c









British psychologist Charles Spearman (1863-1945) described a concept he referred to as general

intelligence, or the Ô
a After using a technique known as factor analysis to to examine a
number of mental aptitude tests, Spearman concluded that scores on these tests were remarkably
similara People who performed well on one cognitive test tended to perform well on other tests,
while those who scored badly on one test tended to score badly on othera He concluded that
intelligence is general cognitive ability that could be measured and numerically expressed
(Spearman, 1904)a

^
^






Psychologist Louis La Thurstone (1887-1955) offered a differing theory of intelligencea Instead

of viewing intelligence as a single, general ability, Thurstone's theory focused on seven different
"primary mental abilities" (Thurstone, 1938)a The abilities that he described were:

`p Verbal comprehension
`p Deasoning
`p erceptual speed
`p [umerical ability
`p rord fluency
`p xssociative memory
`p ?patial visualization

0 







 ne of the more recent ideas to emerge is Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligencesa
Instead of focusing on the analysis of test scores, Gardner proposed that numerical expressions
of human intelligence are not a full and accurate depiction of people's abilitiesa His theory
describes eight distinct intelligences that are based on skills and abilities that are valued within
different culturesa

The eight intelligences Gardner described are:

`p Visual-spatial Intelligence
`p Verbal-linguistic Intelligence
`p 2odily-kinesthetic Intelligence
`p ^ogical-mathematical Intelligence
`p Interpersonal Intelligence
`p Œusical Intelligence
`p Intra personal Intelligence
`p [aturalistic Intelligence
D 

    



Psychologist Robert Sternberg defined intelligence as "mental activity directed toward purposive
adaptation to, selection and shaping of, real-world environments relevant to one¶s life"
(Sternberg, 1985, pa 45)a While he agreed with Gardner that intelligence is much broader than a
single, general ability, he instead suggested some of Gardner's intelligences are better viewed as
individual talentsa Sternberg proposed what he refers to as 'successful intelligence,' which is
comprised of three different factors:

`p xnalytical intelligence: This component refers to problem-solving abilities.

`p creative intelligence: This aspect of intelligence involves the ability to deal with new situations
using past experiences and current skills.
`p ractical intelligence: This element refers to the ability to adapt to a changing environment.

rhile there has been considerable debate over the exact nature of intelligence, no definitive
conceptualization has emerged. Today, psychologists often account for the many different theoretical
viewpoints when discussing intelligence and acknowledge that this debate is ongoing.

u
u 


Sternberg (2003) categorizes intelligence into three parts, which are central in his theory, the
triarchic theory of intelligence:

`p Analytical intelligence, the ability to complete academic, problem-solving tasks, such as

those used in traditional intelligence testsa These types of tasks usually present well-
defined problems that have only a single correct answera
`p Creative or synthetic intelligence, the ability to successfully deal with new and unusual
situations by drawing on existing knowledge and skillsa Individuals high in creative
intelligence may give 'wrong' answers because they see things from a different
perspectivea
`p Practical intelligence, the ability to adapt to everyday life by drawing on existing
knowledge and skillsa Practical intelligence enables an individual to understand what
needs to be done in a specific setting and then do ita

Sternberg (2003) discusses experience and its role in intelligencea Creative or synthetic
intelligence helps individuals to transfer information from one problem to anothera Sternberg
calls the application of ideas from one problem to a new type of problem 
 
a In
contrast to the skills of relative novelty there is 

    which enables an individual
to become so familiar with a process that it becomes automatizeda This can free up brain
resources for coping with new ideasa

Context, or how one adapts, selects and shapes their environment is another area that is not
represented by traditional measures of giftednessa Practically intelligent people are good at
picking up tacit information and utilizing that informationa They tend to shape their environment
around thema (Sternberg, 2003)
Sternberg (2003) developed a testing instrument to identify people who are gifted in ways that
other tests don't identifya The Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test measures not only traditional
intelligence abilities but analytic, synthetic, automazation and practical abilities as wella There
are four ways in which this test is different from conventional intelligence testsa

`p This test is broader, measuring synthetic and practical skills in addition to analytic skillsa
The test provides scores on analytic, synthetic, automatization, and practical abilities, as
well as verbal, quantitative, and figural processing abilitiesa
`p The test measures the ability to understand unknown words in context rather than
vocabulary skills which are dependent on an individual's backgrounda
`p The automatization subtest is the only part of the test that measures mental speeda
`p The test is based on a theory of intelligencea

c 


 (1927) (figure 7) has proposed a theory of two factors (General Ability
"g" and Special Ability), which is based on the observation that those people who perform
well on the tests of general intelligence do usually perform well on tests for special abilities
(like verbal or mathematical processing) and vice-versaa Thus, Spearman's main idea was that
gifted people are gifted in general and dull people are generally dull the same waya This
theory was widely accepted for practical usea The tests, directly measuring Spearman's "g"
are in a wide practice nowadaysa Raven Standard Progressive Matrices, developed by JaCa
Raven and distributed by US Psychological Corporation is test battery of this kinda

`p There's a belief, that most fundamental principles in psychometrics and testing became
available by 1930, and that with a few exceptions, the remainder of the 20th century was
devoted to applying or refining these principlesa The later theories divided into two
groups with one tended to be based on Spearman's model, while the other followers
divide intelligence into several componentsa Some notable theories are listed belowa

A

 
 (EI) is an ability, skill or, in the case of the trait EI model, a self-perceived ability
to identify, assess, and control the emotions of oneself, of others, and of groups. Various models and
definitions have been proposed of which the ability and trait EI models are the most widely accepted in
the scientific literature. criticisms have centered on whether the construct is a real intelligence and
whether it has incremental validity over IQ and the 2ig Five personality dimensions.

They are simply two independently-developed tests of intelligencea The Stanford-Binet is an

updated version of the original IQ test, the Binet Scalea It is the best intelligence scale for
predicting future academic achievementa The Weschler scales are a group of intelligence tests
(different ones for different ages) which are more accurate at distinguishing between different
types of intelligencea The Weschler is the most widely used IQ testa

The Stanford - Binet is the most commonly used assessment for intellectual functioninga Simply
put- It is an IQ testa

x

It's fair to say that,   , the Stanford - Binet has been the most often used individual IQ testa
At present, however, it is  the most commonly used testa

That distinction probably would go to the Wechsler intelligence tests, the childrens' WISC-III
and the adult WAIS-III (the current Wechslers are the WISC-IV and the WAIS-IV, but they're
not widely used as yet)a For general uses, the Wechler tests are preferred by most professionals
 they are the most widely useda That popularity has produced a wealth of research data,
studies, guide books, and other aids for the Weschler testsa The WAIS-III has also proven useful
in the characterization of neuropsychological disorders, such as ADHDa

The current version of the Stanford - Binet test is the Stanford - Binet 5 (or SB5)a It is probably
the best of the modern individual IQ tests for evaluating people either having significant
intellectual giftedness, or significant cognitive disabilitya This is because the SB5 has high
ceilings (and low floors) as well as alternate computed indices for the very gifteda
Both the Wechsler and the Stanford - Binet series of tests are considered serious, scientifically
validated intelligence tests, and they're the standards by which all other such tests are measureda
However, in the USA, it can cost $300 to $750 (or more) for a client to take either of these tests,
as each person's test requires 1a5 to 4 hours of professional time to administer, evaluate, and
reporta For some purposes, such as pre-employment testing, the Wonderlic WPT, PAF, and other
brief group tests are preferreda These tests can be administered for as little as $2a00 per
candidate, or even less, if large numbers of people can be tested at one timea

 


 

 

 
 
  






 
  



 c 
 c
  


 



 


  




 




] 
rhat Factors Determine Intelligence?

x 

In addition to disagreements about the basic nature of intelligence, psychologists have spent a
great amount of time and energy debating the various influences on individual intelligencea The
debate focuses on one of the major questions in psychology: Which is more important - nature or
nurture?
Today, nearly all psychologists recognize that both genetics and the environment play a role in
determining intelligencea It now becomes matter of determining exactly how much of an
influence each factor hasa First, it is important to note that genetics and environment interact to
determine exactly how inherited genes are expresseda For example, if a person has tall parents, it
is likely that the individual will also grow to be talla However, the exact height the person
reaches can be influenced by environmental factors such as nutrition and diseasea

A
 





`p Twin studies suggest that identical twins IQ's are more similar than those of fraternal twins
(romin & ?pinath, 2004).
`p ?iblings reared together in the same home have IQ's that are more similar than those of
adopted children raised together in the same environment (ŒcGue & others, 1993).

A
 








`p Identical twins reared apart have IQ's that are less similar than identical twins reared in the
same environment (ŒcGue & others, 1993).?chool attendance has an impact on IQ scores (ceci,
2001).
`p children who are breastfed during the first three to five months of life score higher on IQ tests
at age 6 than same-age children who were not breastfed (Deinberg, 2008).

 

 




After the development of the Binet-Simon Scale, the test was soon brought to the United States
where it generated considerable interesta Stanford University psychologist Lewis Terman took
Binet's original test and standardized it using a sample of American participantsa This adapted
test, first published in 1916, was called the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and soon became
the standard intelligence test used in the UaSa

The Stanford-Binet intelligence test used a single number, known as the intelligence quotient (or
IQ), to represent an individual's score on the testa This score was calculated by dividing the test
taker's mental age by their chronological age, and then multiplying this number by 100a For
example, a child with a mental age of 12 and a chronological age of 10 would have an IQ of 120
(12 /10 x 100)a

The Stanford-Binet remains a popular assessment tool today, despite going through a number of
revisions over the years since its inceptiona

6
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children(WISC) is an intelligence test which

produces an IQ or intelligence quotaa Developed by Dra David Wechsler (1896-1981) who was
the chief psychologist of New York City's Bellevue Psychiatric Hospital, the test normally
administered is the 2003 revision of the test devised in 1949a It is known as WISC-IVa
Dra Wechsler developed two other commonly used intelligence tests: the Wechsler Adult
Intelligence Scale(WAIS) and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of
Intelligence(WPPSI)a WPPSI is designed to assess children aged 3 to 7 years and 3 monthsa

r


u


Private schools serving children in 4th through 9th grades often use WISC-IV as part of their
admissions testing proceduresa They use it to determine both a child's intelligence and his
performance in school relative to that intelligencea

r 
u
6




WISC-IV determines a child's intellectual capabilitiesa It is frequently used to diagnose ADD or

ADHDa The test helps to assess gifted childrena The WISC-IV test indices are verbal
comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory and processing speeda The subtests
allow precise modeling of a child's intellectual abilities and readiness for learninga
 D




6
   Reliability is the consistency of your measurement, or the degree to which an

instrument measures the same way each time it is used under the same condition with the same
subjectsa In short, it is the repeatability of your measurementa A measure is considered reliable if
a person's score on the same test given twice is similara It is important to remember that
reliability is not measured, it is estimateda

There are two ways that reliability is usually estimated: test/retest and internal consistencya

u
D


Test/retest is the more conservative method to estimate reliabilitya Simply put, the idea behind
test/retest is that you should get the same score on test 1 as you do on test 2a The three main
components to this method are as follows:

1a) implement your measurement instrument at two separate times for each subject;
2)a compute the correlation between the two separate measurements; and
3) assume there is no change in the underlying condition (or trait you are trying to
measure) between test 1 and test 2a



c

Internal consistency estimates reliability by grouping questions in a questionnaire that measure
the same concepta For example, you could write two sets of three questions that measure the
same concept (say class participation) and after collecting the responses, run a correlation
between those two groups of three questions to determine if your instrument is reliably
measuring that concepta

 ne common way of computing correlation values among the questions on your instruments is
by using Cronbach's Alphaa In short, Cronbach's alpha splits all the questions on your instrument
every possible way and computes correlation values for them all (we use a computer program for
this part)a In the end, your computer output generates one number for Cronbach's alpha - and just
like a correlation coefficient, the closer it is to one, the higher the reliability estimate of your
instrumenta Cronbach's alpha is a less conservative estimate of reliability than test/retesta

The primary difference between test/retest and internal consistency estimates of reliability is that
test/retest involves two administrations of the measurement instrument, whereas the internal
consistency method involves only one administration of that instrumenta


 

6
  Validity is the strength of our conclusions, inferences or propositionsa More formally,
Cook and Campbell (1979) define it as the "best available approximation to the truth or falsity of
a given inference, proposition or conclusiona" In short, were we right? Let's look at a simple
examplea Say we are studying the effect of strict attendance policies on class participationa In our
case, we saw that class participation did increase after the policy was establisheda Each type of
validity would highlight a different aspect of the relationship between our treatment (strict
attendance policy) and our observed outcome (increased class participation)a

u

 
There are four types of validity commonly examined in social researcha

1a Conclusion validity asks is there a relationship between the program and the observed
outcome?  r, in our example, is there a connection between the attendance policy and the
increased participation we saw?

2a Internal Validity asks if there is a relationship between the program and the outcome
we saw, is it a causal relationship? For example, did the attendance policy cause class
participation to increase?

3a Construct validity is the hardest to understand in my opiniona It asks if there is there a

relationship between how I operationalized my concepts in this study to the actual causal
relationship I'm trying to study/?  r in our example, did our treatment (attendance policy)
reflect the construct of attendance, and did our measured outcome - increased class
participation - reflect the construct of participation?  verall, we are trying to generalize
our conceptualized treatment and outcomes to broader constructs of the same conceptsa

4a External validity refers to our ability to generalize the results of our study to other
settingsa In our example, could we generalize our results to other classrooms?

Reliability is, roughly, whether you could replicate an experiment and get comparable results -
either because an individual's responses are consistent (for example, their reaction times in a test
are consistent when the test is carried out again), or the general overall results are consistent (for
example, the average score on a test is the same or similar when carried out again on a
comparable group)

Validity is whether the construct you are using really measures what you are using it to measurea
For example, if you devised a test to measure people's self-esteem, does it really measure self-
esteem, or something similar such as extraversion?

`p 5 years ago