且有利于阻碍情感图式发展的环境偶然性的产生，那么这个假设也可能与 Luthar 等人的图式中介假说兼容。

Limitations 局限性

There are several limitations to the present study; some limitations are statistical in nature. One such limitation is the observed ceiling effect of the SPWB subscales. If greater variability in response options had been allowed (e.g., 10 response options rather than 6), stronger relationships between SPWB subscale scores and SAT component scores may have been observed. Responses that might otherwise have exceeded these ranges are attenuated, reducing the overall variance in the scores and thus systematically reducing the covariance between these variables. Although extrapolating below this point could lead to incorrect conclusions about the data pattern, visual analysis showed more maximum scores in the middle of SAT component score ranges. This suggests that if greater response variability were allowed, stronger relationships between SPWB subscales and SAT component scores may have been discovered.
本研究有几个局限性;一些限制本质上是统计的。其中一个限制是 SPWB 分量表的观察到的天花板效应。如果允许回答选项的更大可变性（例如，10 个回答选项而不是 6 个），则可能已经观察到 SPWB 子量表分数和 SAT 组成部分分数之间更强的关系。否则可能超出这些范围的响应将被减弱，从而减少分数的总体方差，从而系统地减少这些变量之间的协方差。尽管低于此点的推断可能会导致有关数据模式的错误结论，但视觉分析显示 SAT 组件分数范围的中间最高分更多。这表明，如果允许更大的反应变异性，则可能已经发现 SPWB 分量表和 SAT 成分分数之间更强的关系。

Another limitation is generalizability. Students in the sample chose to take the SAT and attend the aforementioned university: their SAT scores may not have been high enough to attend a more selective institution. Highly intelligent students, expected to have both high SAT Math and Verbal scores, are less likely to be found in this sample than at more selective schools. Nationally, the College Board (2011) normed the SAT with a mean of 500 and a standard deviation of 110 for the Math and for the Verbal portions of the test; as such, 2.5% of students should score at or above 720 on the Math section, and 2.5% of students should score at or above 720 on the Verbal section. On the Math section in this sample, 0.8% of students scored at or above 720; 1.2% scored above this on the Verbal section. If more of such students were included in the sample, a higher correlation between SAT Math and Verbal may have been observed due to a less-restricted range of scores in accepted students. Also, a different relationship between SAT scores and PWB dimensions may have been observed in data analysis, including significant interactions between SAT component scores. The low-stakes testing condition for the SPWB, taken just prior to the students’ first classes, may have limited these students’ generalizability.
另一个限制是泛化性。样本中的学生选择参加 SAT 并就读上述大学：他们的 SAT 成绩可能不够高，无法进入更具选择性的机构。与更具选择性的学校相比，高智商的学生预计会同时获得较高的 SAT 数学和语文成绩，因此不太可能出现在该样本中。在全国范围内，大学理事会（2011 年）将 SAT 标准化为数学和口头部分的平均值为 500，标准差为 110;因此，2.5% 的学生在数学部分的成绩应达到 720 分或以上，2.5% 的学生在语文部分的成绩应达到 720 分或以上。在这个样本的数学部分，0.8% 的学生得分达到或高于 720;1.2% 的学生在口头部分得分高于此。如果样本中包含更多此类学生，则由于被录取学生的分数范围限制较少，因此可能会观察到 SAT 数学和语言之间的相关性更高。此外，在数据分析中可能观察到 SAT 分数和 PWB 维度之间的不同关系，包括 SAT 组成部分分数之间的显着交互作用。SPWB 的低风险测试条件是在学生的第一节课之前进行的，这可能限制了这些学生的普遍性。

Additionally, given that more highly selective institutions can select the most promising students with very high SAT scores, those students with such scores who instead enrolled in the university in this study may have done so systematically. Such students may have been less involved in extracurricular activities, had lower high school grades, written lower-quality essays, chosen a lighter financial burden, avoided pressure to succeed, or simply been less interested in attending a more selective institution. Any of these possibilities would indicate that such students are not representative of the population of highly intelligent students, and may have created a different PWB profile from another postsecondary school’s students. Moreover, students in this sample were assessed just before they had started classes, which may have affected self-reported PWB.
此外，鉴于更具选择性的机构可以选择 SAT 分数非常高的最有前途的学生，那些在这项研究中反而进入大学的具有此类分数的学生可能是系统地这样做的。这些学生可能较少参与课外活动，高中成绩较低，论文质量较低，选择了较轻的经济负担，避免了成功的压力，或者只是对进入更具选择性的机构不太感兴趣。这些可能性中的任何一种都表明这些学生并不代表高智商学生群体，并且可能创建了与其他高等教育学生不同的 PWB 档案。此外，该样本中的学生在开始上课前接受了评估，这可能会影响自我报告的 PWB。

More broadly, the young adults in this population were all incoming first-year college students. Certainly, not every young adult with intelligence above the mean attends college. Therefore, at a minimum, any inferences from the results of this study are limited to young adults who attend institutions of higher education, and may not directly generalize to the population of young adults as a whole. The relationships between intelligence and the dimensions of well-being observed in this study may not be applicable to young adults who instead directly enter the workforce, volunteer, etc.
更广泛地说，这个群体中的年轻人都是即将入学的大学一年级学生。当然，并不是每个智力高于平均水平的年轻人都上大学。因此，至少，本研究结果的任何推论都仅限于就读高等教育机构的年轻人，并且可能无法直接推广到整个年轻人群。本研究中观察到的智力与幸福感维度之间的关系可能不适用于直接进入劳动力市场、志愿者等的年轻人。

Finally, an assumption about both the SAT and SPWB scores is that the constructs underlying them (latent scholastic aptitude and PWB dimensions) were measured without error. Structural equation modeling (SEM) could have been used to correct for measurement error (e.g., DeShon 1998) of SAT and SPWB scores.
最后，关于 SAT 和 SPWB 分数的假设是，它们背后的结构（潜在学术能力和 PWB 维度）的测量没有错误。结构方程建模 （SEM） 可用于校正 SAT 和 SPWB 分数的测量误差（例如，DeShon 1998）。

This study also has limitations specific to the constructs under investigation beyond purely statistical concerns. One such limitation lies in Ryff’s conceptualization of PWB relative to how other theorists have defined it. This study investigated Ryff’s dimensions of PWB, in addition to using a version of Ryff’s instrument to measure them. This study’s findings are limited to Ryff’s conceptualization of PWB, possibly to the exclusion of others. Methodologically, findings should be tempered by the self-report nature of the PWB instrument as well as the stress of taking it the day before classes and soon after many of the students moved to campus for the first time.
除了纯粹的统计问题之外，这项研究还具有特定于所研究结构的局限性。其中一个局限性在于 Ryff 对 PWB 的概念化，相对于其他理论家如何定义它。这项研究调查了 Ryff 的 PWB 维度，此外还使用 Ryff 的仪器来测量它们。这项研究的结果仅限于 Ryff 对 PWB 的概念化，可能排除了其他人。从方法上讲，研究结果应该受到 PWB 工具的自我报告性质以及在上课前一天和许多学生第一次搬到校园后不久服用它的压力的调节。

Another limitation is the relationship between the construct of intelligence and SAT scores. The relationships observed in this study could reflect another construct influencing SAT scores, such as motivation. One’s level of motivation to perform well on the SAT seems related to PWB dimensions, e.g., Environmental Mastery. Thus, it is possible that the relationships between SAT and these dimensions are not solely attributable to intelligence, but rather to motivation, preparation, etc., or a combination. For example, the observed negative relationship between SAT Verbal scores and the EM subscale score could be a reflection of motivation, in that students who felt that they had poorer environmental mastery would prepare more for, and try harder on, the SAT. If such additional effort and preparation were more likely to improve Verbal scores than Math, then a relationship could be observed for the former but not the latter: a plausible explanation for that very finding in this study.
另一个限制是智力结构与 SAT 分数之间的关系。本研究中观察到的关系可能反映了影响 SAT 分数的另一种结构，例如动机。一个人在 SAT 上取得好成绩的动机水平似乎与 PWB 维度有关，例如，环境掌握。因此，SAT 与这些维度之间的关系可能不仅归因于智力，还归因于动机、准备等，或两者的组合。例如，观察到的 SAT Verbal 分数和 EM 分量表分数之间的负相关可能是动机的反映，因为认为自己对环境掌握较差的学生会为 SAT 做更多准备，并更加努力地尝试 SAT。如果这种额外的努力和准备比数学更有可能提高语言成绩，那么可以观察到前者而不是后者的关系：这是对本研究中这一发现的合理解释。

Finally, due to lack of experimental control, this study does not attribute causality to the observed relationships. There many possible reasons for a relationship between intelligence and these dimensions of PWB. For example, it is conceivable that childhood PWB not only predicts adult PWB, but also affects the course of neurological development, which in turn promotes either increased or decreased intelligence. In this case, childhood PWB would cause both adult PWB and intelligence level. Alternatively, neurological differences (e.g., in gray matter and white matter) may cause both increased intelligence and differences in PWB.
最后，由于缺乏实验控制，本研究没有将因果关系归因于观察到的关系。智力与 PWB 的这些维度之间存在关系的原因有很多。例如，可以想象，儿童 PWB 不仅预测成人 PWB，而且还影响神经发育的过程，这反过来又促进智力的增加或下降。在这种情况下，儿童 PWB 会导致成人 PWB 和智力水平。或者，神经学差异 （例如，灰质和白质） 可能导致智力增加和 PWB 差异。

Recommendations for Future Research 对未来研究的建议

The relationship between intelligence and PWB in young adults in this study was somewhat negative in this sample, inconsistent with findings from previous studies of adolescents and children. This may be due to the developmental differences between young adults versus adolescents and children. Additional studies on large samples of adolescents are recommended. Further research is also recommended to compare well-being and intelligence levels in young adults as they progress through the transitions of increasing independence that comes with adulthood. This independence could be expected to increase an individuals’ well-being, but the extent to which this is moderated by an individual’s intelligence level is unclear.
在该样本中，本研究中年轻人的智力和 PWB 之间的关系有些负，与之前对青少年和儿童的研究结果不一致。这可能是由于年轻人与青少年和儿童之间的发育差异。建议对青少年的大样本进行额外研究。还建议进一步研究以比较年轻人在成年后独立性不断提高的过渡过程中的幸福感和智力水平。这种独立性可以预期会增加个人的幸福感，但这种独立性在多大程度上受到个人智力水平的调节尚不清楚。

Additional research into other factors affecting PWB, such as gender (which explained less than 4% of the variance in this study) is needed. Personality factors (Abbott et al. 2008), life events such as cancer survival (Costanzo et al. 2009), and stress (Chang 2006) have recently been shown to account for variance in PWB dimensions to varying degrees (12.5–19.8, 0–1.5, and 9–50%, respectively—Abbott et al. studied future PWB levels). Future research may reveal that the role of intelligence in PWB is trivial or nonsignificant after controlling for such factors.
需要对影响 PWB 的其他因素进行进一步研究，例如性别（它解释了本研究中不到 4% 的方差）。人格因素（Abbott 等人，2008 年）、癌症生存率等生活事件（Costanzo 等人，2009 年）和压力（Chang 2006 年）最近已被证明在不同程度上解释了 PWB 维度的方差（分别为 12.5-19.8、0-1.5 和 9-50%——Abbott 等人研究了未来的 PWB 水平）。未来的研究可能会揭示，在控制了这些因素后，智力在 PWB 中的作用是微不足道或不重要的。

Prior researcher has uncovered linear relationships between intelligence and many constructs and outcomes. However, the significant curvilinear relationship between SAT Verbal and Positive Relations with Others in this study demonstrates the importance of investigating polynomial models when warranted by the literature. To the extent that this relationship is replicated in future studies, it is recommended that polynomial relationships of intelligence with other variables be considered in future studies of intelligence.
之前的研究人员已经发现了智力与许多结构和结果之间的线性关系。然而，在本研究中，SAT 言语关系和与他人的积极关系之间的显着曲线关系表明了在文献支持的情况下研究多项式模型的重要性。为了在未来的研究中复制这种关系，建议在未来的智力研究中考虑智力与其他变量的多项式关系。

Procedural considerations are also important when studying extreme intelligence levels. Depending on sample size, individuals at least two and a half to three standard deviations above the mean of a sample may be treated as univariate outliers. Such individuals, however, are likely to be more highly influential in statistical tests of polynomial relationships than in linear relationships. Therefore, unless there are other reasons to warrant excluding such an individual’s data (e.g., a nonsensical pattern of responses, a high score on a lie scale, or anything else indicating a reason to believe the data are not to be trusted), automatic exclusion of such individuals is not recommended.
在研究极端智力水平时，程序考虑也很重要。根据样本量，比样本平均值至少高两个半到三个标准差的个体可能被视为单变量异常值。然而，这样的个体在多项式关系的统计检验中可能比在线性关系中更具影响力。因此，除非有其他理由需要排除此类个人数据（例如，无意义的回答模式、测谎量表的高分，或任何其他表明有理由认为数据不可信的情况），否则不建议自动排除此类个人数据。

The extent to which inferences can be made statistical analyses about the population of individuals with such high intelligence (such as those above Hollingworth’s suggested 99.9th percentile cutoff) is debatable. Such individuals are likely to be the highest intelligence score in all but very large samples. In the absence of data points above this point, the best-fitting regression line or curve ends at about their score (if not excluded as an outlier!). Additionally, since the development of invariance studies, few studies have been conducted on the invariance of constructs like PWB at different ranges of intelligence. Much validity evidence about intelligence may thus be inapplicable to people with very high intelligence scores. This could lead to inferences about the relationship between intelligence and other variables which may not apply to these individuals. Such inferences may be dubious at relatively low levels (in this study, evidence from scatterplots of a curvilinear pattern emerged at the 95th percentile). Invariance studies of intelligence are therefore recommended, as are mixed-methods approaches for those of rarified ability.
对具有如此高智力的个体群体（例如高于 Hollingworth 建议的第 99.9 个百分位临界值的个体）的推断在多大程度上是值得商榷的。这样的个体可能是除非常大的样本之外的所有样本中智力得分最高的。如果没有高于此点的数据点，则最佳拟合回归线或曲线的终点约为其分数（如果不排除为异常值！此外，自从不变性研究发展以来，很少有人对 PWB 等结构在不同智力范围内的不变性进行研究。因此，许多关于智力的有效性证据可能不适用于智力得分非常高的人。这可能会导致关于智力和其他变量之间关系的推断，而这些推断可能不适用于这些个体。这种推论在相对较低的水平上可能是可疑的（在这项研究中，曲线模式的散点图证据出现在第 95 个百分位数）。因此，建议对智力进行不变性研究，对于能力稀少的人，也建议采用混合方法。

Conclusion 结论

This study revealed that for the sample of young adults, more intelligent students were, the lower their PWB tended to be four of the five tested dimensions. The extent to which other factors, such as personality and or gender, interact with intelligence in its relationship to PWB, is a subject rich in potential future study. Because childhood intelligence has proven to be a positive predictor of later occupational status, and adulthood intelligence of current occupational status (e.g., Judge et al. 1999), it seems likely that the more intelligent young adults are, the greater likelihood that they can develop into the most productive and influential members of society, yet without considering other factors such as PWB, such efforts may be incomplete.
这项研究表明，对于年轻人的样本，越聪明的学生，他们的 PWB 往往是五个测试维度中的四个。其他因素，如性格和/或性别，在与 PWB 的关系中与智力相互作用的程度，是一个充满未来潜在研究的主题。因为童年智力已被证明是以后职业状况的积极预测因素，而成年智力是当前职业状况的积极预测因素（例如，Judge 等人，1999 年），似乎越聪明的年轻人，他们就越有可能发展成为社会上最有生产力和影响力的成员，但不考虑其他因素，如 PWB， 这些努力可能是不完整的。

Winner (2000) promotes the “interven[tion] for the happiness and health of gifted students” lest they become “bored” and “socially isolated”, and so that “they can become our future leaders and innovators”. The negative relationship found in this study between intelligence and the Positive Relations with Others dimension of PWB lends credence to especially targeting such efforts toward highly gifted students. Research into effective interventions into PWB for such students, as well as how they may be tailored in order to account for possible interactive effects of development, gender, or personality, could ultimately improve the lives of these individuals with great potential to success and improve the world.
Winner （2000） 提倡 “干预资优学生的幸福和健康”，以免他们变得 “无聊” 和 “社会孤立”，以便 “他们可以成为我们未来的领导者和创新者”。在这项研究中发现的智力与 PWB 的与他人的积极关系维度之间的负相关关系，使这种努力特别针对高天赋学生提供了可信度。研究针对这些学生对 PWB 的有效干预措施，以及如何对其进行调整以解释发展、性别或个性可能产生的互动影响，最终可以改善这些具有巨大成功潜力和改善世界的人的生活。

Endnotes

a At the time of the original Stanford-Binet (Terman’s translation and revision to Binet’s test, or S-B), no method had yet been discovered to transform S-B scores, given in the form of ratio IQ (100 times mental age divided by chronological age), into deviation IQ scores. Therefore, Terman’s (1925) and Hollingworth’s (1942) findings will be reported in the context of the original S-B score, whereas other scores will be related to percentiles.

b 140 + IQ on the original (ratio IQ) S-B.

c 136+ IQ (deviation; mean = 100, standard deviation = 15).

d 136–140 (deviation) IQ, whom Gallucci called “moderately superior."

e 150+ (deviation) IQ, whom Gallucci called “very superior.”

f 127+ (deviation) IQ.

g Over 160 IQ, original S-B.

h Hollingworth’s reasoning on this matter reflects thinking in terms of deviation IQ (i.e., that highly intelligent children deviate in the extreme from the norms of their age-mates in their cognitive content, which, in her view, creates an effect in non-cognitive domains). Therefore, her theory relates to deviation IQ, though the subjects of her study were more technically measured using a ratio IQ scale.

i Deviation IQ of at least 145 (99.75th percentile).

j 160+ deviation IQ.

k 116–132 deviation IQ.

l 132+ IQ.

m 140+ IQ.

References

• Abbott, R. A., Croudace, T. J., Ploubidis, G. B., Kuh, D., Richards, M., & Huppert, F. A. (2008). The relationship between early personality and midlife psychological well-being: evidence from a UK birth cohort study. Journal Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 43, 679–687.

• Achenbach, T. M. (1991). Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist/4-18 & 1991 Profile. Burlington: University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry.

• American Psychiatric Association. (200). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: Author.

• Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2010). Exploring and nurturing the spiritual life of college students. Journal of College and Character, 11(3), 1–9.

• Betts, G. T. (1986). Development of the emotional and social needs of gifted individuals. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 587–589.

• Bilder, R. M., Reiter, G., Bates, J., Lencz, T., Szeszko, P., Goldman, R. S., et al. (2006). Cognitive development in schizophrenia: follow-back from the first episode. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 28(2), 270–282.

• Bland, L., & Sowa, C. (1994). An overview of resilience in gifted children. Roeper Review, 17(2), 77–80.

• Chang, E. C. (2006). Perfectionism and dimensions of Psychological Well-Being in a college student sample: a test of a stress-mediation model. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25(9), 1001–1022.

• The College Board (1926–2005). SAT Reasoning Test. New York: The College Board.

• Costanzo, E. S., Ryff, C. D., & Singer, B. H. (2009). Psychosocial adjustment among cancer survivors: findings from a national survey of health and well-being. Health Psychology, 28(2), 147–156.

Article PubMed Central

• Dauber, S. L., & Benbow, C. P. (1990). Aspects of personality and peer relations of extremely talented adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34(1), 10–14.

• Davis, G. A., & Rimm, S. B. (2004). Education of the gifted and talented (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

• DeShon, R. P. (1998). A cautionary note on measurement error corrections in structural equation models. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 412–423.

• Frey, M. C., & Detterman, D. K. (2004). Scholastic assessment or g? The relationship between the scholastic assessment test and general cognitive ability. Psychological Science, 15(6), 373–378.

• Gallucci, N. T. (1988). Emotional adjustment of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 32, 273–276.

• Gottfredson, L. S. (2008). Of what value is intelligence? In A. Prifitera, D. H. Saklofske, & L. G. Weiss (Eds.), WISC-IV clinical assessment and intervention (2nd ed., pp. 545–563). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

• Gross, M. U. M. (2004). The use of radical acceleration in cases of extreme intellectual precocity. Grouping and acceleration practices in gifted education (pp. 13–31). Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press. Retrieved November 7, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

• Grossberg, I. N., & Cornell, D. G. (1988). Relationship between personality adjustment and high intelligence: terman versus Hollingworth. Exceptional Children, 55(3), 266–272.

• Henriques, G. (2003). The tree of knowledge system and the theoretical unification of psychology. Review of General Psychology, 7(2), 150–182. Retrieved October 17, 2007, from PsycINFO database.

• Hollingworth, L. S. (1942). Children above 180 IQ Stanford-Binet: origin and development. Yonkers-on-Hudson: World Book.

• Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The big five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 621–652.

• Kaliski, P. K. (2006). Diagnosing the misfit of the theoretical factor structure of the Scales of Psychological Well-Being (SPWB): Development of the revised SPWB. Unpublished master’s thesis, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia, USA.

• Kline, B. E., & Meckstroth, E. A. (1985). Understanding and encouraging the exceptionally gifted. Roeper Review, 8(1), 24–30.

• Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134.

• Lindfors, P., Berntsson, L., & Lundberg, Ulf. (2006). Factor structure of Ryff’s psychological well-being scales in Swedish female and male white-collar workers. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 1213–1222.

• Lovecky, D. V. (1986). Can you hear the flowers singing? Issues for gifted adults. Journal of Counseling and Development, 64, 572–575.

• Luthar, S. S., Zigler, E., & Goldstein, D. (1992). Psychosocial adjustment among intellectually gifted adolescents: the role of cognitive-developmental and experiential factors. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 33(2), 361–375.

• Lysaker, P. H., Clements, C. A., Wright, D. E., Evans, J., & Marks, K. A. (2001). Neurocognitive correlates of helplessness, hopelessness, and well-being in schizophrenia. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 189(7), 457–462.

• MacCallum, R. C., Zhang, S., Preacher, K. J., & Rucker, D. D. (2002). On the practice of dichotomization of quantitative variables. Psychological Methods, 7(1), 19–40.

• Neihart, M. (1999). The impact of giftedness on psychological well-being. Roeper Review., 22(1), 10–17.

• Norman, A. D., Ramsay, S. G., & Martray, C. R. (1999). Relationship between levels of giftedness and psychosocial adjustment. Roeper Review, 22(1), 5–9.

• Parker, J., Mitchell, A., Kalpakidou, A., Walshe, M., Jung, H.-Y., Nosarti, C., et al. (2008). Cerebellar growth and behavioural and neuropsychological outcome in preterm adolescents. Brain, 131, 1344–1351.

• Peterson, R. A. (1994). A meta-analysis of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(2), 381–391.

• Plescia-Pikus, M., Long-Suter, E., & Wilson, J. P. (1988). Achievement, well-being, intelligence, and stress reaction in adult children of alcoholics. Psychological Reports, 62, 603–609.

• Reynolds, C. R., & Kamphaus, R. W. (1992). Behavior assessment system for children-Second Edition–Student Observation System (BASC-2-SOS). Circle Pines: AGS/American Guidance Service.

• Richards, J., Encel, J., & Shute, R. (2003). December). The emotional and behavioural adjustment of intellectually gifted adolescents: a multi-dimensional, multi-informant approach. High Ability Studies, 14(2), 153–164.

• Rinn, A. N., & Plucker, J. A. (2004). We recruit them, but then what? The educational and psychological experiences of academically talented undergraduates. Gifted Child Quarterly, 48(1), 54–67.

• Ryff, C. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.

• Sarason, I. G., Levine, H. M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R. (1983). Assessing social support: the social support questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127–139.

• Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: an introduction. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5–14.

• Springer, K. W., & Hauser, R. M. (2006). An assessment of the construct validity of Ryff’s Scales of Psychological Well-Being: method, mode, and measurement effects. Social Science Research, 35(4), 1080–1102.

• Strauser, D. R., Lustig, D. C., & Çiftçi, A. (2008). Psychological Well-Being: its relation to work personality, vocational identity, and career thoughts. The Journal of Psychology, 142(1), 21–35.

• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

• Terman, L. M. (1925). Genetic studies of genius, Vol. 1: Mental and physical traits of a thousand gifted children. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

• The College Board (2011). SAT Data Tables. Retrieved June 23, 2011, from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/testing/sat-reasoning/scores/sat-data-tables.

• Torrance, E. P. (1962). Guiding creative talent. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

• Van Dierendonck, D. (2004). The construct validity of Ryff’s Scales of Psychological Well-being and its extension with spiritual well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(3), 629–643.

• Vialle, W., Heaven, P. C. L., & Ciarocchi, J. (2007). On being gifted, but sad and misunderstood: social, emotional, and academic outcomes of gifted students in the Wollongong Youth Study. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(6), 569–586.

• Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1991). Preliminary manual for the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule–Expanded Form (PANAS-X). Unpublished manuscript, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.

• Winner, E. (2000). The origins and ends of giftedness. American Psychologist, 55(1), 159–169.

Author contributions

CJW and GRH designed the study. GRH and CJW incorporated theoretical perspectives to the study. CJW carried out the statistical analysis. CJW and GRH drafted the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Profs. Robin Anderson and Dena Pastor for their comments on previous versions of this article.

Compliance with ethical guidelines

Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. James Madison University, Harrisonburg, Virginia, USA

Clifton J Wigtil & Gregg R Henriques

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clifton J Wigtil.

---

via:

• The Relationship Between Intelligence and Psychological Well-Being in Incoming College Students | Psychology of Well-Being | Full Text

  https://psywb.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s13612-015-0029-8