Ciccarelli Intelligence PDF Practice Quiz

318  Chapter 7 Practice Quiz How much do you remember? Pick the best answer. 1. What is thinking? pair of scissors, she cuts the bag so that she can put her head and a. mental activity that involves processin...

318  Chapter 7 Practice Quiz How much do you remember? Pick the best answer. 1. What is thinking? pair of scissors, she cuts the bag so that she can put her head and a. mental activity that involves processing, organizing, understand- arms through the bag without getting wet. In using the trash bag as ing, and communicating information a makeshift rain jacket, Alicia has overcome b. spontaneous, nondirected, and unconscious mental activity a. functional fixedness. c. creativity bias. c. simply and succinctly, it is only our ability to remember b. confirmation bias. d. confirmation fixedness. d. all mental activity except memory 5. Randall believes that aliens are currently living deep under the 2. People in the United States often think of a sports car when asked ocean. When looking for information about this on the Internet, he to envision a fun, fast form of travel. In this example, a sports car ignores any sites that are skeptical of his belief and only visits sites would be considered a that support his belief. This is an example of a. prototype. c. formal concept. a. functional fixedness. c. creativity bias. b. natural concept. d. mental image. b. confirmation bias. d. confirmation fixedness. 3. While taking a shower, Miguel suddenly realizes the solution to 6. Which of the following is the best way to encourage divergent, a problem at work. When later asked how he solved this prob- ­creative thinking? lem, Miguel said, “The answer just seemed to pop into my head.” a. Go for a walk or engage in some other automatic activity. Miguel’s experience is an example of b. Stare at a blank sheet of paper until a new, innovative solution a. a mechanical solution. c. an algorithm. comes to mind. b. a heuristic. d. insight. c. Engage in many activities simultaneously. 4. Alicia leaves her office building only to find it is raining. She returns d. Force yourself to think of something new and creative. to her office and gets a trash bag out of the supply cabinet. Using a Intelligence What does it mean to be “smart”? Is this the same as being intelligent? It is likely the answer depends on the immediate task or context. What exactly do we mean by the term intelligence? Theories of Intelligence 7.6 Compare and contrast different theories on the nature of intelligence. Is intelligence merely a score on some test, or is it practical knowledge of how to get along in the world? Is it making good grades or being a financial success or a social success? Ask a dozen people and you will probably get a dozen different answers. ­Psychologists have come up with a workable definition that combines many of the ideas just men- tioned: They define intelligence as the ability to learn from one’s experiences, acquire knowledge, and use resources effectively in adapting to new situations or solving prob- lems (Sternberg & Kaufman, 1998; Wechsler, 1975). These are the characteristics that indi- viduals need in order to survive in their culture. Although we have defined intelligence in a general way, there are differing opin- ions of the specific knowledge and abilities that make up the concept of intelligence. We intelligence will discuss several theories that offer different explanations of the nature and number of the ability to learn from one’s expe- intelligence-related abilities. riences, acquire knowledge, and use resources effectively in adapting to Spearman’S G Factor Charles Spearman (1904) saw intelligence as two different abil- new situations or solving problems. ities. The ability to reason and solve problems was labeled g factor for general ­intelligence, whereas task-specific abilities in certain areas such as music, business, or art are labeled g factor s factor for specific intelligence. A traditional IQ test would most likely measure g factor, the ability to reason and solve prob- but Spearman believed that superiority in one type of intelligence predicts superiority lems, or general intelligence. overall. Although his early research found some support for specific intelligences, other s factor researchers (Guilford, 1967; Thurstone, 1938) felt that Spearman had oversimplified the the ability to excel in certain areas, or concept of intelligence. Intelligence began to be viewed as composed of numerous fac- specific intelligence. tors. In fact, Guilford (1967) proposed that there were 120 types of intelligence.  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   319 Gardner’S Multiple Intelligences One of the later theorists to propose the exis- tence of several kinds of intelligence is Howard Gardner (1993b, 1999a). Although many people use the terms reason, logic, and knowledge as if they are the same ability, Gardner believes that they are different aspects of intelligence, along with several other abilities. He originally listed seven different kinds of intelligence but later added an eighth type and then proposed a tentative ninth (Gardner, 1998, 1999b). The nine types of intelligence are described in the video Theories of Intelligence: Gardner’s Theory and summarized in Table 7.2. CC Watch the Video Theories of Intelligence: Gardner’s Theory on MyPsychLab Table 7.2 Gardner’s Nine Intelligences Type of Intelligence Description Sample Occupation Verbal/linguistic Ability to use language Writers, speakers Musical Ability to compose and/or perform Musicians, even those who do not music read musical notes but can perform and compose Logical/ Ability to think logically and to Scientists, engineers mathematical solve mathematical problems Visual/spatial Ability to understand how objects Pilots, astronauts, artists, are oriented in space navigators Movement Ability to control one’s body motions Dancers, athletes Interpersonal Sensitivity to others and Psychologists, managers understanding motivation of others Intrapersonal Understanding of one’s emotions Various people-oriented careers and how they guide actions Naturalist Ability to recognize the patterns Farmers, landscapers, biologists, found in nature botanists Existentialist Ability to see the “big picture” of the Various careers, philosophical (a candidate human world by asking questions thinkers intelligence) about life, death, and the ultimate reality of human existence Source: Gardner, 1998, 1999b. 320  Chapter 7 The idea of multiple intelligences has great appeal, especially for educators. How- ever, some argue that there are few scientific studies providing evidence for the concept of multiple intelligences (Waterhouse, 2006a, 2006b), while others claim that the evidence does exist (Gardner & Moran, 2006). Some critics propose that such intelligences are no more than different abilities and that those abilities are not necessarily the same thing as what is typically meant by intelligence (E. Hunt, 2001). Sternberg’S Triarchic Theory Robert Sternberg (1988a, 1997b) has theorized that there are three kinds of intelligence. Called the triarchic theory of intelligence (triarchic means three), this theory includes analytical, creative, and practical intelligence. Analytical intelligence refers to the ability to break problems down into component parts, or analysis, for problem solving. This is the type of intelligence that is measured by intelligence tests and academic achievement tests, or “book smarts” as some peo- ple like to call it. Creative intelligence is the ability to deal with new and different concepts and to come up with new ways of solving problems (divergent thinking, in other words); it also refers to the ability to automatically process certain aspects of information, which frees up cognitive resources to deal with novelty (Sternberg, 2005). ­Practical intelligence is best described as “street smarts,” or the ability to use informa- tion to get along in life. People with a high degree of practical intelligence know how to be tactful, how to manipulate situations to their advantage, and how to use inside information to increase their odds of success. How might these three types of intelligence be illustrated? All three might come into play when planning and completing an experiment. For example: Analytical: Being able to run a statistical analysis on data from the experiment. Creative: Being able to design the experiment in the first place. Practical: Being able to get funding for the experiment from donors. Practical intelligence has become a topic of much interest and research. Sternberg (1996, 1997a, 1997b) has found that practical intelligence predicts success in life but has a surprisingly low relationship to academic (analytical) intelligence. However, when practical intelligence is taken into account or used to supplement standardized tests, studies have found that college, high school, and elementary school programs benefit in a variety of areas due to the diverse range of individuals being included (Sternberg, 2015). Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory Another influential theory of intelligence is actually based on the culmination of work from several theorists, Raymond Cattell, triarchic theory of intelligence John Horn, and John Carroll (Flanagan & Dixon, 2013; McGrew, 2009; Schneider & Sternberg’s theory that there are three McGrew, 2012). Interestingly, Cattell was a student of Charles Spearman and Horn was kinds of intelligence: analytical, cre- a student of Cattell (Schneider & McGrew, 2012). Raymond Cattell suggested intelli- ative, and practical. gence was composed of crystalized intelligence, which represents acquired knowledge and skills, versus f luid intelligence, or problem solving and adaptability in unfamiliar analytical intelligence situations. John Horn expanded on Cattell’s work and added other abilities based on the ability to break problems down visual and auditory processing, memory, speed of processing, reaction time, quantita- into component parts, or analysis, for tive skills, and reading-writing skills (Flanagan & Dixon, 2013). Based on an extensive problem solving. factor analysis of data from more than 460 studies, John Carroll developed a three-tier creative intelligence hierarchical model of cognitive abilities that fit so well with the Cattell-Horn crystal- the ability to deal with new and differ- ized and fluid intelligence models that a new theory was suggested, the Cattell-Horn-­ ent concepts and to come up with new Carroll (CHC) Theory of Intelligence (McGrew, 2009). ways of solving problems. One component of the CHC framework is general intelligence, or g. It is also composed of 16 broad abilities including general brain-based factors comprising fluid practical intelligence reasoning, short-term memory, long-term storage and retrieval, processing speed, reac- the ability to use information to get tion and decision speed, and psychomotor speed (see Figure 7.4). Four abilities are along in life and become successful. based on C ­ attell’s description of crystalized intelligence: comprehension-knowledge,  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   321 domain-­specific knowledge, reading and writing, and quantitative knowledge. Other abilities are tied to sensory systems and their respective primary and association areas of the cortex: visual processing, auditory processing, olfactory abilities, tactile abilities, kinesthetic abilities, and psychomotor abilities (Schneider & McGrew, 2012). General Intelligence ( g) General Domain-Independent Sensory-Motor Domain Acquired Knowledge General Speed General Capacities Specific Abilities Broad Quantitative Knowledge (Gq) Fluid Reasoning (Gf) Visual Processing (Gv) Processing Speed (Gs) Comp - Knowledge (Gc) Short-Term Memory (Gsm) Auditory Processing (Ga) Reaction & Decision Speed (Gt) Reading & Writing (Grw) Long-Term Storage & Olfactory Abilities (Go) Retrieval (Glr) Psychomotor Speed (Gps) Domain Specific Knowledge Tactile Abilities (Gh) (Gkn) Kinesthetic Abilities (Gk) Psychomotor Abilities (Gp) Narrow 70+ Narrow Abilities Functional groupings Conceptual groupings Figure 7.4 Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) Theory of Intelligence. Based on and adapted from Schneider & McGrew (2012, 2013). Of all of the theories of intelligence, it has been suggested that CHC theory is the most researched, empirically supported, and comprehensive (Flanagan & Dixon, 2013). In fact, many new assessments of intelligence and revisions of earlier assessments have been driven by CHC theory (Keith & Reynolds, 2010). Neuroscience Theories It is probably no surprise that the brain has been closely linked to intelligence. Not only have specific brain areas and brain functions been tied to differences in intellectual ability, but differing levels of specific cognitive abilities have also been a topic of study. With regard to brain area and function, some researchers have suggested that the frontal and parietal brain areas play the most important roles, and these areas are actually components of one of the leading neuroscience theories of intel- ligence, the Parieto-Frontal Integration Theory, or P-FIT (Jung & Haier, 2007). to Learning Objectives 2.11, 2.12. Researchers have expanded on P-FIT and suggested other areas such as the posterior cingulate cortex, insular cortex, and specific subcortical areas also play critical roles (Basten et al., 2015). For specific cognitive abilities, working memory has been tied to f luid intelligence, or the ability to adapt and deal with new problems or challenges the first time you encounter them, without having to depend on knowledge you already possess. Working memory in of itself is a contributing fac- tor to a variety of higher cognitive functions. to Chap 6.4. When examined in relation to fluid intelligence, individual differences in working memory components such as capacity, attention control, and ability to retrieve items from long-term memory appear to be most influential, and that overall, the ability to reliably preserve relevant information for successful cognitive processing appears to be vital (Colom et al., 2015; Unsworth et al., 2014, 2015). 322  Chapter 7 Measuring Intelligence 7.7 Compare and contrast some methods of measuring intelligence. The history of intelligence testing spans the twentieth century and has at times been marked by controversies and misuse. A full history of how intelligence testing developed would take at least an entire chapter, so this section will discuss only some of the bet- ter-known forms of testing and how they came to be. It doesn’t sound like intelligence would be easy to measure on a test—how do IQ tests work, anyway? The measurement of intelligence by some kind of test is a concept that is less than a century old. It began when educators in France realized that some students needed more help with learning than others did. They thought that if a way could be found to identify these students more in need, they could be given a different kind of education than the more capable students. Binet’S Mental Ability Test In those early days, a French psychologist named Alfred Binet was asked by the French Ministry of Education to design a formal test of intelligence that would help identify children who were unable to learn as quickly or as well as others so that they could be given remedial education. Eventually, he and colleague Théodore Simon came up with a test that distinguished not only between fast and slow learners but also between children of different age groups as well (Binet & Simon, 1916). They noticed that the fast learners seemed to give answers to questions that older children might give, whereas the slow learners gave answers that were more typical of a younger child. Binet decided that the key element to be tested was a child’s mental age, or the average age at which children could successfully answer a particular level of questions. Stanford-Binet and IQ Lewis Terman (1916), a researcher at Stanford University, adopted German psychologist William Stern’s method for comparing mental age and chronological age (number of years since birth) for use with the translated and revised Binet test. Stern’s (1912) formula was to divide the mental age (MA) by the chronologi- cal age (CA) and multiply the result by 100 to get rid of any decimal points. The result- ing score is called an intelligence quotient, or IQ. (A quotient is a number that results from dividing one number by another.) IQ = MA/CA * 100 For example, if a child who is 10 years old takes the test and scores a mental age of 15 (is able to answer the level of questions typical of a 15-year-old), the IQ would look like this: IQ = 15/10 * 100 = 150 The quotient has the advantage of allowing testers to compare the intelligence lev- els of people of different age groups. While this method works well for children, it pro- duces IQ scores that start to become meaningless as the person’s chronological age passes 16 years. (Once a person becomes an adult, the idea of questions that are geared for a particular age group loses its power. For example, what kind of differences would there be between questions designed for a 30-year-old versus a 40-year-old?) Most intelligence tests today, such as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5; Roid, 2003) and the Wechsler tests (see the following section), use age-group comparison norms instead. intelligence quotient (IQ) The SB5 is often used by educators to make decisions about the placement of students a number representing a measure into special educational programs, both for those with disabilities and for those with of intelligence, resulting from the exceptionalities. Many children are given this test in the second grade, or age 7 or 8. The division of one’s mental age by one’s SB5 yields an overall estimate of intelligence, verbal and nonverbal domain scores, all chronological age and then multiply- composed of five primary areas of cognitive ability—fluid reasoning, knowledge, quan- ing that quotient by 100. titative processing, visual–spatial processing, and working memory (Roid, 2003). Test  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   323 items vary by task and difficulty and are typically completed successfully at different ages. Test items include tasks such as inserting correct shapes into matching holes on a form board (Age 2), digit reversal or being able to repeat four digits backward (Age 9), and testing vocabulary by defining 20 words from a list (Average adult; Roid, 2003). The Wechsler Tests Although the original Stanford-Binet Test is now in its fifth edition and includes different questions for people of different age groups, it is not the only IQ test that is popular today. David Wechsler was the first to devise a series of tests designed for specific age groups. Originally dissatisfied with the fact that the Stan- ford-Binet test was designed for children but being administered to adults, he devel- oped an IQ test specifically for adults. He later designed tests specifically for older school-age children and preschool children, as well as those in the early grades. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2008), Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014), and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI-IV; Wechsler, 2012) are the three current versions of this test, and in the United States these tests are now used more frequently than the Stan- ford-Binet. In earlier editions, another way these tests differed from the Stanford-Binet was by having both a verbal and performance (nonverbal) scale, as well as providing an overall score of intelligence (the original Stanford-Binet was composed predomi- nantly of verbal items). While still using both verbal and nonverbal items, the Wechlser tests now provide an overall score of intelligence and index scores related to cognitive domains. Table 7.3 has sample items for each of the four index scales from the WAIS-IV. Table 7.3 Simulated Sample Items From the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-IV) Simulated Sample Test Items Verbal Comprehension Index Similarities In what way are a circle and a triangle alike? In what way are a saw and a hammer alike? Vocabulary What is a hippopotamus? What does “resemble” mean? Information What is steam made of? What is pepper? Who wrote Tom Sawyer? Perceptual Reasoning Index Block Design After looking at a pattern or design, try to arrange small cubes in the same pattern. Matrix After looking at an incomplete matrix pattern or series, select an option that Reasoning completes the matrix or series. Visual Puzzles Look at a completed puzzle and select three components from a set of options that would recreate the puzzle, all within a specified time limit. Working Memory Index Digit Span Recall lists of numbers, some lists forward and some lists in reverse order, and recall a mixed list of numbers in correct ascending order. Arithmetic Three women divided 18 golf balls equally among themselves. How many golf balls did each person receive? If two buttons cost $0.15, what will be the cost of a dozen buttons? Processing Speed Index Symbol Search Visually scan a group of symbols to identify specific target symbols, within a specified time limit. Coding Learn a different symbol for specific numbers and then fill in the blank under the number with the correct symbol. (This test is timed.) Simulated items and descriptions similar to those in the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition (2008). 324  Chapter 7 Test Construction: Good Test, Bad Test? 7.8 Identify ways to evaluate the quality of a test. All tests are not equally good tests. Some tests may fail to actually test what they are designed for. Others may fail to give the same results on different occasions for the same person when that person has not changed. These tests would be considered invalid and unreliable, respectively. Reliability and Validity Reliability of a test refers to the test producing consistent results each time it is given to the same individual or group of people. For example, if Nicholas takes a personality test today and then again in a month or so, the results should be very similar if the personality test is reliable. Other tests might be easy to use and even reliable, but if they don’t actually measure what they are supposed to measure, they are also useless. These tests are thought of as “invalid” (untrue) tests. Validity is the degree to which a test actually measures what it’s supposed to measure. Another aspect of validity is the extent to which an obtained score accurately reflects the intended skill or outcome in real-life situations, or ecological validity, not just valid- ity for the testing or assessment situation. For example, we hope that someone who passes his or her test for a driver’s license will also be able to safely operate a motor vehicle when they are actually on the road. When evaluating a test, consider what a specific test score means and to what or to whom it is compared. Take the hypothetical example of Professor Stumpwater, who—for reasons best known only to him—believes that intelligence is related to a person’s golf scores. Let’s say that he develops an adult intelligence test based on golf scores. What do we need to look at to determine if his test is a good one? Standardization of Tests First of all, we would want to look at how he tried to standardize his test. Standardization refers to the process of giving the test to a large group of people that represents the kind of people for whom the test is designed. One aspect of standardization is in the establishment of consistent and standard methods of test administration. All test subjects would take the test under the same conditions. In the professor’s case, this would mean that he would have his sample members play the same number of rounds of golf on the same course under the same weather conditions, and so on. Another aspect addresses the comparison group whose scores will be used to com- pare individual test results. Standardization groups are chosen randomly from the popu- lation for whom the test is intended and, like all samples, must be representative of that population. to Learning Objectives A.1 and 1.8. If a test is designed for children, for example, then a large sample of randomly selected children would be given the test. Norms The scores from the standardization group would be called the norms, the standards against which all others who take the test would be compared. Most tests of reliability intelligence follow a normal curve, or a distribution in which the scores are the most fre- the tendency of a test to produce the quent around the mean, or average, and become less and less frequent the farther from same scores again and again each the mean they occur (see Figure 7.5). to Learning Objectives A.2, A.3, and A.4. time it is given to the same people. On the Wechsler IQ test, the percentages under each section of the normal curve represent the percentage of scores falling within that section for each standard deviation validity (SD) from the mean on the test. The standard deviation is the average variation of scores the degree to which a test actually from the mean. to Learning Objective A.4. measures what it’s supposed to measure. In the case of the professor’s golf test, he might find that a certain golf score is the average, which he would interpret as average intelligence. People who scored extremely deviation IQ scores well on the golf test would be compared to the average, as well as people with unusually a type of intelligence measure that poor scores. assumes that IQ is normally distrib- The normal curve allows IQ scores to be more accurately estimated than the old IQ uted around a mean of 100 with a scoring method formula devised by Stern. Test designers replaced the old ratio IQ of the standard deviation of about 15. earlier versions of IQ tests with deviation IQ scores, which are based on the normal curve  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   325 34.13% Standard Deviations -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 Wechsler IQ 40 55 70 85 100 115 130 145 160 Stanford-Binet 4 IQ 36 52 68 84 100 116 132 148 164 Cumulative % 0.003 0.135 2.275 15.856 50.00 84.134 97.725 99.865 99.997 Figure 7.5 The Normal Curve The percentages under each section of the normal curve represent the percentage of scores falling within that section for each standard deviation (SD) from the mean. Scores on intelligence tests are typically represented by the normal curve. The dotted vertical lines each represent one standard deviation from the mean, which is always set at 100. For example, an IQ of 115 on the Wechsler represents one standard deviation above the mean, and the area under the curve indicates that 34.13 percent of the population falls between 100 and 115 on this test. to Learning Objectives A.2, A.3, A.4, and 1.8. Note: The figure shows the mean and standard deviation for the Stanford-Binet Fourth Edition (Stanford-Binet 4). The Stan- ford-Binet Fifth Edition was published in 2003 and now has a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 for composite scores. distribution (Eysenck, 1994): IQ is assumed to be normally distributed with a mean IQ of 100 and a typical standard deviation of about 15 (the standard deviation can vary according to the particular test). An IQ of 130, for example, would be two standard devi- ations above the mean, whereas an IQ of 70 would be two standard deviations below the mean, and in each case the person’s score is being compared to the population’s average score. With respect to validity and reliability, the professor’s test fares poorly. If the results of the professor’s test were compared with other established intelligence tests, there would probably be no relationship at all. Golf scores have nothing to do with intelli- gence, so the test is not a valid, or true, measure of intelligence. On the other hand, his test might work well for some people and poorly for oth- ers on the question of reliability. Some people who are good and regular golfers tend to score about the same for each game that they play, so for them, the golf score IQ would be fairly reliable. But others, especially those who do not play golf or play infrequently, would have widely varying scores from game to game. For those people, the test would be very unreliable, and if a test is unreliable for some, it’s not a good test. A test can fail in validity but still be reliable. If for some reason Professor Stump- water chose to use height as a measure of intelligence, an adult’s score on Stumpwater’s “test” would always be the same, as height does not change by very much after the late teens. But the opposite is not true. If a test is unreliable, how can it accurately measure what it is supposed to measure? For example, adult intelligence remains fairly constant. If a test meant to measure that intelligence gave different scores at different times, it’s obviously not a valid measure of intelligence. Just because an IQ test gives the same score every time a person takes it doesn’t mean that the score is actually measuring real intelligence, right? 326  Chapter 7 That’s right—think about the definition of intelligence for a moment: the ability to learn from one’s experiences, acquire knowledge, and use resources effectively in adapt- ing to new situations or solving problems. How can anyone define what “effective use of resources” might be? Does everyone have access to the same resources? Is everyone’s “world” necessarily perceived as being the same? Intelligence tests are useful measuring devices but should not necessarily be assumed to be measures of all types of intelligent behavior, or even good measures for all groups of people, as the next section discusses. IQ Tests and Cultural Bias The problem with trying to measure intelligence with a test that is based on an understanding of the world and its resources is that not everyone comes from the same “world.” People raised in a different culture, or even a different economic situation, from the one in which the designer of an IQ test is raised are not likely to perform well on such a test—not to mention the difficul- ties of taking a test that is written in an unfamiliar language or dialect. In the early days of immigration, people from non–English-speaking countries would score very poorly on intelligence tests, in some cases being denied entry to the United States on the basis of such tests (Allen, 2006). It is very difficult to design an intelligence test that is completely free of cultural How might these two women, apparently from bias, a term referring to the tendency of IQ tests to reflect, in language, dialect, and con- different cultures, come to an agreement on what tent, the culture of the person or persons who designed the test. A person who comes best defines intelligence? from the same culture (or even socioeconomic background) as the test designer may have an unfair advantage over a person who is from a different cultural or socioeconomic background (Helms, 1992). If people raised in an Asian culture are given a test designed within a traditional Western culture, many items on the test might make no sense to them. For example, one kind of question might be: Which one of the five is least like the other four? DOG—CAR—CAT—BIRD—FISH The answer is supposed to be “car,” which is the only one of the five that is not alive. But a Japanese child, living in a culture that relies on the sea for so much of its food and culture, might choose “fish,” because none of the others are found in the ocean. That child’s test score would be lower but not because the child is not intelligent. In 1971, Adrian Dove designed an intelligence test to highlight the problem of cul- tural bias. Dove, an African-American sociologist, created the Dove Counterbalance Gen- eral Intelligence Test in an attempt to demonstrate that a significant language/dialect barrier exists among children of different backgrounds. Questions on this test were derived from African-American culture in the southeastern United States during the 1960s and 1970s. Anyone not knowledgeable of this culture will probably score very poorly on this test, including African-American people from other geographical regions. The point is sim- ply this: Tests are created by people from a particular culture and background. Questions and answers that test creators might think are common knowledge may relate to their own experiences and not to people of other cultures, backgrounds, or socioeconomic levels. Attempts have been made to create intelligence tests that are as free of cultural influ- ences as is humanly possible. Many test designers have come to the conclusion that it may be impossible to create a test that is completely free of cultural bias (Carpenter et al., 1990). Instead, they are striving to create tests that are at least culturally fair. These tests use ques- tions that do not create a disadvantage for people whose culture differs from that of the majority. Many items on a “culture-fair” test require the use of nonverbal abilities, such as rotating objects, rather than items about verbal knowledge that might be culturally spe- cific. One example is Raven’s Progressive Matrices, a test of abstract reasoning. The test consists of a series of items containing abstract patterns, either in a 2 * 2 or 2 * 3 matrix, from which test takers have to identify a missing portion that best completes a pattern (see Figure 7.6). However, although once believed to be largely culture free, or at least fair, even this test is not immune to the influence of culture, as age, generational cohort, and education appear to impact performance (Brouwers et al., 2009; Fox & Mitchum, 2013).  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   327 ? A B C D E F Figure 7.6 Raven’s Progressive Matrices Example Facsimile of an item that may be found in Raven’s Progressive Matrices. Which of the bottom images completes the pattern? Thinking Critically What kind of questions would you include on an intelligence test to minimize cultural bias? If intelligence tests are so flawed, why do people still use them? Usefulness of IQ Tests IQ tests are generally valid for predicting academic success and job performance (Sackett et al., 2008). This may be more true for those who score at the higher and lower ends of the normal curve. (For those who score in the average range of IQ, the predictive value is less clear.) The kinds of tests students are given in school are often similar to intelligence tests, and so people who do well on IQ tests typically do well on other kinds of academically oriented tests as well, such as the SAT, the American College Test (ACT), the Graduate Record Exam (GRE), and actual college examinations. These achievement tests are very similar to IQ tests but are administered to groups of people rather than to individuals. However, research suggests skills in self-regulation or levels of motivation may impact IQ measures and raises concerns about situations or circumstances in which IQ scores may not be unbiased predictors of academic or job suc- cess (Duckworth et al., 2011; Duckworth & Seligman, 2005; Nisbett et al., 2012). Intelligence testing also plays an important role in neuropsychology, where spe- cially trained psychologists use intelligence tests and other forms of cognitive and behavioral testing to assess neurobehavioral disorders in which cognition and behav- ior are impaired as the result of brain injury or brain malfunction (National Academy of ­Neuropsychology, 2001). As part of their profession, neuropsychologists use intelligence testing in diagnosis (e.g., head injury, learning disabilities, neuropsychological disor- ders), tracking progress of individuals with such disorders, and in monitoring possible recovery. to Learning Objective B.5. 328  Chapter 7 Neuropsychologists often work with individuals who have traumatic brain injury (TBI). Many traumatic brain injuries can also be permanent, impacting the day-to-day func- tioning of both individuals and their loved ones for the rest of their lives. Depending on the area or areas of the brain injured and the severity of the trauma, some possible out- comes might include difficulty thinking, speech disturbances, memory problems, reduced attention span, headaches, sleep disturbances, frustration, mood swings, and personality changes. Not only do these outcomes negatively impact formal tests of intelligence, the defi- cits from such injuries may also affect thinking, problem solving, and cognition in general. Mild TBI, or concussion, is an impairment of brain function for minutes to hours following a head injury. Concussions may include a loss of consciousness for up to 30 minutes, “seeing stars,” headache, dizziness, and sometimes nausea or vomiting (Blu- menfeld, 2010; Ruff et al., 2009). Amnesia for the events immediately before or after the accident is also a primary symptom and more likely to be anterograde in nature. to Learning Objective 6.5 and 6.13. The effects of repeated concussions and the long-term effects of head injuries in general are of particular interest to neuropsychologists and other health professionals because the potential issues (memory problems, changes in personality, etc.) may not be evident until many years later. American football is one sport in which athletes may have extended playing careers. The possibility of an increased risk for depression, dementia, or other neurological risks for these athletes after they have quit playing has spawned ongoing research with professional football players (Guskiewicz et al., 2007; Hazrati et al., 2013; G. Miller, 2009). Former players who had three or more concussions were three times more likely to have significant memory problems and five times more likely to be diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment, often a precursor to Alzheimer’s disease. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a progressive brain disease linked to repetitive TBIs. In one recent study, of 66 brains examined from individuals that had participated in contact sports, 21 had brain changes and pathology consistent with CTE. Furthermore, of 198 brains from individuals that did not play contact sports, no CTE signs were detected, even in the brains of 33 individuals that suffered from a single TBI (Bieniek et al., 2015). As part of the effort to protect players, modern football helmets are being designed Individual Differences in Intelligence so they better fit individual players, and engineered to further minimize both front 7.9 Define intellectual disability, giftedness, and emotional intelligence. and side impacts to the head. Another use of IQ tests is to help identify people who differ from those of average intelli- gence by a great degree. Although one such group is composed of those who are sometimes called “geniuses” (who fall at the extreme high end of the normal curve for intelligence), the other group is made up of people who, for various reasons, are considered intellectu- ally disabled and whose IQ scores fall well below the mean on the normal curve. Intellectual Disability Intellectual disability (intellectual developmental dis- order), formerly mental retardation or developmentally delayed, is a neurodevelopmental disorder and is defined in several ways. First, the person exhibits deficits in mental abilities, which is typically associated with an IQ score approximately two standard deviations below the mean on the normal curve, such as below 70 on a test with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15. Second, the person’s adaptive behavior (skills that Intellectual disability (intellectual allow people to live independently, such as being able to work at a job, communicate developmental disorder) well with others, and grooming skills such as being able to get dressed, eat, and bathe condition in which a person’s behav- with little or no help) is severely below a level appropriate for the person’s age. Finally, ioral and cognitive skills exist at an these limitations must begin in the developmental period. Intellectual disability occurs earlier developmental stage than the in about 1 percent of the population (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). skills of others who are the same chronological age; may also be referred So how would a professional go about deciding whether or to as developmentally delayed. This condition was formerly known as not a child has an intellectual disability? Is the IQ test the primary mental retardation. method?  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   329 Diagnosis Previous editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) relied heavily on IQ tests for determining the diagnosis of mental retardation and level of severity. Recognizing tests of IQ are less valid as one approaches the lower end of the IQ range, and the importance of adaptive living skills in multiple life areas, lev- els of severity are now based on the level of adaptive functioning and level of support the individual requires (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Thus, a Diagnostic and ­Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) (American Psychiatric Asso- ciation, 2013) diagnosis of intellectual disability is based on deficits in intellectual func- tioning, determined by standardized tests of intelligence and clinical assessment, which impact adaptive functioning across three domains. The domains include: conceptual (memory, reasoning, language, reading, writing, math, and other academic skills), social (empathy, social judgment, interpersonal communication, and other skills that impact the ability to make and maintain friendships), and practical (self-management skills that affect personal care, job responsibilities, school, money management, and other areas; American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Symptoms must begin during the developmen- tal period. Intellectual disability can vary from mild to profound. According to the DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013), individuals with mild intellectual disability may not be recognized as having deficits in the conceptual domain until they reach school age, where learning difficulties become apparent; as adults, they are likely to be fairly concrete thinkers. In the social domain, they are at risk of being manipulated, as social judgment and interactions are immature as compared to same-age peers. In the practical domain, they are capable of living independently with proper supports in place but will likely require assis- tance with more complex life skills such as health care decisions, legal issues, or raising a family (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). This category makes up the vast majority of those with intellectual disabilities. Other classifications in order of severity are moderate, severe, and profound. Conceptually, individuals with profound intellectual disability have a very limited ability to learn beyond simple matching and sorting tasks and, socially, have very poor communication skills, although they may recognize and interact nonverbally with well-known family members and other caretakers. In the practical domain, they may be able to participate by watching or assisting but are likely totally dependent on others for all areas of their care (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). All of these skill deficits are likely compounded by multiple physical or sensory impairments. Causes What causes intellectual disability? Unhealthy living conditions can affect brain development. Examples of such conditions are lead poisoning from eating paint chips (Lanphear et al., 2000), exposure to PCBs (Darvill et al., 2000), prenatal exposure to mercury (Grandjean et al., 1997), as well as other toxicants (Eriksson et al., 2001; Eskenazi et al., 1999; Schroeder, 2000). Deficits may also be attributed to factors resulting in inadequate brain development or other health risks associated with poverty. Examples include malnutrition, health consequences as the result of not having adequate access to health care, or lack of mental stimulation through typical cultural and educational experiences. Some of the biological causes of intellectual disability include Down syndrome This middle-aged man, named Jack, lives ( to Learning Objective 8.3), fetal alcohol syndrome, and fragile X syndrome. in a small town in Arkansas and serves as Fetal alcohol syndrome is a condition that results from exposing a developing embryo to a deacon in the local church. He is loved and respected and leads what, for him, is alcohol, and intelligence levels can range from below average to levels associated with a full and happy life. Jack also has Down intellectual disability (Olson & Burgess, 1997). In fragile X syndrome, an individual (more syndrome, but he has managed to find his frequently a male) has a defect in a gene on the X chromosome of the 23rd pair, leading to place in the world. a deficiency in a protein needed for brain development. Depending on the severity of the damage to this gene, symptoms of fragile X syndrome can range from mild to severe or profound intellectual disability (Dykens et al., 1994; Valverde et al., 2007). There are many other causes of intellectual disability (Murphy et al., 1998). Lack of oxygen at birth, damage to the fetus in the womb from diseases, infections, or drug use 330  Chapter 7 by the mother, and even diseases and accidents during childhood can lead to intellectual disability. One thing should always be remembered: Intellectual disability affects a person’s intellectual capabilities and adaptive behaviors. Individuals with an intellectual disability are just as responsive to love and affection as anyone else and need to be loved and to have friends just as all people do. Intelligence is only one characteristic; warmth, friend- liness, caring, and compassion also count for a great deal and should not be underrated. Giftedness At the other end of the intelligence scale* are those who fall on the upper end of the normal curve (see Figure 7.4), above an IQ of 130 (about 2 percent of the population). The term applied to these individuals is gifted, and if their IQ falls above 140 to 145 (less than half of 1 percent of the population), they are often referred to as highly advanced or geniuses. I’ve heard that geniuses are sometimes a little “nutty” and odd. Are geniuses, especially the really high-IQ ones, “not playing with a full deck,” as the saying goes? People have long held many false beliefs about people who are very, very intel- ligent. Such beliefs have included that gifted people are weird and socially awkward, physically weak, and more likely to suffer from mental illnesses. From these beliefs come the “mad scientist” of the cinema and the “evil geniuses” of literature. These beliefs were shattered by a groundbreaking study that was initiated in 1921 by Lewis M. Terman, the same individual responsible for the development of the Stanford-Binet Test. Terman (1925) selected 1,528 children to participate in a longitudinal study. to Learning Objective 8.1. These children, 857 boys and 671 girls, had IQs (as measured by the Stanford-Binet) ranging from 130 to 200. The early findings of this major study (Terman & Oden, 1947) demonstrated that the gifted were socially well adjusted and often skilled lead- ers. They were also above average in height, weight, and physical attractiveness, putting an end to the myth of the weakling genius. Terman was able to demonstrate not only that his gifted children were not more susceptible to mental illness than the general population, but he was also able to show that they were actually more resistant to mental illnesses than Stanford University psychologist Lewis Terman is pictured at his desk in 1942. those of average intelligence. Only those with the highest IQs (180 and above) were found Terman spent a good portion of his career to have some social and behavioral adjustment problems as children (Janos, 1987). researching children with high IQ scores Terman’s “Termites,” as they came to be called, were also typically successful as and was the first to use the term gifted to adults. They earned more academic degrees and had higher occupational and financial describe these children. success than their average peers (at least, the men in the study had occupational ­success— women at this time did not typically have careers outside the home). Researchers Zuo and Cramond (2001) examined some of Terman’s gifted people to see if their identity formation as adolescents was related to later occupational success. to Learning Objective 8.11. They found that most of the more successful “Termites” had in fact suc- cessfully achieved a consistent sense of self, whereas those who were less successful had not done so. For more on Terman’s famous study, see Classic Studies in Psychology. A book by Joan Freeman called Gifted Children Grown Up (Freeman, 2001) describes the results of a similar longitudinal study of 210 gifted and nongifted children in Great Britain. One of the more interesting findings from this study is that gifted children who are “pushed” to achieve at younger and younger ages, sitting for exams long before their peers would do so, often grow up to be disappointed, somewhat unhappy adults. gifted ­Freeman points to differing life conditions for the gifted as a major factor in their success, the 2 percent of the population falling adjustment, and well-being: Some lived in poverty and some in wealth, for example. on the upper end of the normal curve and typically possessing an IQ of 130 *scale: a graded series of tests or performances used in rating individual intelligence or or above. achievement.  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   331 Classic Studies in Psychology Terman’s “Termites” Terman’s (1925) longitudinal study is still providing information today. Terman himself died in 1956, but several other researchers (including Robert Sears, one of the original Termites, who died in 1989) kept track of the remaining Termites over the years (Holahan & Sears, 1996). As adults, the Termites were relatively successful, with a median income in the 1950s of $10,556, compared to the national median at that time of $5,800 a year. Most of them graduated from college, many earning advanced degrees. Their occupations included doc- tors, lawyers, business executives, university professors, scientists, and even one famous science fiction writer and an Oscar-winning director. By 2000, only about 200 Termites were still living. Although the study was marred by several flaws, it still remains one of the most important and rich sources of data on an entire generation. Terman’s study was actually the first truly longitudinal study ( to Learning Objective 8.1) ever to be accomplished, and scientists have gotten data about the effects of phenomena such as World War II and the influence of personality traits on how long one lives from the questionnaires filled out by the participants over the years. Terman and Oden (1959) compared the 100 most successful men in the group to the 100 least successful by defining “successful” as holding jobs that related to or used their intellectual skills. The more successful men earned more money, had careers with more prestige, and were healthier and less likely to be divorced or alcoholics than the less successful men. The IQ scores were relatively equal between the two groups, so the dif- ferences in success in life had to be caused by some other factor or factors. Terman and Oden found that the successful adults were different from the others in three ways: They were more goal oriented, more persistent in pursuing those goals, and were more self-­ confident than the less successful Termites. What were the flaws in this study? Terman acquired his participants by getting recom- mendations from teachers and principals, not through random selection, so that there was room for bias in the pool of participants from the start. It is quite possible that the teachers and principals were less likely, especially in 1921, to recommend students who were “trou- blemakers” or different from the majority. Consequently, Terman’s original group consisted of almost entirely white, urban, and middle-class children, with the majority (857 out of 1,528) being male. There were only two African Americans, six Japanese Americans, and one Native American. Another flaw is the way Terman interfered in the lives of his “children.” In any good research study, the investigator should avoid becoming personally involved in the lives of the participants in the study to reduce the possibility of biasing the results. Terman seemed to find it nearly impossible to remain objective (Leslie, 2000). He became like a surrogate father to many of them. Flawed as it may have been, Terman’s groundbreaking study did accomplish his original goal of putting to rest the myths that existed about genius in the early part of the twentieth century. Gifted children and adults are no more prone to mental illnesses or odd behavior than any other group, and they also have their share of failures as well as suc- cesses. Genius is obviously not the only factor that influences success in life—personality and experiences are strong factors as well. For example, the homes of the children in the top 2 percent of Terman’s group had an average of 450 books in their libraries, a sign that the parents of these children valued books and learning, and these parents were also more likely to be teachers, professionals, doctors, and lawyers. The experiences of these gifted children growing up would have been vastly different from those in homes with less emphasis on reading and lower occupational levels for the parents. 332  Chapter 7 Questions for Further Discussion 1. In Terman and Oden’s 1959 study of the successful and unsuccessful Termites, what might be the problems associated with the definition of “successful” in the study? 2. Thinking back to the discussion of research ethics in Chapter One ( to ­ earning Objective 1.10), what ethical violations may Terman have committed while L involved in this study? 3. If gifted children thrive when growing up in more economically sound and education- ally focused environments, what should the educational system strive to do to nourish the gifted? Should the government get involved in programs for the gifted? Yet another longitudinal study (Torrance, 1993) found that in both gifted students and gifted adults, there is more to success in life than intelligence and high academic achieve- ment. In that study, liking one’s work, having a sense of purpose in life, a high energy level, and persistence were also very important factors. If the picture of the genius as mentally unstable is a myth, so, too, is the belief that being gifted will always lead to suc- cess, as even Terman found in his original study. Emotional Intelligence What about people who have a lot of “book smarts” but not much common sense? There are some people like that who never seem to get ahead in life in spite of having all that so-called intelligence. It is true that not everyone who is intellec- tually able is going to be a success in life (Mehrabian, 2000). Sometimes the people who are most successful are those who didn’t do all that well in the regular academic setting. One explanation for why some people who do poorly in school succeed in life and why some who do well in school don’t do so well in the “real” world is that success relies on a certain degree of emotional intelligence, the accurate awareness of and ability to manage one’s own emotions to facilitate thinking and attain specific goals, and the ability to understand what others feel (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Mayer, Salovey, et al., 2008). The concept of emotional intelligence was first introduced by Peter Salovey and John Mayer (1990) and later popularized by Dan Goleman (1995). And while Goleman originally suggested emotional intelligence was a more powerful influence on success in life than more traditional views of intelligence, his work and the work of others used the term in a variety of different ways than originally proposed, and claims by some were not backed by scientific evidence. For example, studies have been criticized for their lack of validity and, thus, their applicability (Antonakis, 2004). Furthermore, emotional intel- ligence is not the same as having high self-esteem or being optimistic. One who is emo- tionally intelligent possesses self-control of emotions such as anger, impulsiveness, and anxiety. Empathy, the ability to understand what others feel, is also a component, as are an awareness of one’s own emotions, sensitivity, persistence even in the face of frustra- tions, and the ability to motivate oneself (Mayer & Salovey, 1997; Salovey & Mayer, 1990). That all sounds very nice, but how can anything like this be measured? Is there research to support this idea? In one study, researchers asked 321 partic- ipants to read passages written by nonparticipants and try to guess what the nonpar- emotional intelligence ticipants were feeling while they were writing (Mayer & Geher, 1996). The assumption the awareness of and ability to man- was that people who were good at connecting thoughts to feelings would also have a age one’s own emotions to facilitate high degree of empathy and emotional intelligence. The participants who more cor- thinking and attain goals, as well as rectly judged the writers’ emotional experiences (assessed by both how well each par- the ability to understand emotions in ticipant’s emotional judgments agreed with a group consensus and the nonparticipant’s others. actual report of feelings) also scored higher on the empathy measure and lower on  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   333 the defensiveness measure. These same participants also had higher SAT scores (self-­ reported), leading Mayer and colleagues to conclude not only that emotional intelligence is a valid and measurable concept but also that general intelligence and emotional intel- ligence may be related: Those who are high in emotional intelligence are also smarter in the traditional sense (Mayer et al., 2000). Another review found individuals with higher emotional intelligence tended to have better social relationships for both children and adults, better family and intimate relationships, were perceived more positively by oth- ers, had better academic achievement, were more successful at work, and experienced Emotional intelligence includes empathy, greater psychological well-being (Mayer, Roberts, et al., 2008). which is the ability to feel what others Another example of research supporting the role of emotional intelligence in real- are feeling. This doctor is not only able to world settings has been in the field of medicine. Studies have supported that medical listen to her patient’s problems but also is able to show by her facial expression, school students with higher emotional intelligence tended to perform better in courses body language, and gestures that she related to patient relationships, or “bedside manners” (Libbrecht et al., 2014). In this understands how the patient feels. sample of students, success appeared to be related more to the individual’s ability to regulate their own emotions, as compared to their ability to understand the emo- tions of others. There has also been reported evidence for emotional intelligence being related to physician competence and areas of improved physician–patient interactions, including enhanced communication and more empathic and compassionate patient care (Arora et al., 2010). The Nature/Nurture Issue Regarding Intelligence 7.10 Evaluate the influence of heredity and environment on the development of intelligence. Are people born with all of the “smarts” they will ever have, or do experience and learn- ing count for something in the development of intellect? The influence of nature (hered- ity or genes) and nurture (environment) on personality traits has long been debated in the field of human development, and intelligence is one of the traits that has been exam- ined closely. to Learning Objective 8.2. Twin and Adoption Studies The problem with trying to separate the role of genes from that of environment is that controlled, perfect experiments are neither practical nor ethical. Instead, researchers find out what they can from natural experiments, cir- cumstances existing in nature that can be examined to understand some phenomenon. Twin studies are an example of such circumstances. Identical twins are those who originally came from one fertilized egg and, there- fore, share the same genetic inheritance. Any differences between them on a certain trait, then, should be caused by environmental factors. Fraternal twins come from two dif- ferent eggs, each fertilized by a different sperm, and share only the amount of genetic material that any two siblings would share. to Learning Objective 8.3. By com- paring the IQs of these two types of twins reared together (similar environments) and reared apart (different environments), as well as persons of other degrees of relatedness, researchers can get a general, if not exact, idea of how much influence heredity has over the trait of intelligence (see Figure 7.7). As can be easily seen from the chart, the greater the degree of genetic relatedness, the stronger the correlation is between the IQ scores of those persons. The fact that genetically identical twins show a correlation of 0.86 means heritability that the environment must play a part in determining some aspects of intelligence as degree to which the changes in some measured by IQ tests. If heredity alone were responsible, the correlation between genet- trait within a population can be con- ically identical twins should be 1.00. At this time, researchers have determined that the sidered to be due to genetic influences; estimated heritability (proportion of change in IQ within a population that is caused by the extent individual genetic differ- hereditary factors) for intelligence is about.50 or 50 percent (Plomin & DeFries, 1998; ences affect individual differences in Plomin & Spinath, 2004). Furthermore, the impact of genetic factors increases with observed behavior; in IQ, proportion of increasing age, but the set of genes or genetic factors remains the same. The effects of the change in IQ within a population that same set of genes becomes larger with increasing age (Posthuma et al., 2009). is caused by hereditary factors. 334  Chapter 7 Type of comparison Nature’s influence Type of comparison Nurture’s influence Identical twins together Identical twins together Fraternal twins together Identical twins apart Biological siblings Biological siblings together together Unrelated individuals Biological siblings together apart Biological parents and Biological parents and children together children together Adoptive parents and Biological parents and children together children apart Unrelated individuals together Unrelated individuals apart.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9 1.1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9 1 Correlations Correlations Figure 7.7 Correlations Between IQ Scores of Persons With Various Relationships In the graph on the left, the degree of genetic relatedness seems to determine the agreement (correlation) between IQ scores of the various comparisons. For example, identical twins, who share 100 percent of their genes, are more similar in IQ than fraternal twins, who share only about 50 percent of their genes, even when raised in the same environment. In the graph on the right, identical twins are still more similar to each other in IQ than are other types of comparisons, but being raised in the same environment increases the similarity considerably. Wait a minute—if identical twins have a correlation of.86, wouldn’t that mean that intelligence is 86 percent inherited? Although the correlation between identical twins is higher than the estimated her- itability of.50, that similarity is not entirely due to the twins’ genetic similarity. Twins who are raised in the same household obviously share very similar environments as well. Even twins who are reared apart, as seen in adoption studies, are usually placed in homes that are similar in socioeconomic and ethnic background—more similar than one might think. So when twins who are genetically similar are raised in similar environments, their IQ scores are also going to be similar. However, similar environmental influences become less important over time (where genetic influences increase over time), account- ing for only about 20 percent of the variance in intelligence by age 11 or 12 (Posthuma et al., 2009). In turn, environmental influences tend not to be a factor by adolescence, and with the increasing impact of genetic factors, it has been suggested that the heritability of intelligence might be as high as.91 or 91 percent by the age of 65 (Posthuma et al., 2009). One of the things that people need to understand about heritability is that estimates of heritability apply only to changes in IQ within a group of people, not to the i­ndividual people themselves. Each individual is far too different in experiences, education, and other nongenetic factors to predict exactly how a particular set of genes will interact with those factors in that one person. Only differences among people in general can be inves- tigated for the influence of genes (Dickens & Flynn, 2001). Genes always interact with environmental factors, and in some cases extreme environments can modify even very heritable traits, as would happen in the case of a severely malnourished child’s growth pattern. Enrichment, on the other hand, could have improved outcomes. Even a fami- ly’s socioeconomic status is influenced by genetics, and a child’s socioeconomic status during infancy through adolescence is positively correlated with his or her intelligence  Cognition: Thinking, Intelligence, and Language   335 development (Trzaskowski et al., 2014; von Stumm & Plomin, 2015). Some observations suggest IQ scores are steadily increasing over time, from generation to generation, in modernized countries, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect (Flynn, 2009). THINKING CRITICALLY How might you determine whether flute-playing ability is a highly heritable trait? If you want to improve your flute playing and someone tells you that musical ability is heritable, should you stop practicing? The Bell Curve and Misinterpretation of Statistics One of the other factors that has been examined for possible heritable differences in performance on IQ tests is the concept of race. (The term race is used in most of these investigations as a way to group people with common skin colors or facial features, and one should always be mindful of how suspect that kind of classification is. Cultural background, educa- tional experiences, and socioeconomic factors typically have far more to do with sim- ilarities in group performances than does the color of one’s skin.) In 1994, Herrnstein and ­Murray published the controversial book The Bell Curve, in which they cite large numbers of statistical studies (never published in scientific journals prior to the book) that led them to make the claim that IQ is largely inherited. These authors go further by also implying that people from lower economic levels are poor because they are unintelligent. In their book, Herrnstein and Murray made several statistical errors and ignored the effects of environment and culture. First, they assumed that IQ tests actually do measure intelligence. As discussed earlier, IQ tests are not free of cultural or socioeconomic bias. Fur- thermore, as the video Intelligence Tests and Stereotypes explains, just being aware of nega- tive stereotypes can result in an individual scoring poorly on intelligence tests, a response called stereotype threat (Steele & Aronson, 1995). So all they really found was a correlation stereotype threat condition in which being made aware of a negative performance stereotype CC interferes with the performance of someone that considers himself or Watch the Video Intelligence Tests and Stereotypes on MyPsychLab herself part of that group. 336  Chapter 7 between race and IQ, not race and intelligence. ­Second, they assumed that intelligence itself is very heavily influenced by genetics, with a heritability factor of about.80. The current estimate of the heritability of intelligence is about.50 (­Plomin & DeFries, 1998; Plomin & Spinath, 2004). Herrnstein and Murray also failed to understand that heritability only applies to differences that can be found within a group of people as opposed to those between groups of people or individuals (Gould, 1981). Heritability estimates can only be made truly from a group that was exposed to a similar environment. One of their findings was that Japanese Americans are at the top of the IQ Although The Bell Curve stated that Japanese Americans are genetically superior in ladder, a finding that they attribute to racial and genetic characteristics. They seem intelligence, the book’s authors overlook the to ignore the cultural influence of intense focus on education and achievement by influence of cultural values. Many Japanese Japanese-American parents (Neisser et al., 1996). Scientists (Beardsley, 1995; Kamin, American parents put much time and effort 1995) have concluded that, despite the claims of The Bell Curve, there is no real sci- into helping their children with schoolwork. entific evidence for genetic differences in intelligence between different racial groups. A series of studies, using blood-group testing for racial grouping (different racial groups have different rates of certain blood groups, allowing a statistical estimation of ancestry), found no significant relationship between ethnicity and IQ (Neisser et al., 1996). Concept Map L.O. 7.6, 7.7, 7.8, 7.9, 7.10 Intelligence (the ability to learn from one’s experiences, acquire knowledge, and use resources effectively) g factor: general intelligence Spearman’s g factor: intelligence comprises two different abilities s factor: specific intelligence theories Gardner’s multiple intelligences: overall intelligence comprises nine different types analytical Sternberg’s triarchic theory: intelligence comprises three different aspects creative practical first formal test created by Binet’s Mental Ability Test key element to be tested was child’s mental age Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon to help identify Terman (researcher at Stanford) translated and revised Binet’s test French students first test to adopt intelligence quotient (IQ): now uses who needed more Stanford-Binet IQ 5 mental age/chronological age 3 100 age-group help with learning comparison uses a variety of verbal and nonverbal norms as the subtests to provide an overall estimate Wechsler does Measuring tests of intelligence and scores related to five areas of cognition uses a variety of verbal and performance subtests to Wechsler Tests provide an overall score of intelligence and index scores related to specific cognitive domains good tests are both valid and reliable standardized administration, scoring, and comparison against norms test construction intelligence is assumed to follow a normal curve different definitions of intelligence and multiple ways to assess them is challenging difficult to design tests that are completely free of cultural bias IQ. 130 (2 SD above mean) criteria IQ. 140 are called geniu