Intelligence
Unit 2
Topics to cover
·
History of Intelligence
Key Contributors:
Sir Francis Galton
Alfred Binet
Sir Francis Galton: quantifying mental ability
Cousin of Charles Darwin, strongly influenced by Darwin’s theory of evolution.
In his book Hereditary Genius (1869) Galton showed through study of family trees that
eminence and genius seemed to occur within certain families.
Proposed that eminent people had ‘inherited mental constitutions’ ’ that made them more
fit for thinking than their less successful counterparts.
attempted to demonstrate a biological basis for eminence by showing that people who
were more socially and occupationally successful would also perform better on a variety
of laboratory tasks thought to measure the ‘efficiency of the nervous system’.
developed measures of reaction speed, hand strength and sensory acuity.
measured the size of people’s skulls, believing that skull size reflected brain volume and
hence intelligence. In this respect, Galton was the first researcher to posit a relationship
between biological variables and intelligence.
Alfred Binet’s mental tests
Modern intelligence-testing movement began at the turn of the 20th century, when the French psychologist Alfred
Binet was commissioned by France’s Ministry of Public Education to develop the test that was to become the
forerunner of all modern intelligence tests.
Certain children seemed unable to benefit from normal public schooling. Educators wanted an objective way to
identify these children as early as possible so that some form of special education could be arranged for them.
Binet’s Assumptions:
1) Mental abilities develop with age
2) Rate at which people gain mental competence is a characteristic of the person and is fairly constant over time.
Concept of Mental Age.
German psychologist William Stern provided a relative score of intelligence quotient (IQ) was the ratio of mental age
to chronological age, multiplied by 100:
IQ = mental age / chronological age × 100
Binets Legacy: Intelligence Testing industry
Translation & adaptation of Binet’s test by Terman : Stanford Binet Test
Arthur Otis: Army Alpha (World War 1)
Army Beta
Wechsler: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) 1939
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) 1955
Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) in 1967.
Nature of Intelligence
Psychometrics is the statistical study of psychological tests.
The psychometric approach to intelligence tries to identify and measure the
abilities that underlie individual differences in performance. In essence, it tries to
provide a measurement based map of the mind.
Intelligence is a hypothetical construct—we cannot see it but we infer it on the
basis of test scores and other abilities and even behaviours.\
Although many regard IQ as a good measure of intelligence, there are some
people, and many researchers who disagree and would prefer to think of our
intelligence differently, perhaps as an indication of our success in life or even how
happy we are or how we relate to other people.
Factor analysis
Factor analysis reduces a large number of
measures to a smaller number of clusters,
or factors, with each cluster containing
variables that correlate highly with one
another but less highly with variables in
other clusters.
A factor allows us to infer the underlying
characteristic that presumably accounts
for the links among the variables in the
cluster.
FA can’t tell us what is being tested, only
that different clusters are being tested.
The g factor: intelligence as general mental capacity
British psychologist Charles Spearman (1923) gave the ‘Two Factor Theory’.
Observed that school grades in different subjects, such as English and
mathematics, were almost always positively correlated but not perfectly.
Spearman found the same to be true for different types of Stanford-Binet
intelligence test items, such as vocabulary questions, arithmetic reasoning
problems and the ability to solve puzzles.
Spearman concluded that intellectual performance is determined partly by a g
factor, or general intelligence, and partly by whatever special abilities might be
required to perform that particular task.
Spearman contended that because the general factor—the g factor—cuts across
virtually all tasks, it constitutes the core of intelligence.
Thus Spearman would argue that your performance in a mathematics course
would depend mainly on your general intelligence but also on your specific ability
to learn mathematics.
G-factor as a core of intelligence
Researchers believe g matters a great deal as a predictor of both academic and job
performance.
Nathan Kuncel and co-workers (2004) performed a meta-analysis of 127 studies involving 20,352
participants in numerous educational and work settings. They concluded that the same general
mental ability is significantly related to success in both areas of life.
Frank Schmidt and John Hunter (2004) concluded that measures of the g factor predict job
success even better than measures of specific abilities tailored to individual jobs.
David Lubinski, a prominent intelligence researcher, concluded: ‘g is clearly the most important
dimension uncovered in the study of cognitive abilities to date’ (2004, p. 100).
Intelligence as specific mental abilities
Spearman’s conclusion about the centrality of the g factor was soon challenged by
LL Thurstone.
While Spearman had been impressed by the fact that scores on different mental
tasks are correlated, Thurstone was impressed by the fact that the correlations are
far from perfect.
Thurstone therefore concluded that human mental performance depends not on a
general factor but rather on seven distinct abilities, which he called primary
mental abilities
Crystallised and fluid intelligence
Raymond Cattell (1971) and John Horn (1985) proposed a new model of
intelligence.
Crystallised Intelligence
Cattell and Horn broke down Spearman’s general intelligence into two distinct
but related subtypes of g (with a correlation of about 0.50).
Crystallised intelligence (gc) is the ability to apply previously acquired
knowledge to current problems.
Vocabulary and information tests are good measures of crystallised intelligence.
Crystallised intelligence, which is the basis for expertise, depends on the ability to
retrieve previously learned information and problem-solving schemas from the
long-term memory (Horn & Masunaga, 2000; Hunt, 1997).
It is dependent on previous learning and practice.
Fluid Intelligence
2nd Factor: Fluid Intelligence.
Fluid intelligence (gf) is defined as the ability to deal with novel problem-solving situations
for which personal experience does not provide a solution.
It involves inductive reasoning and creative problem-solving skills.
Fluid intelligence is dependent primarily on the efficient functioning of the central nervous system
rather than on prior experience and cultural context.
People high in fluid intelligence can perceive relations among stimulus patterns and draw
inferences from relationships.
The tower-of-London and nine-dot problems are examples of fluid-intelligence tasks
Task: Join 9 dots with 4 straight lines
Solution
Fluid intelligence requires the abilities to reason abstractly, think logically and
manage information in working (short-term) memory so that new problems can be
solved on ‘the blackboard of the mind’ (Hunt, 1997).
Thus, long-term memory contributes strongly to crystallised intelligence,
whereas fluid intelligence is particularly dependent on efficient working
memory.
The gc–gf model is based in part on what has been learned about intellectual
development in adulthood (Horn & Blankston, 2005).
Cattell and Horn concluded that over our life span, we progress from using
fluid intelligence to depending more on crystallised intelligence.
Early in life, we encounter many problems for the first time, so we need fluid
intelligence to figure out solutions. As experience makes us more knowledgeable,
we have less need to approach each situation as a new problem. Instead, we
simply call up appropriate information and schemas from our long-term memory,
thereby using our crystallised intelligence. This is the essence of wisdom
(Kunzman & Baltes, 2003).
Developmental Progression of Gc and Gf
Because long-term memory remains strong even as we age, performance on tests
of crystallised intelligence improves during adulthood and remains stable well into
late adulthood.
In contrast, performance on tests of fluid intelligence begins to decline as people
enter late adulthood (Daniels et al., 2006; Schaie, 1998).
The fact that ageing affects the two forms of intelligence differently is additional
evidence that they represent different classes of mental abilities (Horn & Noll,
1997; Weinert & Hany, 2003).
Concept at a GLANCE!
Carroll’s Three Stratum Model
Attempt to synthesise the results of prior research, John B Carroll (2005) used
factor analysis to re-analyse more than 460 different sets of data obtained by
researchers around the world between 1935 and 1980.
Carroll’s analysis resulted in an integrative model of intelligence that contains
elements of Spearman’s, Thurstone’s and Cattell-Horn’s models.
Carroll’s Three-Stratum Model: a Modern Synthesis
The three-stratum theory of cognitive abilities establishes three levels of mental
skills—general, broad and narrow—arranged in a hierarchical model.
At the top, or Stratum III, of the model is a g factor thought to underlie most mental
activity.
Below g at Stratum II are eight broad intellectual factors arranged from left to right in
terms of the extent to which they are influenced by (or correlated with) g. Fluid
intelligence is most strongly related to (or ‘saturated with’) g, and crystallised intelligence
is next, indicating the importance of the Cattell-Horn factors. The other broad abilities at
Stratum II involve basic cognitive functions, such as memory and learning, perceptual
abilities and speed of mental functioning, some of which resemble Thurstone’s primary
mental abilities.
Finally, at Stratum I of the model, are nearly 70 highly specific cognitive abilities that feed
into the broader Stratum II factors. These specific ability measures tend to correlate
around 0.30 with one another, reflecting the common g factor at the top of the model.
Carroll (2005) believes that the three-stratum model encompasses virtually all known
cognitive abilities, and this model provides the most complete and detailed map of the
human intellect derived from the psychometric approach to intelligence (McGrew, 2009).
Guilford and The Structure of Intellect Model
Guilford post the world war II, expanded on Thurstone’s factors of intelligence.
Contested that number of discernible mental abilities was far in excess of the seven
proposed by Thurstone.
Guilford noticed that Thurstone had ignored the category of creative thinking entirely.
Guilford also found that if innovative types of tests were included in the large batteries of
tests he administered his subjects, then the pattern of correlations between these tests
indicated the existence of literally dozens of new factors of intellect.
Some of these new factors had recurring similarities with respect to the kinds of mental
processes involved, the kinds of information featured, or the form that the items of
information took. ⇒ gave hope for grouping into small number of dimensions.
Guilford (1967) proposed an elegant structure-of-intellect (SOI) model to summarize his
findings.
Visually conceived, Guilford’s SOI model classifies intellectual abilities along three
dimensions called
1) operations,
2) contents, and
3) products.
Operations
Includes intellectual operation required by the test, like:
Cognition Discovering, knowing, or comprehending
Memory Committing items of information to memory, such as a series of numbers
Divergent Retrieving from memory items of production a specific class, such as
naming objects that are both hard and edible
Convergent Retrieving from memory a correct production item, such as a crossword puzzle word
Evaluation Determining how well a certain item of information satisfies specific
logical requirements
Contents
Contents refers to the nature of the materials or information presented to the
examinee. The five content categories are as follows:
Visual Images presented to the eyes
Auditory Sounds presented to the ears
Symbolic Such as mathematical symbols that stand for something
Semantic Meanings, usually of word symbols
Behavioral The ability to comprehend the mental state and behavior of other
persons
Products
The different kinds of mental structures that the brain must produce to derive a
correct answer.
Unit A single entity having a unique combination of properties or attributes
Class What it is that similar units have in common, such as a set of triangles or high-pitched
tones
Relation An observed connection between two items, such as two tones an
octave apart
System Three or more items forming a recognizable whole, such as a melody or a plan for a
sequence of actions
Transformation A change in an item of information, such as a correction of a misspelling, inversion of an
image
Implication What an individual item implies, such as to expect thunder following lightning
Guilford (1985) identified five types of operations, five types of content, and six
types of products, for a total of 5 * 5 * 6 or 150 factors of intellect.
Each combination of an operation (e.g., memory), a content (e.g., symbolic), and a
product (e.g., units) represents a different factor of intellect. Guilford claims to
have verified over 100 of these factors in his research.
Critique
SOI model is often lauded on the grounds that it captures the complexities of
intelligence. This is also a potential Achilles’ heel for the theory.
Consider one factor of intellect, memory for symbolic units. A test that requires the
examinee to recall a series of spoken digits (e.g., Digit Span on the WAIS-III)
might capture this factor of intellect quite well. But so might a visual digit span test
and perhaps even an analogous test with tactile presentation of symbols, such as
vibrating rods applied to the skin.
Perhaps we need a separate cube for hearing, vision, and touch; such an
expanded model would incorporate 450 factors of intellect, surely an unwieldy
number.
Cognitive process approaches: the nature of intelligent
thinking
Psychometric theories of intelligence provide a statistical map of the mind and
describe how people differ from one another (Birney & Sternberg, 2006).
However psychometric theories don’t explain why people vary in these mental
skills.
What fills that GAP!
Cognitive process theories; explore the specific information processing and
cognitive processes that underlie intellectual ability.
Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
Addresses both the psychological processes involved in intelligent behaviour and
the diverse forms that intelligence can take.
Sternberg’s theory divides the cognitive processes that underlie intelligent
behaviour into three specific components;
1) Metacomponents
2) Performance Components
3) Knowledge acquisition components
Metacomponents
Metacomponents are the higher-order processes used to plan and regulate task
performance.
They include problem solving skills such as identifying problems, formulating hypotheses
and strategies, testing them logically and evaluating performance feedback.
Sternberg believes that metacomponents are the fundamental sources of individual
differences in fluid intelligence.
He finds that intelligent people spend more time framing problems and developing
strategies than less intelligent people, who have a tendency to plunge right in without
sufficient forethought.
Performance components
Performance components are the actual mental processes used to perform the
task.
They include perceptual processing, retrieving appropriate memories and
schemas from longterm memory and generating responses
Knowledge acquisition
Knowledge acquisition components allow us to learn from our experiences, store
information in memory and combine new insights with previously acquired
information.
These abilities underlie individual differences in crystallised intelligence. Thus,
Sternberg’s theory addresses the processes that underlie the distinction made by
Cattell and Horn between fluid and crystallised intelligences.
Sternberg believes that there is more than one kind of intelligence. He suggests
that environmental demands may call for three different classes of adaptive
problem-solving and that people differ in their intellectual strengths in these areas:
1. Analytical intelligence involves the kinds of academically oriented
problem-solving skills measured by traditional intelligence tests.
2. Practical intelligence refers to the skills needed to cope with everyday
demands and to manage oneself and other people effectively.
3. Creative intelligence comprises the mental skills needed to deal adaptively
with novel problems.
Sternberg has shown that these forms of intelligence, while having a modest
underlying g factor, are also distinct from one another.
Consider, for example, the relation between academic and practical skills.
In one study, adolescents in Kenya were given one set of analytical tests
measuring traditional academic knowledge and another set measuring their
knowledge of natural herbal medicines used to treat illnesses, a kind of practical
knowledge viewed by villagers as important to their survival. The results indicated
that the practical intelligence measure of herbal knowledge was unrelated to (and
sometimes negatively correlated with) the academic measures (Sternberg et al.,
2001).
Sternberg also found that Brazilian street children were very proficient at the
maths required to carry on their street businesses, despite the fact that many of
them had failed mathematics in school (Sternberg, 2004).
Sternberg believes that educational programs should teach all three classes of
skills, not just analytical-academic skills.
In studies with primary school children, he and his colleagues have shown that a
curriculum that also teaches practical and creative skills results in greater mastery
of course material than does a traditional analytic, memory based approach to
learning course content (Sternberg et al., 1998).
As Sternberg’s work illustrates, cognitive science is leading us to focus on
understanding and enhancing the mental processes that underlie intelligent
behaviour
PASS MODEL OF
INTELLIGENCE
Planning, Attention,Simultaneous, and Successive (PASS)
Theory
This theory is influenced by the neuropsychological investigations of the Russian
psychologist Aleksandr Luria (1902–1977).
Luria (1966) relied primarily on individual case studies and clinical observations of
brain-injured soldiers to arrive at a general theory of cognitive processing, wherein he
proposed that:
Analysis shows that there is strong evidence for distinguishing two basic forms of
integrative activity of the cerebral cortex by which different aspects of the outside world
may be reflected. . . . The first of these forms is the integration of the individual stimuli
arriving in the brain into simultaneous, and primarily spatial groups, and the second is
the integration of individual stimuli arriving consecutively in the brain into temporally
organized, successive series. (Luria, 1966)
The 3 units of the PASS Model
This approach focuses upon the mechanics by which information is processed.
Also called information processing theory, because it looks into how information is processed.
Luria (1970) proposed three functional units in the brain. Processing of information proceeds
from lower units to higher units.
1) subcortical areas including the brain stem, midbrain, and thalamus. Attentional
processes originate here, including selective attention and resistance to distraction.
2) rearward sensory portions of the cerebral cortex (parietal, temporal, and occipital
lobes). This large unit subserves the simultaneous and successive processes. These
processes are to some extent lateralized, with simultaneous processing engaged more with
the right hemisphere, and successive processing connected more with the left hemisphere.
However, lateralization is relative, not absolute (Springer & Deutsch, 1997).
3) Frontal lobes, This is primarily where planning occurs and also where motor output
initiates.
Planning and Attention
Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, Successive (PASS) theory of intelligence as a modern
extension of Luria’s work by Naglieri and Das (1990,2005)
Planning involves the selection, usage, and monitoring of effective solutions to problems. It also
entails impulse control.
As noted, the frontal lobes are heavily engaged in this process.
Even though it is listed first in the PASS acronym, Planning is actually the last stage of
information processing. The first process is Attention, which requires selectively attending to
some stimuli while ignoring others. In some cases, attention also entails vigilance over a period
of time. Difficulties with this process underlie attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder
As noted, the brain stem and other midline subcortical tructures are vital to attentional processes.
Simultaneous processing
Characterized by the execution of several different mental operations
simultaneously.
Forms of thinking and perception that require spatial analysis, such as drawing a
cube, require simultaneous information processing.
In drawing, the examinee must simultaneously apprehend the overall shape and
guide hand and fingers in the execution of the shape.
Successive processing
Is needed for mental activities in which a proper sequence of operations must be
followed.
This is in sharp contrast to simultaneous processing (such as drawing), for which
sequence is unimportant.
Successive processing is needed in remembering a series of digits, repeating a
string of words (e.g., shoe, ball, egg), and imitating a series of hand
movements (fist, palm, fist, fist, palm).
Most forms of information processing require an interplay of simultaneous and
successive mechanisms.
How we read?
The single letters are to be recognized, and that involves simultaneous coding.
The reader matches the visual shape of the letter with a mental dictionary and
comes up with a name for it.
The letter sequences, then, have to be formed (successive coding) and blended
together as a syllable (simultaneous).
Then the string of syllables has to be made into a word (successive), the word is
recognized (simultaneous), and a pronunciation program is then assembled
(successive), leading to oral reading (successive and simultaneous).
Higher-level information processing relies upon an interplay of specific,
anatomically localizable forms of information processing.
Broader conceptions of
intelligence:
Beyond Mental
Competencies
Gardner’s multiple intelligences
Inspired by his observations of how specific human abilities are affected by brain
damage, Gardner advanced a theory of multiple intelligences.
The number of intelligences has varied as Gardner’s work has progressed; he
currently defines eight distinct varieties of adaptive abilities and a possible ninth
variety (Gardner, 2000)
1. Linguistic intelligence: the ability to use language well, as writers do.
2. Logical-mathematical intelligence: the ability to reason mathematically and logically.
3. Visuospatial intelligence: the ability to solve spatial problems or to succeed in a field such as
architecture.
4. Musical intelligence: the ability to perceive pitch and rhythm and to understand and produce
music.
5. Bodily-kinaesthetic intelligence: the ability to control body movements and skilfully
manipulate objects, as demonstrated by a highly skilled dancer, athlete or surgeon.
6. Interpersonal intelligence: the ability to understand and relate well to others.
7. Intrapersonal intelligence: the ability to understand oneself.
8. Naturalistic intelligence: the ability to detect and understand phenomena in the natural
world, as a zoologist or meteorologist might.
9. Existential intelligence, a philosophically oriented ability to ponder questions about the
meaning of one’s existence, life and death.
Critique
Researchers argue that many of these other abilities are not really part of the traditional
concept of intelligence at all and that some of them are better regarded as talents.
Gardner’s Reply
the form of intelligence that is most highly valued within a given culture depends on the
adaptive requirements of that culture.
As per Gardner’s theory abilities exhibited by Taylor Swift, Usain Bolt and Oprah Winfrey
exemplify different forms of intelligence that are highly adaptive within their respective
environments.
Personal and emotional intelligence
John Mayer (2008) has proposed the concept of personal intelligence.
Personal Intelligence is defined as the ability to understand who one is and who
one wants to be.
It is a legitimate form of intelligence because, like other cognitive forms of
intelligence, it involves the ability to carry out abstract reasoning in a valid and
accurate manner
Personal Intelligence involves 4 key aspects
1. The ability to process and reason about personally relevant information through introspection
(looking within) and by observing yourself, other people and the way others react to you.
2. The ability to incorporate the information gained through introspection and observation into an
accurate self-knowledge of your traits, abilities and values, as well as accurate models of others’
personalities. This sort of knowledge helps enhance interpersonal relationships.
3. The ability to use personally relevant knowledge to guide your choices, such as a choice of
occupation or marriage partner, when (or whether) to begin a family and where to reside. Accurate
compatibility choices enhance occupational success and personal well-being.
4. The ability to select goals that are consistent (rather than in conflict) with one another and that
are realistic given your talents and resources. This may involve accurately deciding which competencies
you need to increase to pursue your goals and how to increase them. The person high in personal
intelligence can also draw on his or her personal memories and ‘life story’ for self-direction and to
recognise changes in goals and values as they occur over the life span.
Each of these abilities contributes to personal success and well-being
(Chamorro-Premuzic & Furnham, 2006; Roberts et al., 2007).
Like many cognitive competencies, these skills involve the executive functions of
the frontal lobe, and proponents can make a strong case that they reflect
intelligent thought.
Emotional Intelligence
Emotional intelligence involves
the ability to read others’
emotions accurately, to respond
to them appropriately, to motivate
oneself, to be aware of one’s own
emotions and to regulate and
control one’s own emotional
responses (Mayer, 2008).
4 Components
Perceiving emotions is measured by people’s accuracy in judging emotional expressions in
facial photographs, as well as the emotional tones conveyed by different landscapes and
designs.
Using emotions to facilitate thought is measured by asking people to identify the emotions
that would best enhance a particular type of thinking, such as how to deal with a distressed
co-worker or plan a birthday party.
To measure understanding emotions, people are asked to specify the conditions under which
their emotions change in intensity or type; another task measures people’s understanding of
which basic emotions blend together to create subtle emotions, such as envy or jealousy.
Finally, managing emotions is measured by asking respondents to indicate how they can
change their own or others’ emotions to facilitate success or increase interpersonal harmony.
Benefits of EI
Emotionally intelligent people form stronger emotional bonds with others; enjoy greater
success in careers, marriage and child rearing; modulate their own emotions so as to
avoid strong depression, anger or anxiety; and work more effectively toward long-term
goals by being able to control impulses for immediate gratification.
In the end, some people who are high in emotional intelligence may enjoy more success
in life than others who surpass them in mental intelligence (Salovey & Pizzaro, 2003).
They also tend to use more effective coping strategies (Saklofske et al., 2007).
