Class Notes (835,467)
Canada (509,192)
Psychology (6,249)
Lecture

Chapter Eight.docx

10 Pages
131 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
Psychology 2040A/B
Professor
Jackie Sullivan
Semester
Summer

Description
Chapter Eight: Intelligence Definitions of Intelligence Alfred Binet: A Holistic View - Constructed the first successful intelligence test (Binet & Simon) - Believed that test items should tap complex mental activities involved in intelligent behaviour (memory & reasoning) - Thus, devised a test of general ability (variety of verbal and non-verbal items – requiring thought & judgment) - Also the first test to associate items of increasing difficulty with chronological age o Able to estimate if the child is behind or ahead of their average classmates - Successful in predicting school performance - Terman (Stanford University) adapted the test for English speakers (Known as Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale) o The Scale has changed greatly, no longer provides just a single, holistic measure of intelligence The Factor Analysis: A Multifaceted View - Researchers used a complicated, correlational procedure called factor analysis, which identifies a sets of test items that cluster together, meaning that test-takers who do well on one item in a cluster tend to do well on the others o Distinct clusters are called factors (verbal comprehension is a component of verbal ability) Early Factor Analysis - Spearman first factor analyst - Found that all test items correlated with another; proposed underlying general intelligence (g), influenced each of them - At same time, noticed that test items were not perfectly correlated, Spearman concluded that they varied in the extent to which g contributed to them & suggested that each item, or a set of similar items, also measured a specific intelligence unique to the task o He downplayed the significance of specific intelligence and regarded g as central & supreme – he inferred that g represents abstract reasoning capacity - Thurstone questioned importance of g o Indicated that unrelated factors exist, called these factors primary mental abilities Contemporary Extension - Current theorists combine Spearman & Thurstone approaches, propose hierarchical models of mental abilities o At highest level, g, assumed to be present to some degree in all separate factors  These factors then measured by subtests, groups of related items (show strengths & weaknesses)  Also the subtests can be combined to determine general intelligence - Theorists have extended factor-analytic research, Cattel & Carroll offer unique multifaceted perspective o Crystallized vs. Fluid Intelligence Theory (Cattel)  2 broad factors of g  Crystallized: refers to skills that depend on accumulated knowledge & experience, good judgment & mastery of social customs (valued by the individual’s culture) o Examples: vocab, general information & arithmetic problems  Fluid: depends more heavily on basic information-processing skills – the ability to detect relationships among stimuli, the speed with which the individual can analyze information & the capacity of working memory; is assumed to be influenced more by conditions in the brain & less by culture o Works with crystallized to support effective reasoning, abstraction & problem solving  Among children with similar cultural & educational backgrounds, crystallized & fluid intelligence are highly correlated & difficult to distinguish in factor analyses, probably because children high in fluid intelligence acquire information more easily  Vice versa with children differing in cultural & educational experiences, little relationship between crystallized & fluid intelligence  Thus, Cattel displays the issue of cultural bias in intelligence testing – to reduce bias, usually emphasize fluid over crystallized items o The Three-Stratum Theory of Intelligence (Carroll)  This theory elaborates the models proposed by Spearman, Thurstone & Cattell  Carroll represented the structure of intelligence having 3 tiers; g on top, the second tier are an array of broad abilities (basic biological components of intelligence that are arranged left to right in terms of decreasing relationship with g), the third tier are narrow abilities (specific behaviours through which people display their second-tier factors) – chart on pg. 322  This model is the most comprehensive factor-analytic classification of mental abilities  Currently, no test measures all of Carroll’s factors (great intellectual diversity) Recent Advances in Defining Intelligence Combining Psychometric & Information-Processing Approaches - To overcome limitations of factor analysis, investigators combine psychometric & information-processing approaches o They conduct componential analyses of children’s test scores, looking for relationships between aspects (or components) of information-processing & children’s intelligence test performance o After looking at multiple studies & intelligence tests, the findings illustrate identifying relationships between cognitive processing & mental test scores brings us closer to isolating the cognitive skills that contribute to high intelligence  One major shortcoming of componential analysis is that intelligence is considered to be entirely due to causes within the child  Sternberg expanded the componential approach into a comprehensive theory that views intelligence as a product of inner & outer forcers Sternberg’s Triarchic Theory of Successful Intelligence - Made up of 3 broad, interacting intelligences o Analytical Intelligence (information-processing skills) o Creative Intelligence (the capacity to solve novel problems) o Practical Intelligence (application of intellectual skills in everyday situations)  Intelligent behaviour involves balancing all 3 intelligences to achieve success in life, according to one’s personal goals & the requirements of one’s cultural community Analytical Intelligence - Consists of information-processing components that underlie all intelligent acts: o Applying strategies, acquiring task-relevant, metacognitive knowledge & engaging in self-regulation o In mental tests, only used in a few different ways so the view of intelligence is too narrow Creative Intelligence - Generating useful solutions to new problems - People who are creative think more skillfully than other when faced with novelty - When given a new task, can apply their information-processing skills in effective ways so working memory is free for complex aspects of the situation Practical Intelligence - Goal-orientated activity aimed at adapting to, shaping or selecting environments - Intelligence people skillfully adapt their thinking to fit with both their desires & the demands of their everyday worlds; when they cannot adapt, they shape it to meet their needs; if cannot shape, they select new contexts that better match their skills, goals or values - Reminds us that intelligence is never culture-free * Factor analyses repeatedly indicated that the 3 intelligences are relatively distinct – emphasizes the complexity of intelligence & the limitations of current intelligence tests in assessing that complexity - He believed that mental tests underestimate & even overlook the intellectual strengths of some children, especially ethnic minorities Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences - Defines intelligence in terms of distinct sets of progressing operations that permit individuals to solve problems, create products & discover new knowledge in a wide range of culturally valued activities o Dismissing the idea of general intelligence, Gardner proposes at least 8 independent intelligences - Found these because damage to a certain part of the brain only affects the one ability o Individuals with savant syndrome, who display one area of outstanding strength alongside deficits in many others, yielding an “island of strength”, provide an illustration o Children with autism occasionally show this pattern The 8 Intelligences: Intelligence Processing Operations End-State Performance Possibilities Linguistic Sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms & meaning of words/functions of language Poet & Journalist Logico- Sensitivity to & capacity to detect, logical or numerical patterns; ability to Mathematician mathematical handle long chains of logical reasoning Musical Ability to produce & appreciate pitch, rhythm (or melody) & aesthetic quality Instrumentalist & of the forms of musical expressiveness Composer Spatial Ability to perceive the visual-spatial world accurately, to perform Sculptor & Navigator transformations on those perceptions & to re-create aspects of visual experience in the absence of relevant stimuli Bodily- Ability to use the body skillfully for expressive as well as goal-directed Dancer & Athlete kinesthetic purposes; ability to handle objects skillfully Naturalist Ability to recognize & classify all varieties of animals, minerals & plants Biologist Interpersonal Ability to detect & respond appropriately to the moods, temperaments, motivations & intentions of others Intrapersonal Ability to discriminate complex inner feelings & use them to guide one’s own Person with detailed, behaviour; knowledge of one’s own strengths, weaknesses, desires & accurate self-knowledge intelligences - Criticism: o Questioned independence of his intelligences & g suggests that they have at least some features in common Measuring Intelligence - The group-administered tests given from time to time in classrooms permit larger numbers of students to be tested at once & are useful for instructional planning & for identifying students who require more extensive evaluation with individually administered tests (which requires training & experience to give) Some Commonly Used Intelligence Tests - 2 individual tests – the Stanford Binet & Wecshler are used most often to identify highly intelligent children & to diagnose learning disabilities The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales - 5 edition - For individuals from age 2 to adulthood - Measures general intelligence & 5 intellectual factors: fluid reasoning, quantitative reasoning, knowledge, visual- spatial processing & working memory o Each factor includes a verbal mode & a non-verbal mode of testing (10 subsets in all) - A special edition of the test, the test for early childhood, includes fewer items & is tailored for assessing children between 2 – 7 years (more useful for diagnosing intellectual difficulties) The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-IV) th - 4 edition - For individuals from age 6 – 16 years o An extension of it is used for children 2 – 7 years (WPPSI- III) - Offers both a measure of general intelligence & a variety of factor scores long before Binet’s test - Includes 4 broad intellectual factors: verbal reasoning, perceptual reasoning, working memory & processing speed o Each factor made up of 2-3 subsets (10 scores in total) - Designed to downplay crystallized, culture-dependent intelligence, which is emphasized since they only have one factor (verbal reasoning); the 3 remaining factors focus on fluid information-processing skills - First test to use samples representing the total U.S population, including minorities, to devise standards for test scores Aptitude & Achievement Tests - 2 other types of tests o Aptitude: assess an individual’s potential to learn a specialized activity  Ex. Musical aptitude is the capacity to acquire musical skills (narrower focus)  SAT – measures scholastic aptitude o Achievement: assess actual knowledge & skill attainment  Ex. Final exams, grade 4 testing (narrowest material covered) - Differences among intelligence (tests a wide array of skills), aptitude & achievement tests are not clear cut Tests for Infants - Since can’t answer questions or follow directions, we assess them with stimuli & observe their behaviour - To compensate for unpredictable behaviour, rely on information from the parents - Most measures emphasize perceptual & motor responses o Most common test, Bayley Scales of Infant & Toddler Development, suitable for children (1 month - 3 years) o Most recent edition, Bayley III, has 3 subtests  The Cognitive Scale (items include attention, object familiarity, pretend play)  The Language Scale (understanding & expression of language)  The Motor Scale (assess fine & gross movements) o Two additional scales depend on parent report  Social-emotional Scale (social responsiveness, ease of calming)  Adaptive Behaviour Scale (adaptations to the demands of life – communicating, etc.) o Predict later intelligence poorly (easily distracted, fatigued so tests often don’t reflect their abilities) o But the Cognitive & Language scales are good predictors of mental test performance; but because most infants scores do not tap the same dimensions of intelligence assessed in older children, they are labeled developmental quotients (DQs), rather than IQs - Today infant testing is used for screening – helping to identify for further observation & intervention infants whose very low scores mean they are at risk for future development problems - Speed of habituation & recovery to visual stimuli is among the best infant correlations of later intelligences o One test, Fagan Test of Infant Intelligence, consists entirely of habituation/recovery items  Infant examines pictures & record looking time (low test-retest reliability, hence it is less successful in predicting mental scores than researchers’ assessments) Computation & Distribution of IQ Scores - Intelligence tests for infants, children & adults are scored in the same way – by computing an IQ, which indicates the extent to which the raw score (number of items passed) deviates from the typical performance of same-age individuals - To make the comparison possible, test designers engage in standardization – giving the test to a large sample & using the results as the standard for interpreting scores (form a normal distribution – most score clusters around the mean, with a bell-shaped curve since measured a large sample) – mean set at 100, a persons score higher or lower reflects how their performance deviates from the standardized-sample mean o Ex. Someone with an IQ of 100, performed better than 50% of children their age What Do Intelligence Tests Predict & How Well? - Assumes to predict future intelligence & scholastic performance Stability of IQ Scores - To answer how well, need to look at longitudinal studies, when children are repeatedly tested Correlational Stability - Correlating scores obtained at different ages; researchers have identified 2 generalizations about the stability of IQ: o The older the child at the time of first testing, the better the prediction of later IQ – preschool IQs do not predict school-age score well (r = 0.3); but after age 6, stability improves (r = 0.7 – 0.8); & relationships between testing in adolescents have higher correlations (r = 0.8 – 0.9) - Why do preschoolers’ scores predict less? – Reasons: age (items focus less on concrete knowledge), periods of rapid development (some kids ahead of others), children might not be in school yet (quality of schooling also a factor) Stability of Absolute Scores - Stability in absolute terms – by examining each child’s profile of IQ scores over repeated testing o Longitudinal studies show that most children fluctuate in IQ scores in childhood o Children who change usually have orderly profiles, increasing or decreasing consistently, gainers tend to be independent & have parents who are warm but disciplined & decliners are the opposite  According to the environmental cumulative deficit hypothesis, the negative effects of underprivileged rearing conditions increase the longer children remain in those conditions; as a result, early cognitive deficits lead to more deficits, which become harder to overcome - In sum, children show changes in their absolute IQ value (personal characteristics, child-rearing practices & living conditions), but once IQ becomes stable, it predicts a variety of important outcomes IQ as a Predictor of Academic Achievement - Beginning at age 7, IQ is moderately correlated with adult educations attainment - Why? o Both IQ & achievement depend on the same abstract reasoning processes that underlie g  Heredity (nature) researchers prefer this one o Other researchers believe that IQ & achievement tests draw on the same culturally specific information – thus, saying that crystallized knowledge is a stronger indicator than fluid  Environment (nurture) researchers prefer this one - Although IQ predicts achievement better than any other measure, still far from perfect (motivation & personality lead some children to try harder in school) IQ as a Predictor of Occupational Achievement - IQ predicts occupational achievement just about as well as academic achievement o Again, correlation is far from perfect; factors like family background, parental encouragement, etc. also predict occupational choice & achievement o Educational achievement is a stronger predictor of occupational success & income than IQ o Personality is another factor (emotional stability, conscientiousness & positive sociability) - Once a person enters an occupation, practical intelligence – mental abilities apparent in the real world but not in testing situations – predicts on-the-job performance as well as or sometimes better than IQ o Mental & performance intelligence have different capacities; unlike IQ, performance intelligence does not vary with ethnicity – both make independent contributions to job success - In sum, occupational outcomes are complex & measured by intelligence, education, family influences, etc. IQ is influential but not more important than the other factors IQ as a Predictor of Psychological Adjustment - IQ is moderately correlated with emotional & social adjustment o Higher IQ children tend to be better-liked by their agemates – reasons not clear - Good peer relations are linked to patient but firm child-rearing practices, social personality & even tempered & these factors are correlated to high IQs - In contrast, those who are more aggressive showed lower IQ scores (especially in verbal ability) o Similarly, genetic & environmental factors influence IQ & conduct problems - Lower mental scores also associated with other psychological disorders (high anxiety, depression) o These relationships are modest; also high IQ children are more resilient to stressful life experiences - In sum, IQ predicts diverse life indicators, but does so imperfectly (don’t rely on IQ alone, but also making educational decisions) Ethnic & Socioeconomic Variations in IQ - Researchers assess a family’s standing on this continuum through an index called socioeconomic status (SES), which combines 3 interrelated – but not completely overlapping – variables: o Years of education (social status) o Prestige of one’s job & skills it requires (social status) o Income (economic status) - If group differences (Black/Hispanic vs. White/Asian) in IQ exist, then either heredity varies with SES & ethnicity, or certain groups have fewer opportunities to acquire skills needed for successful test performance o In studies, usually goes – Black, Hispanic, White, Asian in order of average IQ scores
More Less

Related notes for Psychology 2040A/B

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit