Intelligence and learning
Introduction
Ask yourself: What is intelligence, i.e. what
factors are indicators of this?
• Einstein said, "The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but
imagination."
• Socrates said, "I know that I am intelligent, because I know that I
know nothing.”
• Results?
• On a sheet write – what is intelligence
Ask yourself: What do you think are the causal
factors in intelligence?
• Good food.
• Nice wine.
Ask yourself: What are multiple intelligences?
• Emotional
• Academic
Lesson 3
• Aims
• Understand and reproduce spearman Psychometric theory of
intelligence.
• Understand and reproduce Thurstone Psychometric theory of
intelligence.
• Understand and reproduce Vernon and. Cattell hierarchical
Psychometric theory of intelligence.
• Discuss!
Spearman
• The first of the major psychometric theories was that of the British psychologist Charles
E. Spearman, who published his first major article on intelligence in 1904. Spearman
noticed what, at the turn of the century, seemed like a peculiar fact: People who did well
on one mental ability test tended to do well on the others, and people who did not do
well on one of them also tended not to do well on the others. Spearman devised a
technique for statistical analysis, which he called factor analysis, that examines patterns
of individual differences in test scores and is said to provide an analysis of the underlying
sources of these individual differences. Spearman's factor analyses of test data suggested
to him that just two kinds of factors underlie all individual differences in test scores. The
first and more important factor Spearman labeled the "general factor," or g, which is said
to pervade performance on all tasks requiring intelligence. In other words, regardless of
the task, if it requires intelligence, it requires g. The second factor is specifically related to
each particular test. But what, exactly, is g? After all, calling something a general factor is
not the same as understanding what it is. Spearman did not know exactly what the
general factor might be, but he proposed in 1927 that it might be something he labeled
"mental energy."
Spearman notes
• People do well in one intelligence test do well in others. (vice versa)
• The general factor. Or G. If it requires intelligence it requires the
general factor.
Thurstone
• The American psychologist L.L. Thurstone disagreed not only with Spearman's
theory but also with his isolation of a single factor of general intelligence.
Thurstone argued that the appearance of just a single factor was an artifact of the
way Spearman did his factor analysis and that if the analysis were done in a
different and more appropriate way, seven factors would appear, which
Thurstone referred to as the "primary mental abilities." The seven primary mental
abilities identified by Thurstone were verbal comprehension (as involved in the
knowledge of vocabulary and in reading); verbal fluency (as involved in writing
and in producing words); number (as involved in solving fairly simple numerical
computation and arithmetical reasoning problems); spatial visualization (as
involved in mentally visualizing and manipulating objects, as is required to fit a
set of suitcases into an automobile trunk); inductive reasoning (as involved in
completing a number series or in predicting the future based upon past
experience); memory (as involved in remembering people's names or faces); and
perceptual speed (as involved in rapidly proofreading to discover typographical
errors in a typed text).
NotesThurstone:
One general factor was not good enough and if the tests had been
done differently then there would be 7 factors.
• Verbal comprehension
• Reasoning
• Perceptual speed
• Numerical ability
• Word fluency
• Associative memory
• Spatial visualization
Philip E. Vernon and Raymond B. Cattell
• Canadian Philip E. Vernon and the American Raymond B. Cattell, suggested
another possibility--that both were right in some sense. In the view of
Vernon and Cattell, abilities are hierarchical. At the top of the hierarchy is
g, or general ability. But below g in the hierarchy are successive levels of
gradually narrowing abilities, ending with Spearman's specific abilities.
Cattell, for example, suggested in a 1971 work that general ability can be
subdivided into two further kinds of abilities, fluid and crystallized. Fluid
abilities are the reasoning and problem-solving abilities measured by tests
such as the analogies, classifications, and series completions described
above. Crystallized abilities can be said to derive from fluid abilities and be
viewed as their products, which would include vocabulary, general
information, and knowledge about specific fields. John L. Horn, an
American psychologist, suggested that crystallized ability more or less
increases over the life span, whereas fluid ability increases in the earlier
years and decreases in the later ones.
Hierarchical notes
• Spearman then Thurstone then lots more
• Crystallised and Fluid
• Fluid intelligence involves being able to think and reason abstractly and
solve problems. This ability is considered independent of learning,
experience, and education. Examples of the use of fluid intelligence include
solving puzzles and coming up with problem-solving strategies. Fluid
intelligence tends to decline during late adulthood.
• Crystallized intelligence involves knowledge that comes from prior learning
and past experiences. Situations that require crystallized intelligence
include reading comprehension and vocabulary exams. This type of
intelligence is based upon facts and rooted in experiences. As we age and
accumulate new knowledge and understanding, crystallized intelligence
becomes stronger.This type of intelligence tends to increase with age.
Discuss
• It had become apparent that there were serious problems with psychometric theories,
not just individually but as a basic approach to the question. For one thing, the number
of abilities seemed to be getting out of hand. A movement that had started by
postulating one important ability had come, in one of its major manifestations, to
postulating 150. Because parsimony is usually regarded as one of several desirable
features of a scientific theory, this number caused some disturbance. For another thing,
the psychometricians, as practitioners of factor analysis were called, didn't seem to have
any strong scientific means of resolving their differences. Any method that could support
so many theories seemed somewhat suspect, at least in the use to which it was being
put. Most significant, however, was the seeming inability of psychometric theories to say
anything substantial about the processes underlying intelligence. It is one thing to discuss
"general ability" or "fluid ability," but quite another to describe just what is happening in
people's minds when they are exercising the ability in question. The cognitive
psychologists proposed a solution to these problems, which was to study directly the
mental processes underlying intelligence and, perhaps, relate them to the factors of
intelligence proposed by the psychometricians.
• So……… no explanation of intelligence
Psychometric Approach:
Psychometric theories focus on quantifying intelligence and
measuring IQ.
• Intelligence tests have been developed to try to provide an accurate way of
measuring intelligence. Well-known tests include the Stanford–Binet test, the
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, and the British Ability Scales. These tests
are designed to measure several aspects of intelligence and so include
mathematical items, vocabulary tests, problems based on analogies, and items
relating to spatial ability.
The standardised intelligence quotient (IQ) tests were introduced so that scores
could be compared to those of others. These were tested on large representative
samples to establish the reliability and validity of the measures. The intelligence
test is devised so that the scores form a normal distribution, which means that
the majority of the scores cluster around the mean. The distance from the mean
is measured in standard deviations, 68% of the scores fall within one standard
deviation of the mean, 95% fall within two standard deviations, and 99.73% are
within three standard deviations. Intelligence tests are designed to produce a
mean IQ of 100 and a standard deviation of about 16.
Structure of Intelligence: Factor Analysis
• Factor analysis is a statistical technique used to assess how well factors correlate
to help separate out different aspects of intelligence. If two items correlate highly
with each other, those who perform well on one item tend to perform well on the
other one. The key assumption is that two items correlating highly with each
other assess the same factor of intelligence. Spearman (1923) suggested that
there is a general factor of intelligence, which he called “g” because most of the
items within an intelligence test correlate positively with each other. However,
most of these positive correlations are fairly weak and so Spearman argued there
are specific factors associated with each test.
Thurstone also believed that intelligence was more specific than general. He
identified seven factors of intelligence, which he termed primary mental abilities:
inductive reasoning (forming generalisations from examples), verbal meaning,
numerical ability, spatial ability, perceptual speed, memory, and verbal fluency.
Research evidence for the psychometric
approach
• The validity of intelligence tests can be checked by seeing if students
with high IQs have a higher level of academic performance than those
with low IQs. There is a positive correlation of about +.5 or +.6
between intelligence test score and academic performance
(Mackintosh, 1998), indicating there is a moderately strong
relationship between these two variables.
• Hunter (1986) found that IQ as assessed by intelligence tests
correlated +.58 with work performance among individuals with highcomplexity jobs (e.g. biologist; city circulation manager). The finding
that IQ predicted job performance moderately well suggests that
intelligence tests are at least reasonably valid.
EVALUATION OF THE PSYCHOMETRIC APPROACH
• The specific factors correlate. Thurstone’s specific approach to intelligence is challenged by the
fact that all seven primary mental abilities correlate positively with each other and so can’t be
regarded as completely independent factors. Factor analysis of Thurstone’s seven factors
produces the general factor that he claimed wasn’t important!
• The hierarchical approach. According to this approach (e.g. Carroll, 1986,), a combination of
Spearman’s and Thurstone’s approaches best accounts for the structure of human intelligence.
This results in a three-level hierarchical approach. At the highest level is the general factor of
intelligence originally identified by Spearman. At the intermediate level of the hierarchy are six or
seven group factors as originally suggested by Thurstone, each more specific than the general
factor. At the lowest level of the hierarchy, there are numerous specific factors (e.g. spelling
ability).
• Culture bias. It has often been argued that most intelligence tests are biased in favour of white
individuals. Williams (1972,) compared white and black children who were given the Black
Intelligence Test of Cultural Homogeneity (BITCH), which was designed for black Americans. White
American children did no better than black American children on this test, and sometimes
performed worse. This reveals the difficulty of testing IQ as the questions are biased to the
dominant group, so intelligence tests are only directly applicable to the majority group of the
culture in which they were devised. Therefore they may tell us relatively little about intelligence in
other cultures or sub-cultures.
EVALUATION OF THE PSYCHOMETRIC
APPROACH
• Strong research support. The factorial approach has produced reasonable agreement
that intelligence has a hierarchical structure. There is also strong evidence for a general
factor of intelligence.
• Descriptive rather than explanatory. The psychometric approach is descriptive rather
than explanatory because it describes intelligence but does not explain how or why it has
developed. It does not explain the influence of genetic and environmental factors in
determining individual differences in intelligence and so offers no insight into the causes
of intelligence.
• Reductionist. In seeking only to measure intelligence, the psychometric approach is very
limited and so reductionist because it tells us little about the cognitive processes and
mechanisms underlying intelligent behaviour. This limitation has been addressed by
researchers adopting the information-processing approach.
• Emotional intelligence. Another way in which the psychometric approach is reductionist
is that it only considers one type of intelligence. Social or emotional intelligence seems
important, and yet is typically excluded from the hierarchical model
Extra for interest.
• The new statistical techniques developed by Thurstone provided the necessary tools for his most enduring
contribution to psychology: The Theory of Primary Mental Abilities, a model of human intelligence that
challenged Charles Spearman’s then-dominant paradigm of a unitary conception of intelligence. Spearman,
using an earlier approach to factor analysis, found that scores on all mental tests (regardless of the domain
or how it was tested) tend to load on one major factor. Spearman suggested that these disparate scores are
fueled by a common metaphorical “pool” of mental energy. He named this pool the general factor,
or g (Spearman, 1904).
• Thurstone argued that g was a statistical artifact resulting from the mathematical procedures used to study
it. Using his new approach to factor analysis, Thurstone found that intelligent behavior does not arise from a
general factor, but rather emerges from seven independent factors that he called primary abilities: word
fluency, verbal comprehension, spatial visualization, number facility, associative memory, reasoning, and
perceptual speed (Thurstone, 1938). Furthermore, when Thurstone analyzed mental test data from samples
comprised of people with similar overall IQ scores, he found that they had different profiles of primary
mental abilities, further supporting his model and suggesting that his work had more clinical utility than
Spearman’s unitary theory. However, when Thurstone administered his tests to an intellectually
heterogeneous group of children, he failed to find that the seven primary abilities were entirely separate;
rather he found evidence of g. Thurstone managed an elegant mathematical solution that resolved these
apparently contradictory results, and the final version of his theory was a compromise that accounted for
the presence of both a general factor and the seven specific abilities. This compromise helped lay the
groundwork for future researchers who proposed hierarchical theories and theories of multiple intelligences
(Ruzgis, 1994).
Prep
• Discuss one psychometric theory of intelligence. (4 marks + 8 marks)
• Choose Spearman or Cattell or Thurstone
A01
• Psychometric theories focus on quantifying intelligence and measuring IQ.
Key figures include Spearman, Thurstone, Cattell and Hebb. Candidates
may choose from any of these theories, which cover the development of
the concept of IQ, factor approaches to intelligence and its measurement,
and fluid and crystallised intelligence (Hebb). Candidates should not be
penalised for mislabelling a particular theory as long as the description
itself is accurate. If aspects of two different theories are muddled, the
more coherent one should be marked. Note that Gardner’s theory of
multiple intelligences is not a psychometric theory. The question is on
theories and any description of IQ tests is unlikely to earn AO1 marks.
However the development of tests may be presented as a legitimate
implication of a particular theory and earn AO2/AO3 marks.
A02
• Psychometric theories focus on quantifying intelligence and measuring IQ.
Key figures include Spearman, Thurstone, Cattell and Hebb. Candidates
may choose from any of these theories, which cover the development of
the concept of IQ, factor approaches to intelligence and its measurement,
and fluid and crystallised intelligence (Hebb). Candidates should not be
penalised for mislabelling a particular theory as long as the description
itself is accurate. If aspects of two different theories are muddled, the
more coherent one should be marked. Note that Gardner’s theory of
multiple intelligences is not a psychometric theory. The question is on
theories and any description of IQ tests is unlikely to earn AO1 marks.
However the development of tests may be presented as a legitimate
implication of a particular theory and earn AO2/AO3 marks.
Banding
How to Interpret a Correlation Coefficient
• The sign and the absolute value of a correlation coefficient describe the direction and the
magnitude of the relationship between two variables.
• The value of a correlation coefficient ranges between -1 and 1.
• The greater the absolute value of a correlation coefficient, the stronger the linear relationship.
• The strongest linear relationship is indicated by a correlation coefficient of -1 or 1.
• The weakest linear relationship is indicated by a correlation coefficient equal to 0.
• A positive correlation means that if one variable gets bigger, the other variable tends to get
bigger.
• A negative correlation means that if one variable gets bigger, the other variable tends to get
smaller.
• Keep in mind that the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient only measures linear
relationships. Therefore, a correlation of 0 does not mean zero relationship between two
variables; rather, it means zero linear relationship. (It is possible for two variables to have zero
linear relationship and a strong curvilinear relationship at the same time.)
Test
• Discuss one psychometric theory of intelligence. 12
Next part
• Information processing theories, for example, Sternberg, Gardner
Animal learning and intelligence
Aim
• Understand Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
• Be able to recreate the three types in the Triarchic theory.
• Understand the difference between this and the Psychometric
theories.
Information processing theories
Cognitive psychology sees the individual as a processor of information, in
much the same way that a computer takes in information and follows a
program to produce an output.
Remember the multi-store model of memory?
For example, the eye receives visual information and codes information into
electric neural activity which is fed back to the brain where it is “stored” and
“coded”. This information can be used by other parts of the brain relating to
mental activities such as memory, perception and attention. The output (i.e.
behaviour) might be, for example, to read what you can see on a printed
page.
Memory
Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
• Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Human Intelligence (1977, 1985, 1995)
subsumes both Spearman’s g and underlying information processing
components. His triarchic theory includes three facets or subtheories:
• Analytical (componential)
• Creative (experiential)
• Practical (contextual)
• Sternberg's theory builds on his earlier componential approach to
reasoning. His theory is mostly based on observing Yale graduate students.
Sternberg believes that if intelligence is properly defined & measured it will
translate to real-life success.
• Sternberg's Triarchic Theory is an important effort to synthesize the various
theories of intelligence.
Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
Analytical (componential) Facet (or Subtheory)
• Analytical Intelligence similar to the standard psychometric definition of intelligence e.g. as measured by Academic problem
solving: analogies and puzzles, and corresponds to his earlier componential intelligence. Sternberg considers this reflects how an
individual relates to his internal world.
• Sternberg believes that Analytical Intelligence (Academic problem-solving skills) is based on the joint operations of
metacomponents and performance components and knowledge acquisition components of intelligence
• Metacomponents: control, monitor and evaluate cognitive processing. These are the executive functions to order and organise
performance and knowledge acquisition components. They are the higher-order processes that order and organise the
performance components. Used to analyze problems and pick a strategy for solving them. They decide what to do and the
performance components actually do it.
• Performance Components: execute strategies assembled by the metacomponents. They are the basic operations involved in any
cognitive act. They are the cognitive processes that enable us to encode stimuli, hold information in short-term memory, make
calculations, perform mental calculations, mentally compare different stimuli, retrieve information from long-term memory.
• Knowledge acquisition components: are the processes used in gaining and storing new knowledge - i.e. capacity for learning. The
strategies you use to help memorize things exemplify the processes that fall into this category.
• Sternberg feels that IDs in intelligence are related to IDs in the use of these cognitive processes. He feels that people with better
reasoning ability generally spend more time understanding the problem but reach their solution faster than those who are less
skilled at the task.
Creative (experiential) Facet (or Subtheory)
• Creative Intelligence: this involves insights, synthesis and the ability to react to novel situations
and stimuli. This he considers the Experiential aspect of intelligence and reflects how an
individual connects the internal world to external reality.
• Sternberg considers the Creative facet to consist of the ability which allows people to think
creatively and that which allows people to adjust creatively and effectively to new situations.
• Sternberg believes that more intelligent individuals will also move from consciously learning in a
novel situation to automating the new learning so that they can attend to other tasks.
• Two-Facet Subtheory (Novelty & Automatization)
• Basic assumption: That there are two broad classes of abilities associated with intelligence:
novelty skills and automatization skills. A task measures intelligence if it requires the ability to
deal with novel demands or the ability to automatize information processing (two ends of a
continuum).
• Novel tasks or situations are good measures of intellectual ability because they assess an
individual's ability to apply existing knowledge to new problems.
Practical (contextual) Facet (or Subtheory)
• Practical Intelligence: this involves the ability to grasp, understand and deal with
everyday tasks. This is the Contextual aspect of intelligence and reflects how the
individual relates to the external world about him or her.
• Sternberg states that Intelligence is: "Purposive adaptation to, shaping of, and
selection of real-world environments relevant to one's life" (Sternberg, 1984,
p.271)
• Purposive means that intelligence is directed towards goals, however vague or
subconscious they may be. This means that intelligence is indicated by one's
attempts to adapt to one's environment.
• Practical Intelligence can be said to be intelligence that operates in the real world.
People with this type of intelligence can adapt to, or shape their environment. It
might also be called “Street-smarts” (Hector). In measuring this facet, not only
mental skills but attitudes and emotional factors that can influence
intelligence are measured.
Practical (all good)
So this practical intelligence is a combination of:
(a) adaptation to the environment in order to have goals met
(b) changing the environment in order to have goals met
(c) or, if (a) and (b) don't work moving to a new environment
in which goals can be met
Sternberg believes that individuals considered intelligent in
one culture may be looked on as unintelligent in another.
An important asset of this theory is to avoid defining
intelligence in terms of intelligence tests rather than
performance in the everyday world (which is, after all, what
intelligence tests try to predict!)
Measuring practical intelligence:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sternberg and Wagner’s test of Practical Managerial Intelligence measures:
ability to write effective memos
ability to motivate people
knowledge of when to delegate
ability to “read” people
When measuring practical intelligence Sternberg looks at things such as
how people decode nonverbal messages e.g. can you tell who are the real
couples?
• Sternberg Multidimensional Abilities Test measures all 3 intelligences, on
separate scales
Look at article.
Gardner: take a test
• https://prezi.com/lhtvvyqjbng7/a2-psychology-intelligence-andlearning-lesson-4/
Gardner: Multiple intelligence
Evaluation
• Musical and Body Kinaesthetic are talents not intelligence.
• No tests to prove they exist
• Naturalistic an interest rather than intelligence.
• Kornhaber: Matches what teachers experience so has led to the
theories being incorporated successfully into teaching practice.
• Turner provided evidence of Musical intelligence.
• Neuroscience proof shows distinct areas through brain imaging and
brain damaged individuals.