Abstract
This chapter examines current views on intelligence and its assessment with a particular focus on the cultural context. The topics to be addressed are discussed in three parts: historical influences, cultural issues in conceptualizing and assessing intelligence, and adapting and developing intelligence test adaptation in the wider world.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We use this term to refer to developing or emerging non-Western countries that constitute the majority of humankind and define community in terms of what it is.
References
Armour-Thomas, E., & GoPaul-McNicol, S. A. (1998). Assessing intelligence: Applying a biocultural model. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Baddeley, A. D., Thomson, N., & Buchanan, M. (1975). Word length and the structure of short-term memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 575–589.
Berry, J., Poortinga, Y., Breugelmans, S., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology. Research and applications (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bracken, B. A., & McCallum, R. S. (1998). Universal nonverbal intelligence test examiner’s manual. Itsaka: Riverside.
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 185–216.
Brown, L., Sherbenou, R. J., & Johnsen, S. K. (2010). Test of nonverbal intelligence (4th ed.). San Antonio: Pearson.
Butcher, J. N., & Han, K. (1996). Methods of establishing cross- cultural equivalence. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.), International adaptations of the MMPI-2: Research and clinical applications (pp. 44–63). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cattell, R. B. (1940). A culture free intelligence test, I. Journal of Educational Psychology, 31, 176–199.
Dasen, P. R. (2011). Culture, cognition and learning. In A. Bame Nsamenang & T. S. Tschombe (Eds.), Handbook of African educational theories and practices: A generative teacher education curriculum contents (pp. 187–202). Bamenda: Human Development Resource Centre.
Edwards, O., & Oakland, T. (2006). Factorial invariance of Woodcock-Johnson scores for African Americans and Caucasian American. Journal of Psycho-educational Assessment, 24, 358–366.
Flanagan, D. P., Ortiz, S. O., & Alfonso, V. C. (2013). Essentials of cross-battery assessment (2nd ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.
Flynn, J. R. (2012). Are we getting smarter? Rising IQ in the twenty-first century. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Fore, C., Burke, M. D., & Martin, C. (2006). Curriculum-based measurement: An emerging alternative to traditional assessment for African American children and youth. The Journal of Negro Education, 75, 16–24.
Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Georgas, J., Weiss, L., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.). (2003). Cultures and children’s intelligence: A cross-cultural analysis of the WISC-III. New York: Academic.
Goodnow, J.1. (1984). On being judged intelligent. International Journal of Psychology, 19:391–406.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1994). The science and politics of race-norming. American Psychologist, 49, 955–963.
Gottfredson, L. S. (1997). Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history and bibliography. Intelligence, 24(1), 13–23.
Gould, S. J. (1996). The mismeasure of man. New York: Norton & Company.
Grigorenko, E. L., Geissler, P. W., Prince, R., Okatcha, F., Nokes, C., Kenny, D. A., Bundy, D. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). The organization of Luo conceptions of intelligence: A study of implicit theories in a Kenyan village. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 367–378.
Hambleton, R. K., & Lee, M. K. (2013). Methods for translating and adapting tests to increase cross-language validity. In D. H. Saklofske, C. R. Reynolds, & V. L. Schwean (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment (pp. 172–181). New York: Oxford University Press.
Hambleton, R., Merenda, P., & Spielberger, C. (Eds.). (2005). Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
Helms, J. E. (1992). Why is there no study of cultural equivalence in standardized cognitive ability testing. American Psychologist, 47, 1083–1101.
Helms-Lorenz, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in cognitive performance and Spearman’s Hypothesis: G or C? Intelligence, 31, 9–29.
Hernstein, R., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: The Free Press.
Hess, R., Kashiwagi, K., Azuma, H., Price, G., & Dickson, W. P. (1980). Maternal expectations for mastery of developmental tasks in Japan and the United States. International Journal of Psychology, 15, 259–271.
Hu, S., & Oakland, T. (1991). Global and regional perspectives on testing children and youth: An international survey. International Journal of Psychology, 26, 329–344.
International Test Commission, (2010). International test commission guidelines for translating and adapting tests. Retrieved from http://www.intestcom.org/upload/sitefiles/40.pdf
Jeltova, I., Birney, D., Fredine, N., Jarvin, L., Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2011). Making instruction and assessment responsive to diverse students’ progress: Group administered dynamic assessment in teaching mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 381–395.
Jensen, A. (1972). Genetics and education. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Jensen, A. (1973). Educability & group differences. San Francisco: Harper & Row.
Jensen, A. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: The Free Press.
Kaplan, E., Fein, D., Kramer, J., Delis, D., & Morris, R. (2004). WISC-IV integrated. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
Kaufman, A. S., & Kaufman, N. L. (2004). Kaufman assessment battery for children, second edition: Manual. Circle Pines: AGS Publishing.
Kluckhohn, C. E., Murray, H. A., & Schneider, D. M. (Eds.). (1953). Personality in nature, society, and culture. New York: Knopf.
Lonner, W. J. (1980). The search for psychological universals. In H. C. Triandis & W. W. Lambert (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 143–204). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Lonner, W. J. (1985). Issues in testing and assessment in cross-cultural counseling. Counseling Psychologist, 13, 599–614.
Lonner, W. J. (2011). The continuing challenge of discovering psychological ‘order’ across cultures. In F. J. R. Van de Vijver, A. Chasiotis, & S. M. Breugelmans (Eds.), Fundamental questions of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 64–94). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Malda, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Srinivasan, K., Transler, C., Sukumar, P., & Rao, K. (2008). Adapting a cognitive test for a different culture: An illustration of qualitative procedures. Psychology Science Quarterly, 50, 451–468.
Malda, M., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Srinivasan, K., Transler, C., & Sukumar, P. (2010). Traveling with cognitive tests: Testing the validity of a KABC-II adaptation in India. Assessment, 17, 107–115.
Marfo, K. (2011). Envisioning an African child development field. Child Development Perspectives, 5(2), 140–147.
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2008). Emotional intelligence: New ability or eclectic mix of traits? American Psychologist, 63, 503–517.
McCallum, R. S., & Bracken, B. A. (2013). Intelligent testing of underserved populations. In J. C. Kaufman (Ed.), Intelligent testing: Integrating psychological theory and clinical practice (pp. 193–219). New York: Cambridge University Press.
McGrew, K. S. (2005). The Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory of cognitive abilities: Past, present, and future. In D. P. Flanagan & P. L. Harrison (Eds.), Contemporary intellectual assessment: Theories, tests, and issues (pp. 136–181). New York: The Guilford Press.
McGrew, K., & Flanagan, D. (1998). The intelligence test desk reference: Gf-Gc cross-battery assessment. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Mercer, J. R., & Lewis, J. F. (1977). SOMPA, System of multicultural pluralistic assessment: Parent interview manual. New York: Psychological Corporation.
Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., Kay, G. G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. R., Eisman, E. J., Kubiszyn, T. W., & Reed, G. M. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment. American Psychologist, 56, 128–165.
Mpofu, E. (2004). Being intelligent with Zimbabweans: A historical and contemporary view. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), International handbook of intelligence (pp. 364–390). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mpofu, E., & Nyanungo, K. R. (1998). Educational and psychological testing in Zimbabwean schools: Past, present and future. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14, 71–90.
Mpofu, E., & Ortiz, J. (2009). Equitable assessment practices in diverse contexts. In E. Grigorenko (Ed.), Multicultural psychoeducational assessment (pp. 41–76). New York: Springer.
Mpofu, E., Gudyanga, E., & Ngara, C. (2007). Constructions of giftedness among The Shona of Central-Southern Africa. In S. N. Phillipson & M. McCann (Eds.), What does it mean to be gifted? Sociocultural perspectives (pp. 225–252). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mpofu, E., Ntinda, K., & Oakland, T. (2012). Understanding human abilities in Sub-Saharan African settings. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, Unit 4. Retrieved from http://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/orpc/vol4/iss3/2. ISBN 978-0-9845627-0-1
Mpofu, E., Oakland, T., Ntinda, K., Seeco, E., Maree, J.G. (2014). Constructing a framework for the use of tests within a developing country’s school system. International Perspectives in Psychology: Research, Practice, Consultation, 3(2), 106–122. doi: 10.1037/ipp0000015
Murphy, L. M., Geisinger, K. F., Carlson, J. F., & Spies, R. A. (Eds.). (2011). Tests in print VIII. Lincoln: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements.
Murray, G. K., Jones, P. B., Kuh, D., & Richards, M. (2007). Infant developmental milestones and subsequent cognitive function. Annals of Neurology, 62(2), 128–136.
Naglieri, J. A. (2003). Naglieri nonverbal abtlity Test. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., Halpern, D. F., Loehlin, J. C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R., & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51(2), 77–101.
Nisbett, R. E. (2009). Intelligence and how to get it: Why schools and cultures count. New York: Norton.
Nsamenang, A. B. (2006). Human ontogenesis: An indigenous African view on development and intelligence. International Journal of Psychology, 41, 293–297.
Oakland, T. (Ed.). (1977). Psychological and educational assessment of minority children. Larchmont: Brunner-Mazel.
Oakland, T. (2009). How universal are test development and use? In E. Grigorenko (Ed.), Assessment of abilities and competencies in an era of globalization (pp. 1–40). New York: Springer.
Oakland, T., & Harrrison, P. (2008). Adaptive behavior and skills: An introduction. In T. Oakland & P. Harrison (Eds.), ABAS-II: Clinical uses and interpretations. New York: Elsevier.
Oakland, T., & Hu, S. (1992). The top ten tests used with children and youth worldwide. Bulletin of the International Test Commission, 19, 99–120.
Oakland, T., Poortinga, Y., Schlegel, J., & Hambleton, R. K. (2001). International Test Commission: Its history, current status, and future directions. International Journal of Testing, 1, 3–32.
Oakland, T., Wechsler, S., & Maree, K. (2013). Test use with children across cultures: A view from three countries. In K. F. Geisinger (Ed.), APA handbook of testing and assessment in psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 231–258). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ortiz, S. O. (2013). Distinguishing difference from disorder in English learners and guidance on how to use the Culture-Language Interpretive Matrix. New York: Cross-Battery Institute, Fordham University.
Pence, A. (2011). Early childhood care and development research in Africa: Historical, conceptual, and structural challenges. Child Development Perspectives, 5(2), 112–118.
Phelps, R. (Ed.). (2008). Correcting fallacies about educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Porteus, S. D. (1937). Primitive intelligence and environment. New York: MacMillan Co.
Prifitera, A., Saklofske, D. H., & Weiss, L. G. (Eds.). (2008). WISC-IV clinical interpretation and intervention. San Diego: Academic.
Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Raven’s standard progressive matrices – Parallel form. Oxford: Oxford Psychologists Press.
Rey, A. (1964). L'examen clinique en psychologie [The clinical examination in psychology]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Roid, G. H., Miller, L. J., Pomplum, M., & Koch, C. (2013). Leiter international performance scale (3rd ed.). Torrance: Western Psychological Services.
Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11(2), 235–294.
Ryan, C. (2013, August). Language use in the United States 2011: American community survey reports. Retrieved from www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acs-22.pdf
Saklofske, D. H., Reynolds, C. R., & Schwean, V. L. (Eds.). (2013). Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sattler, J. M. (2008). Assessment of children: Cognitive foundations (5th ed.). San Diego: Jerome Sattler.
Serpell, R. (2008). Participatory appropriation and the cultivation of nurturance: A case study of African primary health science curriculum development. In P. R. Dasen & A. Akkari (Eds.), Educational theories and practices from the “majority world” (pp. 71–97). New Delhi: Sage.
Serpell, R. (2011). Social responsibility as a dimension of intelligence, and as an educational goal: Insights from programmatic research in an African society. Child Development Perspectives, 5, 126–133.
Serpell, R., & Haynes, B. P. (2004). The cultural practice of intelligence testing: Problems of international export. In R. J. Sternberg & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.), Culture and competence: Contexts of life success (pp. 163–185). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Snyderman, M., & Rothman, S. (1988). The IQ controversy, the media and public policy. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607–627.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999). The theory of successful intelligence. Review of General Psychology, 3, 292–375.
Sternberg, R. J., & Jordan, J. (Eds.). (2005). A handbook of wisdom: Psychological perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., Nokes, C., Geissler, P. W., Prince, R., Okatcha, F., Bundy, D. A., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). The relationship between academic and practical intelligence: A case study in Kenya. Intelligence, 29, 401–418.
Trimble, J. E. (2010). Cultural measurement equivalence. In C. C. Clauss-Ehlers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cross cultural school psychology (pp. 316–318). New York: Springer.
Tulsky, D., Saklofske, D. H., Chelune, G. J., Heaton, R. K., Ivnik, R. J., Bornstein, R., Prifitera, A., & Ledbetter, M. F. (2003). Clinical interpretation of the WAIS-III and WMS-III. San Diego: Academic.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (1997). Meta-analysis of cross-cultural comparisons of cognitive test performance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 678–709.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2001). The evolution of cross-cultural research methods. In D. Matsumoto (Ed.), Handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 77–97). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2003). Bias and equivalence: Cross-cultural perspectives. In J. A. Harkness, F. J. R. Van de Vijver, & P. P. Mohler (Eds.), Cross-cultural survey methods (pp. 143–155). New York: Wiley.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (2011). Equivalence and bias: A review of concepts, models, and data analytic procedures. In D. Matsumoto & F. J. R. van de Vijver (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 17–45). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2005). Conceptual and methodological issues in adapting tests. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational tests and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 39–64). Mawhaw: Erlbaum.
VandenBos, G. (2007). APA dictionary of psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Wechsler, D. (1949). Wechsler intelligence scale for children. New York: Psychological Corporation.
Wechsler, D. (1974). Manual for the Wechsler intelligence scale for children-revised. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.
Weiss, L. G., Saklofske, D. H., Coalson, D., & Raiford, S. E. (Eds.). (2010). WAIS-IV clinical use and interpretation. San Diego: Academic.
Weiss, L. G., Keith, T. Z., Zhu, J., & Chen, H. (2013a). WAIS-IV and clinical validation of the four and five factor interpretative approaches. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31, 94–113.
Weiss, L. G., Keith, T. Z., Zhu, J., & Chen, H. (2013b). WISC-IV and clinical validation of the four and five factor interpretative approaches. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 31, 14–131.
Wober, M. (1974). Towards an understanding of the Kiganda concept of intelligence. In J. W. Berry & P. R. Dasen (Eds.), Culture and cognition: Readings in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 261–280). London: Methuen.
Wolf, T. (1973). Alfred Binet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Yan, G., & Saklofske, D. H., (2004). Intelligence: Views of Chinese psychologists. Paper presented at 28th international congress of psychology, August. Beijing, China.
Yan, G., Saklofske, D. H., & Oakland, T. (2009). Contrasting views of intelligence: Chinese and North American perspectives. School Psychology International, 30, 456–473.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix A
Appendix A
International Test Commission Guidelines
The use of cognitive and other ability measures can engender strong negative feelings and opinions—particularly in reference to their misuse with groups that may display lower than average mean scores, when tests are misused when assessing immigrants and second-language learners, or when tests do not meet suitable psychometric standards. During the 1970s and 1980s, articles in newspapers and professional journals alleged that examiners often are poorly prepared; tests typically rely on a small sample of behavior, often those to which persons from lower-class homes lacked exposure; tests overlook functional daily used qualities; tests are the servants of the established middle class and are designed to discriminate against the poor and colored; and that cheating on tests is widespread and invalidates their use. In short, the allegations suggest tests generally are unfair, culture bound, biased, and used discriminatorily (Oakland 1977; Phelps 2008).
Many of these issues surfaced in countries other than the United States during this same period (Oakland 2009; Oakland et al. 2013) fueled, in part, by two conditions: (1) the use of pirated copies of tests, developed originally in the United States or Western Europe, and translated into the local language and without adequate efforts to acquire norms or validity data as well as (2) strong reliance on theory from social psychology that expressed disdain for the principle of meritocracy and favoritism toward egalitarian views.
The International Test Commission (ITC) was established during this time to promote an exchange of information on test development and use as well as to address prevailing issues that cut across national boundaries and cultures (Oakland et al 2001). Thus, given its international focus, ITC leadership recognized its need to attend to prevailing issues that were impeding test development and use regionally and internationally. The lack of authoritative guidelines can contribute to assessment services that are unreliable, inferior in quality, and reflect unsuitable standards. Thus, the ITC began developing various guidelines intended to promote sound testing practices. Features of four guidelines that may be most pertinent to cognitive assessment are summarized below. Information on the guidelines can be found on the ITC website at http://www.intestcom.org.
Test Adaptation Guidelines.
The ITC recognized most countries lack resources needed to develop their own tests and thus will continue the practice of obtaining tests, often measures of cognitive ability (Hu and Oakland 1991), from others. Thus, guidelines were needed to adapt these tests for local use. The guidelines provide guidance in reference to the context of a test’s use, test development and adaptation, test administration, and documentation/scoring interpretations. These guidelines distinguish two processes: translating/adapting existing tests and instruments as well as developing new instruments intended to be used internationally to provide international comparisons.
ITC Guidelines for Test Use.
These guidelines were developed to help overcome unsuitable assessment practices by focusing on test user competencies. Competencies require acquiring basic knowledge (e.g., psychometric principles and procedures along with technical requirements of tests) and skills (e.g., suitable use of assessment procedures), displaying suitable professional and ethical behaviors, assuming responsibility for test use, ensuring test materials are secured, ensuring that test results are treated confidentially, evaluating the potential utility of testing, selecting technically sound tests appropriate for the situation, considering issues of fairness, establishing rapport, scoring and analyzing test results accurately displaying a good understanding of the test’s theoretical or conceptual basis, communicating the results clearly and accurately to relevant others, and reviewing the appropriateness of the test and its use.
International Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing.
The use of computers to administer scores and report tests has become somewhat routine. Lamentably, individuals with limited ability to develop suitable tests are able to market their inferior products online and potentially reach all people who have Internet access (Friedman 2005). These guidelines are intended to promote good practices for computer-based (CBT) and Internet-delivered testing. They address technical issues (e.g., hardware and software requirements; the robustness of the CBT/Internet test; human factors in the presentation of materials via a computer or the Internet; providing reasonable adjustments to the test’s technical features for test-takers who display disabilities; and providing help, information, and practice items) as well as quality control issues (e.g., knowledge, competence, and appropriate use of CBT/Internet testing; the psychometric qualities of CBT/Internet tests; equivalence between paper-and-pencil tests and those delivered via CBT/Internet methods; scoring and analyzing CBT/Internet results accurately; interpret results appropriately, including feedback; and equality of access for all groups).
Proposed ITC Guidelines for the Clinical Assessment of Immigrants and Second-Language Learners.
An increase in personal mobility has led to an increase in the number of persons who hold immigrant status, especially in Western countries. They frequently seek improved lifestyles, including education, work, safety, and other conditions that contribute to their health, welfare, and stability. Their immigrant status implies they are residing in a different culture and are likely to lack fluency in the host country’s primary or preferred language and thus are second-language learners. Attempts to assess their cognitive abilities pose severe challenges to assessment specialists. These proposed guidelines consider five issues that may impact the clinical assessment of persons whose cultural and linguistic qualities differ from the local culture: qualities associated with culture and language, four personal qualities that commonly are assessed (i.e., medical, social, cognitive, and behavioral), the importance of psychometric qualities, interpersonal relationships, and ethical issues. The importance of considering the acculturation status of immigrant clients (i.e., their orientation and level of adjustment to their ethnic culture and the mainstream culture) and possible ways to address acculturation issues are described. Possible test modifications together with best practice guidelines are suggested. These proposed guidelines are intended to assist professionals in the provision of clinical assessment services for persons who are acculturating to a new culture and are second-language learners. The ITC leadership currently is reviewing these proposed guidelines.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Saklofske, D.H., van de Vijver, F.J.R., Oakland, T., Mpofu, E., Suzuki, L.A. (2015). Intelligence and Culture: History and Assessment. In: Goldstein, S., Princiotta, D., Naglieri, J. (eds) Handbook of Intelligence. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1562-0_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1562-0_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1561-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1562-0
eBook Packages: Behavioral ScienceBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)