Intelligence. Intelligence Creativity Psychometrics: tests & measurements Cognitive approach. The Psychometric Approach. How do you define “Intelligence”? Theorists use narrow, operational definitions
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
…..More a matter of emphasis
“Intelligence is what intelligence tests measure”
---the difference is really one of degree and intended use since all are based to some extent on experience with words, objects, etc.
Divided child’s mental age by the
child’s chronological age to yield an
Intelligence Quotient (IQ)
All average children, regardless of age,
would have an IQ of 100
Intelligence Scale (WAIS) (WISC)
---Probably the best IQ test for adults
---Different subscales (Verbal vs.. Performance)
“He had a WAIS IQ of …..”
Sorry. We have different capabilities and weaknesses. We need to capitalize on our strengths and compensate for our weaknesses. It is a bad idea to tell kids this--it is not true.
2.Psychometrics is a very sophisticated field which uses applied mathematics to measure psychological and behavioral attributes and make predictions. Psychometricians construct, standardize, validate tests. Many people who criticize tests do not understand test theory or the mathematics behind test construction.
3. There is a difference between criticizing a test, i.e., is a test valid, and criticizing its inappropriate use, i.e., should it be used for a certain purpose. Science issues versus values, policy, & political issues. A test may be valid but you still might not want to use it for a particular purpose--e.g., IQ test for chefs.
When there is money to be made, sometimes ethics are compromised.
5. In the testing field, bias is a statistical concept and has a statistical answer. Is the test equally predictive? Are the slopes the same? Some historical abuses have clouded this issue. Political issues and scientific issues get confused here again.
6. One test score is not enough. A trained psychometrician (and most Ph.D. psychologists, I hope) know better than to make an important decision about a person based on one test or a single test administration. Labeling "retarded" or college admissions. Multiple pieces of evidence including performance are better.
7. If you don’t like the use of standardized tests, what is a fairer alternative? Often there is no fairer alternative that is practical. The abuses have been much greater when alternatives such as interviews have been used.
8. A test is nothing more than a short sample of behavior. If you have a better sample of what you want to understand or predict, then use it.
1. Galton- -devised correlation coefficient
2. Binet- -devised the first intelligence test
3. Terman- -(Stanford-Binet Intelligence
Test), IQ, Study of Geniuses
4. Spearman--General Intelligence (g) Used factor analysis.
5. Thurstone-- 7 Primary Mental Abilities
6. Wechsler-- developed the WAIS,
separate performance/verbal scales
7. Robert Sternberg--Triarchic Theory of
Intelligence, practical intelligence,
8. Howard Gardner--Multiple Intelligences
1. Intelligence testing is useful for predicting academic success (i.e., grades) and predicting success in some occupations.
2. Intelligence tests are not perfect for predicting academic success because they do not measure motivation, creativity, social skills, and things such as artistic ability, musical ability, dramatic ability, and physical abilities all of which may contribute to academic success.
4. Research psychologists are interested in finding better ways to describe and understand the construct "intelligence".
Traditional tests tended to emphasize analytical reasoning and memory.
Sternberg argues that practical intelligence and creativity need to be included in the construct.
6. If we didn’t have the concept "intelligence", we would probably invent something like it.
Cognitive abilities, analytical reasoning abilities, scholastic aptitude, etc., are all euphemisms.
We need to be able to determine on occasion when a person is mentally ill as opposed to mentally slow or suffering from brain damage, what people can do in schools and jobs, when they need special help and so forth.
Too expensive and time consuming to allow everyone to do everything and then see who can do the job or school work. We don’t have the resources.
7. The historical concept is too narrow. It needs to be expanded.
8. Cognitive psychologists want to know "how" people solve problems in addition to whether or not they get the right answer (the psychometric approach).
9. It is still debatable whether "intelligence" is best thought of as a single trait that cuts across many different domains (analytical reasoning ability, e.g.,) or many separate types of abilities or intelligences. No agreement on this, even today.
10. Both genetics and the environment play significant roles in intelligence, but how much intelligence can be improved by enriching the environment is not really known. Studies conflict. Going from an impoverished environment to an enriched one definitely helps. How early one needs to intervene is not known, but the earlier the better, probably by 2 yrs. old.
(a) Over 50 different studies (Erlenmeyer-Kimling & Jarvik (1963) have shown that the more genes people have in common, the more similar the IQ. MZ always higher than DZ.
(b) MZ Twins reared apart are remarkably similar in intelligence.
Relationship r # of pairs
on the average.
you think of for a brick?
• Creativity is a sociocultural judgment of the novelty, appropriateness, quality, and importance of a product.
• A person is creative when he or she regularly produces creative products.
• It is closer to domain-specificity than to domain-generality (r = .37 across domains)
• Difference between creative potential and creative performance
1. Intelligence- insightful, analytical,
ability to sell one’s ideas
2. Knowledge - Too much knowledge
can lead to entrenched thinking.
Moderate may be best although
there are exceptions
3. Thinking styles- question the norms
4. Personality - risk takers, have the courage to stand
up for their beliefs in the face of ridicule (Galileo,
Freud, Semmelweiss, e.g.)
5. Motivation - intrinsic motivation, high energy, task-
6. Environmental context
Risk-aversion (low tolerance for failure)
4. Verification/hypothesis testing
5. Communication of results