The Spanish Journal Of Psychology

The Spanish Journal of Psychology
2005, Vol. 8, No. 2, 199-204

Copyright 2005 by The Spanish Journal of Psychology
ISSN 1138-7416

How Impulsivity is Related to Intelligence
and Academic Achievement
Andreu Vigil-Colet ≥ and Fabia Morales-Vives
Universidad Rovira y Virgili

This study investigated the relationships between impulsivity, intelligence, and academic
failure in a sample of241 secondary school students who completed Thurstone’s (1938)
Primary Mental Abilities (PMA) test and Dickman’s (1990) and Barratt’s (1985) impulsivity
questionnaires (DII and BIS-10, respectively). Results show an inverse relationship between
impulsivity and intelligence, specific to the scales with higher loadings on crystallized
intelligence, and a positive relationship betweenimpulsivity and academic failure. These
results indicate that impulsivity is not directly related to intelligence and may act as a
moderator variable between individuals’ resources and their achievements.
Keywords: impulsivity, intelligence, academic achievement

El presente estudio analiza las relaciones existentes entre impulsividad, inteligencia y
fracaso escolar en una muestra de 241 estudiantesde secundaria utilizando el test de
Aptitudes Mentales Primarias de Thurstone (1938) y los cuestionarios de Dickman (1990)
y Barratt (1985) de impulsividad (DII y BIS-10, respectivamente). Los resultados muestran
una relación inversa entre impulsividad e inteligencia que es específica de las escalas
que presentan mayor saturación en inteligencia cristalizada así como una relación positivaentre la impulsividad y el fracaso escolar. Estos resultados parecen indicar que la
impulsividad no está directamente relacionada con la inteligencia y que esta puede actuar
como variable moderadora entre los recursos del individuo y sus logros.
Palabras clave: impulsividad, inteligencia, fracaso escolar

This research was supported by a grant from the Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología(SEC2001-3821-C05-C02) with the collaboration
of the European Fund for the Development of Regions.
Correspondence should be addressed to Andreu Vigil-Colet ,≥ Universidad Rovira y Virgili, Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación y
Psicología, Crtra. Valls s/n, 43007 – Tarragona (Spain). E-mail: avc@fcep.urv.es

199

200

VIGIL-COLET ≥ AND MORALES-VIVES

Research on the relationships between majorpersonality
dimensions and intelligence has proved that is difficult to obtain
consistent and replicable correlations between them and that,
at a general level, personality is weakly related to intelligence
(Austin, Deary, & Gibson, 1997; Demetriou, Kyriakides, &
Avraamidou 2003). Furthermore, it seems that the relationships
between personality dimensions and intelligence are betterestablished at a crystallized intelligence (Gc) level than at the
fluid intelligence (Gf) level (Ashton, Lee, Vernon, & Lang,
2000; Goff & Ackerman, 1992; Jensen, 1998).
There are several explanations for the relationships
between intelligence and personality. Jensen (1998) proposed
that this relationship can be explained by R. B Cattell’s
investment theory, in the sense that individual differencesin achievements are due to the different ways in which
individuals “invest” their g resources, because it is at this
level that personality may be related to intelligence. This
theory also explains why crystallized intelligence is more
related to personality than is fluid intelligence, because
personality will affect achievements more than ability.
Another possible explanation, which maycomplement
the first, was proposed by Ackermann (Ackerman, 1994;
Goff & Ackerman 1992): Intelligence can be maximal
engagement or typical engagement. Ackerman’s proposal
focuses on the fact that performance in psychometric tests
of intelligence reflects an environment in which maximal
performance is measured, whereas an individual’s academic
or occupational performance takes place in a...