Implicit theories concerning the intelligence of individuals with Down syndrome.

Studies over the past three decades have shown that learning difficulties are not only determined by neurological disorders, but also by motivational and/or socio-cognitive factors Among these factors, implicit theories of intelligence (also referred to as conceptions, mindsets or beliefs about intelligence) are key elements. The belief that intelligence is fixed (entity theory), as opposed to malleable (incremental theory), is generally associated with negative teaching practices and poorer student outcomes, yet beliefs about the intelligence of individuals with intellectual disabilities have not received much attention. We propose the first study on conceptions of intelligence of persons with intellectual disabilities, here people with Down syndrome.

Misleading face-based judgment of cognitive level in intellectual disability: the case of trisomy 21 (Down syndrome).

People spontaneously use faces to make inferences about other's personality traits or abilities, which generally lead to invalid conclusions. Here, we show first evidence that perceived variations in the facial appearance of 20 children with trisomy 21 (t21) influence how they are perceived in terms of intelligence (or intellectual disability), the more "trisomic" faces being rated as less intelligent (or more intellectually disabled). Despite high degrees of inter-rater agreement (80 raters), these inferences were unrelated to individuals' actual test scores which were also unrelated to perceived facial appearance.

Tracking subtle stereotypes of children with trisomy 21: from facial-feature-based to implicit stereotyping.

Background: Stigmatization is one of the greatest obstacles to the successful integration of people with Trisomy 21 (T21 or Down syndrome), the most frequent genetic disorder associated with intellectual disability. Research on attitudes and stereotypes toward these people still focuses on explicit measures subjected to social-desirability biases, and neglects how variability in facial stigmata influences attitudes and stereotyping.

Methodology/principal Findings: The participants were 165 adults including 55 young adult students, 55 non-student adults, and 55 professional caregivers working with intellectually disabled persons.

Nonequivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of Trail Making Test.

A computerized version of the Trail Making Test, an adaptation of the classical paper-and-pencil form, was compared with the paper-and-pencil form. The testee must connect targets on the screen with the cursor using the mouse instead of a sheet of paper and a pen. The participants were 68 healthy adolescents and young adults.