🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2010@hp-sdd.hp.com> nick@hp-sdd.hp.com.UUCP (Nick Flor) writes:
>Can we let the spelling discussion die now?  (Or at the very least, edit
>the Newgroups line to leave out comp.cog-eng)

I think that we should limit the newsgroups, but I really felt that this
should go to the particular groups listed, since it is directed somewhat
to Nick.

>Let's just settle on spelling  errors being due to a lack of  attention,
>resulting in combinations of capture, and data description errors.  (And
>for  connectionists,  lack of  inhibitory  signals, e.g.  teh instead of
>the).  Clearly, spelling ability has little to do with intelligience.
>

These insightful explanations may be perfectly correct, but research on
individual differences in cognition (which looks at the construct of 
"intelligence") suggests that "lack of attention" may well be correlated
with whatever underlies "intelligence" generally.  Therefore, spelling
ability may well have something to do with intelligence.  Clearly, there
are other factors which determine the amount of attention a person will
pay to some task, but intelligence may well play a role.

Essentially, in psychology, we like to have evidence for claims about
the relation between performance and potentially underlying states or
characteristics of the organism.  This is not intended as a flame, just an
observation.

-Ray Shaw
raymond@psych.toronto.edu