11:
Intelligence
OUTLINE OF RESOURCES
I.
Introducing Intelligence
Introductory Exercise: Fact or Falsehood? (p. 3)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Twelve Interesting Facts about Intelligence (p. 4)
Classroom Exercise/Student Projects: What Is Intelligence? (p. 3) UPDATED
Designing and Administering an Intelligence Test (p. 4)
Videocassette: Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition: Testing and Intelligence (p. 3)
II. What Is Intelligence?
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Intelligence as the Capacity to Adapt (p. 5)
A. Is Intelligence One General Ability or Several Specific Abilities?
Lecture/Discussion Topics: Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences (p. 6)
Savant Syndrome (p. 9)
Successful Intelligence (p. 10)
The Psychology of Wisdom (p. 12)
Classroom Exercises: The Factor Analysis Approach (p. 5)
Questionnaire for Business Management (p. 11) UPDATED
The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (p. 11) NEW
Sternberg’s Balance Theory of Wisdom (p. 13) NEW
PsychSim 5: Get Smart (p. 5) NEW
Feature Film: Rain Man and Savant Syndrome (p. 10)
Videocassettes: Moving Images: Exploring Psychology Through Film, Program 16: Intelligence: One Ability
or Many? (p. 5)
Moving Images: Exploring Psychology Through Film, Program 3: Brain and Behavior:
A Contemporary Phineas Gage (p. 11)
B. Emotional Intelligence
Lecture/Discussion Topics: Myths About Emotional Intelligence (p. 15) NEW
Fostering Children’s Emotional Intelligence (p. 16)
Classroom Exercises: Ego-Resiliency (p. 14)
Emotional Intelligence Scale (p. 14) UPDATED
REVISED
C. Intelligence and Creativity
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Creative People—Ten Antithetical Traits (p. 17)
Classroom Exercise: Assessing Creativity (p. 17)
D. Is Intelligence Neurologically Measurable?
Lecture/Discussion Topics: Reaction Time, Intelligence, and Longevity (p. 18)
Reaction Time and Intelligence (p. 18)
NEW
III. Assessing Intelligence
A. The Origins of Intelligence Testing
Classroom Exercise: A World War I IQ Test (p. 19) NEW
Videocassette: Psychology: The Human Experience, Module 17: Pros and Cons of Intelligence Tests (p. 20)
1
2 Chapter 11 Intelligence
B. Modern Tests of Mental Abilities
Classroom Exercise: Analogies and Intelligence (p. 21)
Student Project: Joining Mensa (p. 20) NEW/UPDATED
C. Principles of Test Construction
Classroom Exercises: Issues in Testing (p. 21)
Reliability and Validity (p. 22)
Remote Associates Test (p. 23)
IV. The Dynamics of Intelligence
A. Stability or Change?
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Why Do Intelligent People Fail? (p. 23)
B. Extremes of Intelligence
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Giftedness (p. 24)
V. Genetic and Environmental Influences on Intelligence
Classroom Exercise: Incremental Versus Entity Theories of Intelligence (p. 25)
NEW
A. Genetic Influences
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Genes and Intelligence (p. 26)
B. Environmental Influences
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Teaching Intelligence (p. 27)
C. Group Differences in Intelligence Test Scores
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Environmental Explanation of Group Differences (p. 28)
Classroom Exercise: Blacks as a “Castelike” Minority (p. 28)
D. The Question of Bias
Lecture/Discussion Topics: The National Commission on Testing and Public Policy (p. 29)
Intelligence as Culturally Defined (p. 30)
The SAT: A Case Study in Testing (p. 30) NEW
Unanswered Questions about Intelligence (p. 31)
Classroom Exercise: Culture-Biased and Culture-Fair Tests (p. 29)
Videocassette: The Brain, 2nd ed., Module 4: Intelligence and Culture (p. 29)
CHAPTER OBJECTIVES
After completing their study of this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Discuss the difficulty of defining intelligence, and explain what it means to “reify intelligence.”
2. Present arguments for and against considering intelligence as one general mental ability.
3. Compare Gardner’s and Sternberg’s theories of intelligences.
4. Describe the four aspects of emotional intelligence, and discuss criticisms of this concept.
5. Identify the factors associated with creativity, and describe the relationship between creativity and intelligence.
6. Describe the relationship between intelligence and brain anatomy.
7. Discuss findings on the correlations between perceptual speed, neural processing speed, and intelligence.
8. Define intelligence test, and discuss the history of intelligence testing.
9. Distinguish between aptitude and achievement tests, and describe modern tests of mental abilities such as the
WAIS.
10. Discuss the importance of standardizing psychological tests, and describe the distribution of scores in a normal
curve.
11. Explain what it means to say that a test is reliable.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 3
12. Explain what it means to say a test is valid, and describe two types of validity.
13. Describe the stability of intelligence scores over the life span.
14. Discuss the two extremes of the normal distribution of intelligence.
15. Discuss the evidence for the genetic contribution to individual intelligence, and explain what psychologists mean
by the heritability of intelligence.
16. Discuss the evidence for environmental influences on individual intelligence.
17. Describe ethnic similarities and differences in intelligence test scores, and discuss some genetic and environmental factors that might explain them.
18. Describe gender differences in abilities.
19. Discuss whether intelligence tests are biased, and describe the stereotype threat phenomenon.
CHAPTER OUTLINE
I.
Introducing Intelligence (p. 431)
Introductory Exercise: Fact or Falsehood?
The correct answers to Handout 11–1, as shown below,
can be confirmed on the listed text pages.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
T (p. 435)
T (p. 438)
T (p. 440)
T (p. 440)
F (p. 442)
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
T (p. 447)
T (p. 450)
T (p. 452)
T (p. 456)
F (pp. 464–465)
Videocassette: Discovering Psychology, Updated
Edition: Testing and Intelligence (Annenberg/CPB
Project, 27 minutes)
This program closely parallels the content of Chapter
11. After opening with a brief survey of the variety of
tests used to assess abilities, behaviors, and personality
traits, the program focuses on intelligence and its measurement. The origin of intelligence tests is traced to the
work of Sir Francis Galton, Alfred Binet, and Lewis
Terman. Psychologist William Curtis Banks explains
the requirements of a good test, including standardization, validity, and reliability. Banks also discusses the
limitations and misuses of tests—for example, cultural
biases may overlook important differences in experiences, tests do not always measure relevant skills, and
results have sometimes been used to advance claims for
racial superiority. Claude Steele explains how “stereotype threat” affects the experience of taking a test as
well as actual performance. The program examines the
debate over whether intelligence is a general ability or
several specific abilities. Howard Gardner describes his
theory of multiple intelligences and Robert Sternberg
discusses his concept of practical intelligence. The program concludes with a look at recent neurological
approaches to measuring intelligence. The entire
Discovering Psychology series of 26 half-hour
programs is available for $389. Some video programs
can also be purchased individually. To order, or simply
for more information regarding individual programs,
call 1-800-LEARNER.
Classroom Exercise/Student Project: What Is
Intelligence?
Introduce this chapter by asking your students to list
behaviors they believe to be distinctively characteristic
of either particularly intelligent or of particularly unintelligent people. Robert Sternberg and his colleagues
asked that question of several hundred laypeople and
more than 100 psychologists who have a special interest
in intelligence. Analysis of the answers indicated that
the behaviors fell into three general classes: practical
problem-solving skills, verbal skills, and social competence. On the basis of these responses the researchers
developed a behavioral checklist for self-evaluation,
Handout 11–2. Students can rate the extent to which
each set of behaviors characterizes themselves.
Generally, students who give themselves fairly high ratings will be the better students. Results of Sternberg’s
study indicated that laypeople and psychologists had
very similar views of intelligence, except that the former were much more likely to see social competence as
a component of intelligence.
Alternatively, you might use one of Deborah
Podwika’s suggestions to introduce the topic of intelligence. Ask students to form small groups to discuss
who, in their estimation, is the more intelligent: Shaq
O’Neil or Albert Einstein. Have them report their decision and reasons for it to the full class. Or have each
group identify two people (living or dead but wellknown) they consider to be intelligent and to explain
why. Again, have each group report to the entire class.
Podwika, D. S. (2005, May 6). Re: Intelligence
Activities. Message posted to PSYCHTEACHER@list.
kennesaw.edu.
4 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Sternberg, R. J., Conway, B. E., Ketron, J. L., &
Bernstein, M. (1981). People’s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41,
37–55.
Classroom Exercise/Student Project: Designing and
Administering an Intelligence Test
Before your students read Chapter 11, ask them to construct an intelligence test. Divide the class into small
work groups (a total of six or seven groups is ideal) and
instruct each group to design a simple measure that they
believe might be indicative of intellectual functioning.
The assignment will stimulate students to reflect on
the nature of intelligence as well as its possible assessment. You might suggest that ease of administration and
production of a simple numerical score should be
among the criteria used to select the measure. In case
groups have difficulty getting started, suggest some
measure for them to evaluate—for example, the correct
number of U.S. presidents named in backward order,
the correct naming of quarterbacks in the National
Football League, the measurement in inches of head
circumference, the number of seconds taken to
complete a simple puzzle or maze.
When each group has devised a simple measure,
have students present and defend it before the rest of
the class. Again, discussion will focus on the definition
and nature of intelligence, as well as on the validity of
the suggested measures.
Depending on time constraints, you can also have
students design a procedure for administering their
measures. They might specify, for instance, the appropriate order of all the groups’ measures. Prepare instructions, keeping ethical considerations in mind; and
design a way to calculate an overall score.
Students can then administer the “intelligence test”
to several subjects and bring their data to the next class
session. Most students will not anticipate any of the
problems that occur in measurement (for example,
practice effects of the assessor, order effects among
subjects, reliable measurement). The resulting data can
lead to questions of interpretation and the importance of
norms, as well as the introduction of elementary
statistical concepts.
Halonen, J. (1986). Teaching critical thinking in psychology. Milwaukee: Alverno Productions.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Twelve Interesting Facts
about Intelligence
In reviewing the research, Stephen Ceci distills 12 surprising facts about intelligence. They include the
following:
1. IQ is associated with some simple abilities. No one
with measurable IQ has difficulty deciding which
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
of two lines is longer or whether two pairs of letters are identical. However, in order to perform
these simple tasks, a person with an IQ below 70
may need up to five times longer than an individual
with a higher IQ. The nervous systems of those
with low IQs are simply less efficient.
School attendance correlates with IQ. Staying in
school can elevate IQ or, more accurately, keep it
from slipping. Evidence for this dates back to the
turn of the twentieth century when the London
Board of Education found that the IQs of children
in the same family decreased from the youngest to
the oldest. The older children progressively missed
more school. Toward the end of the Vietnam War, a
lottery determined draft priority. Those men born
on July 9, 1951, were picked first so they tended to
stay in school longer in order to avoid the draft.
Those men born July 7 were last in the lottery and
thus had no incentive to stay in school. Men born
on July 9 had higher IQs and also earned 7 percent
more money. Summer vacations also seem to affect
IQ. With each passing month, children’s end-ofyear scores decline.
IQ is not influenced by birth order. The idea that
birth order influences personality and intelligence
has not stood up under recent scrutiny. Moreover,
the claim that large families make low-IQ children
may be unfounded because researchers have found
that low-IQ parents make large families. Smart
people tend to have small families, but it is not
small families per se that make people smart.
IQ is related to breast-feeding. Even when
researchers control for factors such as the sense of
closeness mother and child experience through
nursing, breast-fed children appear to have an IQ of
3 to 8 points higher by age 3.
IQ varies by birth date. State policies mandate the
age of students entering school as well the age they
may leave, typically 16 or 17. Those born in the
final three months of the year are more likely to
enter school a year later; thus, when they leave
school, they have been attending one year less. For
each year of school completed, there is an IQ gain
of approximately 3.5 points. Unsurprisingly, as a
group, those born later in the year show a lower IQ
score.
IQ evens out with age. Imagine, suggests Ceci, two
biological siblings adopted by two different middle
class families, at age 5 and again in early adulthood. Are their IQs more alike when younger and
living in the homes of their adoptive parents or
when they are older and living on their own?
Contrary to expectation, as the siblings go out on
their own, their IQ scores become more similar.
The probable reason is that once they are away
Chapter 11 Intelligence 5
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
from the dictates of their adoptive parents, they are
free to let their genotypes express themselves.
Because they share about 50 percent of their genes,
they will become more alike because they are likely to seek similar sorts of environments.
Intelligence is plural, not singular. Regardless of
their views of so-called general intelligence,
researchers agree that there are statistically independent mental abilities such as spatial, verbal,
analytical, and practical intelligence. Howard
Gardner is, of course, a primary proponent of multiple intelligences theory.
IQ is correlated with head size. Modern neuroimaging techniques demonstrate that cranial volume is
correlated with IQ. Evidence also comes from studies of the helmet sizes of members of the Armed
Forces whose IQs were measured during basic
training. Correlations are quite small.
Intelligence scores are predictive of real-world outcomes. Even among those with comparable levels
of schooling, the greater a person’s intellectual
ability, the higher the person’s weekly earnings.
Those with the lowest levels of intellectual ability
earn only two-thirds the amount workers at the
highest level earn.
Intelligence depends on context. In visiting racetracks, researchers found that some men were
excellent handicappers while others were not. A
complex mental algorithm that was used to convert
racing data from the racing programs sold at the
track distinguished experts from nonexperts.
However, the use of the algorithm was unrelated to
the men’s IQ scores. Some experts were dockworkers with IQs in the 80s, but they reasoned far more
complexly at the track than all nonexperts, even
those with IQs above 120. At the same time, the
experts performed very poorly at reasoning outside
the track.
IQ is going up. IQ has risen about 20 points with
every generation, an increase called the "Flynn
effect," after New Zealand political scientist James
Flynn. The rise in IQ has been attributed to better
nutrition, more schooling, and better-educated
parents.
IQ may be influenced by the school cafeteria menu.
In one large study, 1 million students enrolled in
the New York City school system were examined
before and after preservatives, dyes, colorings, and
artificial flavors were removed from lunch offerings. The investigators found a 14 percent improvement in IQ after the removal. Improvement was
greatest for the weakest students.
Ceci, S. (July/August, 2001). Intelligence: The surprising
truth. Psychology Today, 46–53.
II. What Is Intelligence? (pp. 431–442)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Intelligence as the Capacity
to Adapt
Robert J. Gregory provides an excellent illustration of
intelligent behavior as reflecting the ability to learn
from experience, to solve problems, and to use knowledge to adapt to new situations. You might retell it to
your students in introducing the text’s definition of
intelligence.
Gregory presents the case history of a moderately
retarded 61-year-old newspaper vendor who, although
well-known to community mental health professionals,
managed his own affairs with minimal supervision.
Both eccentric and fiercely independent, he stored
canned goods in his freezer and swore at case workers
who stopped by to inquire into his well-being. He maintained his fragile independence and tenuous adaptation
to his environment by selling papers from a streetside
newsstand. The papers cost a quarter, which he recognized as proper payment. He also had learned that three
quarters were proper change for a dollar. He refused
payment other than a quarter or a dollar—an arrangement his customers had learned to live with. However,
one day the price of a newspaper increased to 35 cents.
He now had to learn to deal with nickels and dimes as
well as quarters and dollars. The amount of learning
required to adapt to this new environmental demand
exceeded his intellectual abilities and, sadly, he was
soon out of business.
Gregory, R. (2004). Psychological testing: History, principles, and applications (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.
A. Is Intelligence One General Ability or Several
Specific Abilities? (pp. 432–436)
Videocassette: Moving Images: Exploring Psychology
Through Film, Program 16: Intelligence: One Ability or
Many?
See the Faculty Guide that accompanies Moving
Images: Exploring Psychology Through Film for a
description.
PsychSim 5: Get Smart
This activity explains the multidimensional nature of
intelligence and demonstrates some tasks used to measure intelligence. Students will perform those tasks and
answer some typical test questions.
Classroom Exercise: The Factor Analysis Approach
Factor analysis is a statistical procedure that identifies
clusters of related items on a test (any test, not just an
intelligence test). It is used to identify the different
6 Chapter 11 Intelligence
dimensions of performance that underlie a person’s total
score.
Because this important statistical technique is difficult for most students to understand, you may want to
demonstrate its application with a specific example.
Charles Potkay and Bem Allen use the Maudsley
Personality Inventory, Handout 11–3, to illustrate factor
analysis. Distribute copies of the handout and ask students to answer all the items. Then ask, “Do the twelve
statements measure twelve different aspects of personality or do some of the statements go together? What
dimensions might they have in common? What do they
measure?” Have them try categorizing the questions
into subgroups and then label each subgroup. Generally,
students have little difficulty with this task, although
their categories and labels may differ. (Having students
form small groups to complete this part of the assignment will highlight these differences.)
Explain that factor analysis provides a more objective approach to this task. The responses of many people to a large number of items are typically entered into
a statistical program of multiple intercorrelations, yield-
ing numerical indices for determining (a) whether
answers to certain items tend to form clusters;
(b) which specific questions contribute to each cluster;
(c) each item’s specific degree of correlation with each
cluster; (d) how many clusters are in the data; and
(e) the extent to which the clusters are independent of
each other, thus forming clearly definable factors.
Finally, explain that when Hans Eysenck used factor analysis with the Maudsley Personality Inventory,
two major factors emerged. Items 1–6 formed a cluster
of characteristics that define a “neuroticism” factor and
items 7–12 describe an “extraversion” factor. The actual
relationship of each item to each factor appears below.
The larger the correlation, the greater is the item’s contribution to the factor. Thus, the neuroticism factor is
best defined by questions 1 and 2, whereas the extraversion factor is best defined by questions 11 and 12. Point
out that items clustering together to form one factor
show little relationship to the second factor. How close
were students’ subjective judgments to the results produced by factor analysis?
Correlations of Twelve MPI Items to Neuroticism and Extraversion
N
E
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
.75
.01
.74
–.06
.71
–.09
.58
.02
.58
–.06
.63
.09
.01
.48
.04
.59
9
–.06
.59
10
11
12
–.04
.49
–.02
.68
.09
.64
Potkay, C. R., & Allen, B. P. (1986). Personality: Theory, research, and applications. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. ©
Charles R. Potkay.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Gardner’s Theory of Multiple
Intelligences
Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences is a
contemporary reflection of Thurstone’s notion that
intelligence comes in different packages. Based on data
from a variety of sources, but particularly from his own
research in neuropsychology at the Boston Veterans
Administration Medical Center, Gardner theorizes eight
relatively independent areas of intellectual competence.
The eight areas, the careers they might lead to, and a
prominent person representative of each category,
according to Gardner, are shown in the table on page 8.
Although Gardner presents evidence from a variety
of research sources to support his theory, perhaps his
most intriguing argument is that separate neural centers
underlie these various intelligences. For example, he
provides numerous case studies of patients who have
lost all language abilities because of damage to the
speech centers in the left hemisphere of the brain, but
who still retain the capacity to be musicians, visual
artists, and engineers. Similarly, he describes patients
who have difficulty with spatial representation and
other visual tasks because of right-hemisphere damage,
but who retain their linguistic abilities. Gardner even
provides supporting neurological data for the personal
intelligences. For example, a lobotomy may cause little
impairment of linguistic or logical-mathematical intelligence, but it can be disastrous for self-understanding
and interpersonal relationships.
Marie Winn describes the practical impact of
Gardner’s theory. For example, in 1985, eight Indiana
school teachers approached Gardner with a plan to start
a public school based on his theory of multiple intelligences. They were intrigued by the idea, implicit in his
theory, that while everyone is born with certain
strengths and weaknesses in each of the cognitive areas,
all people are capable of developing greater proficiency
in all of them. The Key School teaches the traditional
three Rs, but the daily schedule of every child also
includes music, art, and physical education. In fact, students receive four times the exposure children usually
get to these subjects. Every day, students also receive
instruction in Spanish and computers. Classes are
specifically geared to strengthen all eight intelligences,
Chapter 11 Intelligence 7
and a detailed report card provides a profile of the
child’s progress in all abilities. Evaluations of the
school’s program, particularly of students’ progress,
have been overwhelmingly positive. The program has
been expanded to include both middle and high school
students. One of the unique features of the key learning
community is that students enjoy mentorships in the
larger Indianapolis community. That is, after identifying
students’ area of highest interest, the school matches
them with an adult role model. For example, a student
showing strength and intrinsic motivation in activities
reflecting spatial intelligence might be matched with a
mentor from the city planning department. Much more
can be learned about the Key Learning Community at
its Web site, http://www.ips.Kl2.in.us/msKey.
Gardner suggests three ways in which multiple
intelligence (MI) theory can have a positive impact on
schools. First, MI theory encourages schools to cultivate those capacities that are valued in the community
and broader society. Some of these are likely to include
specific intelligences that traditionally have been given
short shrift in the schools. Second, MI theory helps
schools to recognize that nearly every discipline, topic,
and concept can be approached in a variety of ways. To
promote effective learning, the same material must be
taught from a number of perspectives. Third, MI theory
encourages the personalization of education. It fosters
the recognition that all individuals cannot be fitted into
a single intellectual dimension and that these individual
differences are to be taken seriously.
8 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Category
Description
Career
Example
Linguistic
The ability to use language, sensitivity
to the order of things.
These people can argue, persuade,
entertain, or instruct through the spoken
word.
poet, translator
T. S. Eliot
Logical-mathematical
The ability to see the intelligence of
numbers and logic, ability to handle
chains of reasoning and to recognize
patterns and order. These people think
in terms of cause and effect and can
create and test hypotheses.
mathematician,
scientist
Einstein
Musical
Sensitivity to pitch, melody, rhythm,
and tone.
These people can sing in tune, keep
time to music and listen to musical
selections with discernment.
composer, singer
Stravinsky
Bodily-kinesthetic
The ability to use the body skillfully
and handle objects adroitly.
These are hands-on people with good
tactile sensitivity.
athlete, dancer,
surgeon
Martha Graham
Spatial
The ability to perceive the world
accurately and to recreate or
transform aspects of that world.
These people often have acute
sensitivity to visual details, can draw
their ideas graphically, and can orient
themselves easily in 3-D space.
sculptor, architect,
surveyor
Picasso
Interpersonal
The ability to understand people and
relationships.
These people can perceive and respond
to moods, temperaments, intentions, and
the desires of others.
politician,
salesperson,
religious leader
Gandhi
Intrapersonal
Access to one’s emotional life as a means
of understanding oneself and others.
These people can easily access their own
feelings, discriminate among different
emotional states, and use this to
enrich and guide their own lives.
therapist, social
worker
Freud
Naturalist
The ability to understand, categorize,
and explain patterns encountered in
the natural world.
These people observe, interpret,
and construct meaning from the
natural world.
botanist,
farmer,
rancher
Charles
Darwin
Chapter 11 Intelligence 9
Thomas Armstrong’s 7 Kinds of Smart: Identifying
and Developing Your Multiple Intelligences, Revised
and Updated With Information on 2 New Kinds of
Smart is a very useful resource for classroom lectures,
discussions, and exercises relating to Gardner’s theory.
Written as a self-help book, it describes the intelligences, provides checklists for assessing one’s strengths
and weaknesses, includes suggestions for developing
each intelligence, and concludes with an extensive list
of additional resources.
Multiple intelligence theory has a huge presence on
the Web. Comprehensive sites include Chris Sauer’s MI
page at www.dwci.edu/facstaff/~csauer, which includes
an electronic questionnaire whereby visitors can assess
their own intelligence profile. Walter L. McKenzie of
Creative Classroom Consulting maintains an MI page at
http://surfaquarium.com/im.htm that reviews each intelligence, including Gardner’s two most recent additions,
naturalist and existentialist intelligence. For each intelligence, McKenzie provides numerous links to other relevant Web sites. Project SUMIT (Schools Using
Multiple Intelligence Theory) at http://www.pz.harvard.edu.sumit represents a national investigation of
schools using Howard Gardner’s theory. The site provides background to the theory, an overview of applications, and a summary of outcomes thus far.
Armstrong, T. (1999). 7 kinds of smart. New York:
Penguin.
Gardner, H. (1999). Multiple intelligences for the 21st
century. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1995, November). Reflections on multiple
intelligences. Phi Delta Kappa, 200–203, 206–209.
Winn, M. (1990, April 29). New views of human intelligence. The Good Health Magazine, 17, 28–29.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Savant Syndrome
As explained in the text, savant syndrome is a condition
in which people with serious mental handicaps, either
from retardation or major mental illness (early infantile
autism or schizophrenia), have spectacular islands of
ability or brilliance. Some have skills that are remarkable in contrast to the handicap (talented savants or
savant I); others have an ability that would be spectacular even in a normal person (prodigious savants or
savant II). The syndrome is six times more common in
males than females and occurs for a very narrow range
of skills—calendar calculating, music (almost exclusively limited to the piano), lightning calculations and
mathematics, art, mechanical ability, prodigious memory, or, rarely, unusual sensory discrimination abilities
(smell or touch). When the condition was first
described in 1887, the person with the syndrome was
called an “idiot savant,” with “idiot” referring to a level
of intelligence below 25 and “savant” meaning a
learned person. The term “idiot” was improper from the
beginning simply because the savant’s intelligence is
above 25, usually in the range of 40 to 70.
Darold Treffert’s Extraordinary People is an excellent source of lecture material on savant syndrome.
Among the remarkable case studies you can share with
your students are the following:
George and his identical twin brother Charles can give
you the day of the week for any date over a span of
80,000 years. Ask them to identify the years in the next
two centuries in which Easter will fall on March 23 and
they will give correct answers with lightning speed. The
twin brothers can describe the weather on any day of
their adult life. At the same time, they are unable to add
or count to 30, and they cannot figure change from a $10
bill for a $6 purchase.
Kenneth can accurately cite the population of every U.S.
city over 5000; the distance from each city or town to the
largest city in its state; the names, number of rooms, and
locations of 2000 leading hotels in the United States;
and statistics concerning 3000 mountains and rivers.
Kenneth has a mental age of 11 years and a vocabulary
of 58 words.
Upon hearing Tchaikovsky’s Piano Concerto No. 1 for
the first time in his teen years, Leslie played it back flawlessly and without hesitation. He can do the same with
any other piece of music, no matter how long or complex. Leslie is severely mentally handicapped and blind,
and he has cerebral palsy.
Ellen, also a musical genius, constructs complicated
chords to accompany music she hears on the radio. She
was able to repeat the soundtrack of the musical Evita
after hearing it only once, transposing orchestra and
chorus to her piano by using complex, precise chords,
including intense dissonances, to reproduce mob and
crowd noises. Like Leslie, Ellen is blind and has an intelligence score of less than 50.
Although savants are aware of their talents, they
cannot explain how they work. Alonzo Clemons, a
retarded Denver man whose animal sculptures fetch
upwards of $45,000, simply says God gave him his talent. Robert Black, a “calendar calculator” who can figure out the day of the week on which your birthday will
fall in 3314, explains, “I got a good mind.” Bernard
Rimland, director of the Institute for Child Behavior
Research in San Diego, notes that “sometimes savants
give explanations that are meaningful only to them—
things like, ‘Because eleven.’ ”
Savant researchers have not been able to explain
these unique abilities, although several theories have
been advanced. For example, Rimland notes that underlying all savant abilities is a seemingly limitless memory. The savant’s musical ability is not in composition
but rather in an uncanny ability to play back, note for
note, long passages heard just once. Savant art is not
10 Chapter 11 Intelligence
remarkable for its creativity but for its realism—exact
copies of animals or people or scenes done from memory. Rimland theorizes, “The reason you and I can’t multiply four-digit numbers in our heads is that we get distracted. Nine times seven, carry the two—I wonder if
the parking meter’s about to run out—and four sevens
is—hey, how’d I get that stain on my shirt?” In contrast, savants do not have distractions; the brain is dedicated entirely to the task at hand.
In a review of the literature on the savant syndrome, Leon Miller concludes that the skills exhibited
by savants are in many ways similar to those of experts
not having a disability. This finding clearly challenges
the notion that rote memory is the core savant skill.
Furthermore, the specific skill of the savant is usually
accompanied by normative levels of performance on at
least some subtest of standardized intelligence measures. For example, one study found significantly higher
WAIS scores on digit span and block design in a sample
of 11 calendar calculators. Different cognitive strengths
may be associated with each savant skill, although the
link between the strengths found on certain tasks and
the exhibited skill is not clear. Finally, the case-history
literature has long suggested that savants are highly
motivated to perform their skill and, when given the
opportunity, devote considerable time to it. Although no
study has uncovered a motivational dimension distinctive to all savants, it appears that motivation is part of a
set of predisposing factors that promotes skill development.
Although the central purpose of savant research has
been to find ways to treat or prevent the syndrome,
Treffert notes that, “There’s so much these people can
teach us about ourselves—about memory, about its relation to intelligence and creativity. . . . And when we
understand savants, perhaps we’ll also have gained an
avenue to the genius that, I believe, resides in all of us.”
Miller, L. K. (1999). The savant syndrome: Intellectual
impairment and exceptional skill. Psychological Bulletin,
125, 31–46.
Roach, M. (1989). Extraordinary people: Understanding
“idiot savants.” New York: Harper and Row.
Feature Film: Rain Man and Savant Syndrome
Rain Man, starring Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise,
provides wonderful clips to use in class for introducing
savant syndrome and the questions it raises regarding
the nature of intelligence. The film traces the journey of
two brothers, hustler Charlie Babbitt (Cruise) and autistic Raymond (Hoffman), as they travel from Cincinnati
to Los Angeles to claim their deceased father’s estate.
Raymond has been institutionalized for years as a resident of a home for the mentally challenged. In the
course of their travels, Charlie learns that his older
brother has an exceptional computational ability that
stands in sharp contrast to his generally low level of
intellectual functioning and verbal ability. Charlie eventually uses his brother’s unique talent to monetary
advantage at a Las Vegas casino. Among the clips
worth using are the following: (1) at 41:30 minutes into
the film (running only 30 seconds), the brothers are in a
restaurant and Raymond shows an amazing ability to
count and compute the number of toothpicks that fall
from a small box onto the floor. (2) At 60:50 minutes
(running 90 seconds), a doctor asks Charlie whether his
brother has any special abilities. Raymond proceeds to
demonstrate an astounding capacity to multiply large
numbers. At the same time, he cannot tell the price of a
candy bar nor can he calculate change for a dollar.
(3) At 83 minutes (running 9:15 minutes), while again
eating in a restaurant. Raymond shows an amazing
ability to recall numbers arbitrarily paired with songs
and to remember the playing cards in a half-dealt deck.
The clip continues as the two brothers take Las Vegas
by storm, utilizing Raymond’s computational ability to
amass huge winnings.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Successful Intelligence
The text identifies Sternberg’s three aspects of intelligence: analytical, creative, and practical. Together, they
make up what he calls “successful intelligence,” “the
ability to adapt to, shape, and select environments to
accomplish one’s goals and those of one’s society and
culture.” He further suggests that successfully intelligent people discern their own pattern of strengths and
weaknesses and then find ways to capitalize on their
strengths and compensate for their weaknesses.
To illustrate his different aspects of intelligence,
Sternberg used three graduate students:
Alice is a good student, always getting good grades until
she reached graduate school. Required to come up with
original ideas, Alice began to fall behind. Barbara is not
such a good student, but she’s brimming over with ideas
for research. Celia is neither a good nor a creative student, but she’s street smart; she knows how to play the
game—how to get things done.
Sternberg summarizes: “So basically what I’ve said
is there are different ways to be smart but ultimately
what you want to do is take the components (Alice’s
intelligence), apply them to your experience (Barbara),
and use them to adapt to, select, and shape your environment (Celia). That is the triarchic theory of intelligence.”
Sternberg and Kaufman reviewed evidence that
demonstrates the importance of separating practical
intelligence from traditional views of IQ. For example,
in one study, experienced assemblers in a milk-processing plant used complex strategies for combining partially filled cases in a manner that minimized the number
Chapter 11 Intelligence 11
of moves required to complete an order. Although these
assemblers were the least-educated workers in the plant,
they routinely outperformed the better-educated workers who substituted when the former were absent. The
skill involved a mental calculation of quantities
expressed in different base number terms and was unrelated to academic achievement or traditional intelligence test scores. Another study found that expert racetrack handicappers used a highly complex algorithm for
predicting post-time odds that involved interactions
among seven kinds of information. The use of a complex interaction term in their implicit equation was
unrelated to their IQ scores. In yet another study,
California grocery shoppers demonstrated an ability to
choose which of several products represented the best
buy, even though they did very poorly when the same
kind of problems were presented in a paper-and-pencil
arithmetic computation test. Similarly, Brazilian street
children showed an ability to apply sophisticated mathematical strategies in their street vending but were
unable to do the same in a classroom setting. Sternberg
and Kaufman suggest that, although intelligence test
scores may predict school and job performance, there
are other important aspects of intelligence that are relatively independent of traditional IQ. They conclude, “A
multiple-abilities prediction model of school or job performance would probably be most satisfactory.”
Goldman, B. (1992), May/June). The New IQ. Health,
64–70.
Sternberg, R. (1988). The triarchic mind. New York:
Viking Penguin.
Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (1998). Human abilities. In J. T. Spence, J.M. Darley, & D.J. Foss (Eds.),
Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 49, pp. 479–502).
Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Classroom Exercise: Questionnaire for Business
Management
The text refers to Sternberg and Wagner’s test of practical managerial intelligence. The questions in Handout
11–4 assess our tacit knowledge—that is, the knowledge we pick up by osmosis from our experience—that
determines our ability to manage ourselves, to manage
others, and to manage tasks. After students have completed the questionnaire, you can report the “solutions”
below. A “+” indicates the item received a relatively
high rating by individuals more advanced in the field. A
“–” indicates the item received a relatively low rating
by individuals more advanced in the field. Emphasize
that the “+’s” and “–’s” are relative. There are no correct answers, per se, only trends distinguishing the more
experienced from the less experienced. In some cases,
the answers may be counterintuitive.
1. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
–
–
–
+
–
2. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
+
–
+
–
+
4. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
+
+
+
–
–
5. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
–
–
–
–
–
3. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
–
–
–
+
–
Your students also can get a sense of tacit knowledge by reflecting individually or in small groups on
the following challenge:
Identify one or two things it takes to succeed at your
school or at your work that you would never read in textbooks or in your job description.
Tacit knowledge can be expressed in terms of
“if–then” conditionals. For example, if you need to
deliver bad news to your boss, and if the boss’s golf
game were rained out the day before, and if the staff
seems to be walking on eggshells, then it is better to
wait until later to deliver the bad news to avoid spoiling
the boss’s week.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence: How
practical and creative intelligence determine success in
life. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Sternberg, R., & Wagner, R. (1993). The g–ocentric view
of intelligence and job performance is wrong. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 1–5.
Videocassette: Moving Images: Exploring Psychology
Through Film, Program 3: Brain and Behavior: A
Contemporary Phineas Gage
This program was highlighted in Chapter 2 of these
resources but is also relevant to the text discussion of
emotional intelligence. It features one of Antonio
Damasio’s brain-damaged patients who show normal
intelligence but no emotion. See the Faculty Guide that
accompanies Moving Images: Exploring Psychology
Through Film for a description.
Classroom Exercise: The Autism-Spectrum Quotient
Discussing autism is an excellent way of introducing
the idea that intelligence comes in different packages.
As Steven Johnson notes, people with autism often
have above-average IQs and their general logic skills
may be impeccable, but they lack social intelligence.
The history of mathematics and physics, notes Johnson,
contains many borderline autistics. Some people have
great numerical skills but limited social grace. Your
12 Chapter 11 Intelligence
students probably know bright people who perform
poorly in social situations. Often they seem disengaged
in conversation and fail to pick up nonverbal, emotional cues.
Handout 11–5 is the Autism-Spectrum Quotient, or
AQ. It was designed by Simon Baron-Cohen and his
colleagues at Cambridge’s Autism Research Centre as a
measure of autistic traits in adults. “Definitely agree” or
“Slightly agree” responses to questions 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9,
12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 33, 35, 39, 41, 42,
43, 45, and 46 score 1 point. “Definitely disagree” or
“Slightly disagree” responses to questions 1, 3, 8, 10,
11, 14, 15, 17, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 36, 37,
38, 40, 44, 47, 48, 49, and 50 score 1 point. In the first
major trial of the test, the average score in the control
group was 16.4. Eighty percent of those diagnosed
with autism or a related disorder scored 32 or higher.
The authors carefully note that the test is not a means
for making a diagnosis; many who score about 32 and
who even meet the diagnostic criteria for mild autism
report no difficulty in everyday functioning.
Calling your students’ attention to some of the specific items on the test and how they are scored can
highlight how multiple and distinct abilities can contribute to life success. Specific items also introduce
social intelligence and how it may be distinct from academic intelligence. For example, you might highlight
items 29, “I am not very good at remembering phone
numbers,” and 30, “I don’t usually notice small changes
in a situation or a person’s appearance.” Johnson notes
that, to a person with a commonsense understanding of
human psychology, these attributes hardly seem like
opposites. A person with a good memory for phone
numbers should also be more than likely to notice small
changes in appearance. He or she is a detailed person.
Yet autism illustrates how these two traits may be
inversely related; they are not simply the result of some
general intelligence.
Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Skinner, R.,
Martin, J., & Clubley E. (2001). The AutismSpectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger
syndrome/High-functioning autism, males and
females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31, 5–17.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The Psychology of Wisdom
You can extend the text discussion of intelligence by
introducing the psychological research on wisdom. Paul
B. Baltes and his colleagues at the Max Planck Institute
for Human Development and Education in Berlin have
attempted to move the study of wisdom from the theoretical to the empirical. To elicit and measure wisdomrelated knowledge and skills, they ask people to reason
about difficult life dilemmas. You might introduce their
dilemmas in class with the following examples:
“A 15-year-old girl wants to get married right
away. What should one/she do and consider?” Or,
“Imagine a good friend of yours calls you up and tells
you that she can’t go on anymore and has decided to
commit suicide. What would one/you be thinking
about? How would one deal with this situation?” Or, “A
60-year-old widow has recently completed a college
degree and opened a business, only to learn that her son
has been left alone with two small children to care for.
What should she do?”
Baltes defines wisdom as good judgment and
advice in important but uncertain matters of life. It is a
definition not far from that of Webster’s Dictionary:
“understanding of what is true, right or lasting; good
judgment.” Other psychologists contrast wisdom with
intelligence. For example, Vivian Clayton defines intelligence as the ability that allows the individual to think
logically, to conceptualize and abstract from reality;
wisdom, he says, is the power to grasp human nature.
Robert Sternberg offers the following simple distinction: Intelligence enabled people to build a nuclear
bomb. Wisdom keeps them from using it and even
makes them consider the folly of building it in the first
place.
Of course, Baltes’ hypothetical dilemmas have no
obviously correct answers. However, some answers are
believed to show more wisdom than others. Responses
receive scores in the following five categories.
1. Basic factual knowledge—Does the respondent
show general knowledge about life matters, grasp
the scope and depth of the issues involved in the
dilemma, and understand emotions?
2. Strategic or procedural knowledge: Does the
respondent consider various strategies of decision
making, weigh the costs and benefits of certain
actions as well as the timing and withholding of
advice?
3. Life-span context: Does the respondent consider
the past, current, and possible future context of
life?
4. Value relativism: Does the respondent consider
variations in values and life priorities, such as religious differences?
5. Recognition and management of uncertainty: Does
the respondent realize that there may be no perfect
solution, and thus consider the inherent uncertainties of life?
Regarding the 15-year-old who wants to marry, a
typical unwise response might be: “No way. Marrying
at age 15 would be utterly wrong. One has to tell the
girl that marriage is not possible. It would be irresponsible.” A wiser response, receiving a higher score,
would be the following: “Well, on the surface, this
seems like an easy problem. On average, marriage of
Chapter 11 Intelligence 13
15-year-olds is not a good thing. I guess many girls
might think about it when they fall in love for the first
time. Perhaps, in this instance, special life circumstances are involved, maybe the girl has a terminal illness. Or this girl may not be from this county or may
live in another culture and historical period. So I would
need more information.”
An interesting issue raised by Baltes and his colleagues concerns possible age-related changes in wisdom. For example, in one study they found that middle
age afforded some advantage over youth when participants were tested in pairs (tandems)—an interactive format that mimics everyday life in most cases. We perhaps solve many life problems in consultation with others. Roughly half the tandems were either married or
lived together, and most of the others were long-time
friends. Ages ranged from 20 to 70. The pairs discussed
the hypothetical dilemmas for 10 minutes and were
given 5 more minutes to reflect; members of each pair
then were tested individually. Age clearly won out over
youth when tandems were allowed to discuss their
views together.
Baltes, P. B., & Staudinger, U. M. (1993). The search for
a psychology of wisdom. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 2, 75–80.
Baltes, P. B., Gück, J., & Kunzmann, U. (2002). Wisdom: Its structure and function in regulating successful
life span development. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez
(Eds), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 327–347).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Seppa, N. (1997, February). Wisdom: A quality that may
defy age. APA Monitor, 1, 9.
Classroom Exercise: Sternberg’s Balance Theory of
Wisdom
Handout 11–6 can be used to introduce Sternberg’s balance theory of wisdom. Have students consider this
dilemma individually or in small groups. Have them
volunteer their answers to the full class.
In highlighting the difference between intelligence
and wisdom, Robert Sternberg notes that a cunning terrorist may be analytically intelligent in assessing the
advantages and disadvantages of various targets and
even practically intelligent in delivering his attacks, but
he is not wise. An unscrupulous businesswoman may
possess sufficient emotional intelligence to sell a worthless product and thus betray a trusting public, but she is
not wise. An evil tyrant may use his tacit knowledge to
control land and resources that are not his own, but we
would all agree that he is not wise.
The essential goal of wisdom, suggests Sternberg,
is to serve a common good. Wise individuals have balanced (a) intrapersonal, (b) interpersonal, and (c)
extrapersonal interests. In short, wisdom is not simply
about maximizing one’s own or someone else’s self-
interest; rather, it is about balancing various self-interests (intrapersonal) with the interests of others (interpersonal) and other aspects of the context in which one
lives (extrapersonal), such as one’s city or country or
environment or even God.
How is wisdom expressed in everyday life?
Sternberg poses the example of a teacher who has been
instructed by her principal to spend almost all her time
teaching in a way that will maximize students’ scores
on a statewide assessment test. The teacher believes that
the principal is essentially forcing her to abandon the
true education of her students. What are the critical factors in her choosing a wise course of action?
A. Balancing of goals and interests: People vary not
only in the extent to which they seek a common
good but also in what they view to be the common
good. The teacher may believe that it is not in the
children’s best interests to engage only in rote
memory tasks for a state-mandated test. The principal may see the children’s interests differently.
Moreover, both teacher and principal see their own
integrity and reputation at stake. Finally, what students learn has implications for their parents and
their community. The teacher is left with the
responsibility of deciding what is in the best interest of all parties concerned.
B. Balancing of short and long terms: People vary in
their emphases. The teacher may believe that, in
the long run, good education involves more than
rote memorization but at the same time may recognize that performance on the state assessment test
affects the students’ immediate well-being as well
as that of the principal and school.
C. Balancing of responses to the environmental context: The teacher may adapt to the environment by
doing what the principal has instructed. She may
shape the environment by doing precisely what she
believes she should do or by trying to find some
balance that meets both the principal’s and her own
goals. Finally, she may decide she cannot live with
the principal’s teaching philosophy. She may select
another teaching position elsewhere.
D. Acquisition and utilization of tacit knowledge: As
we saw earlier, people vary in the extent to which
they have acquired tacit knowledge and in how
fully they use it. The teacher may have fairly
sophisticated tacit knowledge of how to teach, or
she may have virtually none and thus have no
choice but to do what the principal says. Or, she
may decide to teach in a way that represents a
compromise between her own views and those of
the principal. Clearly, her knowledge of how to
balance the various interests of the involved parties
will shape her course of action.
14 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Does applying Sternberg’s balance theory of wisdom to the dilemma in Handout 11–6 change your
class’s answers? Here are some key questions:
1. Whose interests should Charles take into account?
2. How might the short- and long-term interests of
each party be different?
3. How might Charles’ actions reflect adaptation or
shaping of the environment? What would it mean
for him to select a new environment?
4. How might tacit knowledge or emotional intelligence be relevant to understanding and resolving
this difficult life situation?
In contrast to the problems posed on the typical
intelligence test, this real-life dilemma has multiple
solutions, each associated with liabilities and assets.
Most importantly, as Sternberg observes, values are
integral to the balance theory of wisdom. Values penetrate the consideration of interests, the identification of
the appropriate response to the environment (i.e., to
adapt, shape, or select), and even one’s understanding
of the common good. Obviously, opinions will differ
greatly. Still, argues Sternberg, we can surely reach
agreement on certain universal values, such as respect
for human life, social justice, and enabling people to
reach their full potential.
Sternberg, R. J. (2002, August). Wisdom, schooling, and
society. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the
American Psychological Association, Chicago.
are less anxious and more open to experience than other
people are.
In research in which respondents completed both
the WAIS and their Ego-Resiliency Scale, Block and
Kremen found that people who are ego-resilient tend to
be more competent and comfortable in the “fuzzier”
interpersonal world, whereas people high only on raw
IQ tend to be effective in the “clearer” world of structured work. The latter, however, also tend to be uneasy
with affect and are less able to realize satisfying human
connections.
More specifically, correlates of ego-resilience in
women included having social poise and presence,
being assertive, lacking self-concern, being talkative,
showing warmth, and valuing independence and
autonomy. Correlates of intelligence in women included
having a wide range of interests, being concerned with
philosophical problems, being introspective, and having
high aspirations. Correlates of ego-resilience in men
included being dependable and responsible and straightforward and candid, capable of forming close relationships, and being productive. Correlates of intelligence
in men included having high aspirations, valuing intellectual and cognitive matters, having a wide range of
interests, and being critical, skeptical, and not easily
impressed.
Block, J., & Kremen, A. M. (1996). IQ and ego-resiliency. Conceptual and empirical connections and separateness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70,
349–361.
B. Emotional Intelligence (pp. 436–437)
Classroom Exercise: Ego-Resiliency
Research indicates that the most central qualities of
social intelligence may be the following: understanding
people, being good at dealing with people, being warm
and caring, being open to new experiences and ideas,
having perspective-taking ability, knowing social rules
and norms, and having social adaptability. Jack Block
and Adam M. Kremen believe that these various aspects
of social intelligence may be subsumed under their
concept of ego-resiliency.
To be adaptively attuned to the environment, a
person must learn to regulate his or her impulses.
Adaptability in the long term is not simply replacing
unbridled impulsivity with rigid impulse control, however. According to Block and Kremen, adaptability calls
for a resourceful regulation and equilibration of both
impulses and inhibitions. When one is more undercontrolled than is adaptively effective or more overcontrolled than is adaptively required, one is not resilient.
Ego-resiliency, then, is the capacity to effectively modulate and monitor an ever-changing complex of desires
and reality constraints. Presumably, ego-resilient people
Classroom Exercise: Emotional Intelligence Scale
Handout 11–7 is Nicola Schutte and colleagues’ selfreport measure of emotional intelligence. Based on
Peter Salovey and John Mayer’s model of emotional
intelligence, the scale items are designed to assess (1)
the appraisal and expression of emotion in self and others, (2) the regulation of emotion in self and others, and
(3) the utilization of emotion in solving problems.
Although self-report scales are useful in the classroom for introducing the concept of emotional intelligence, make it very clear to students that, as John
Mayer and his colleagues state, they may be appropriate
only as measures of self-perceived EI, not actual EI
ability. Some self-report scales might even be better
viewed as personality assessments rather than as selfestimates of EI. Gerald Matthews and his colleagues
(see L/D topic that follows) note that self-perceptions of
EI can be inaccurate because they are vulnerable to a
range of response sets, deception, and impression management. In addition, they note that past research has
reported rather modest associations between self-rated
and actual ability measures. Matthews and colleagues
Chapter 11 Intelligence 15
conclude that questionnaire measures tend to be deficient in both convergent and divergent validity. That is,
their correlations with other intelligence factors are too
low (failure of convergent validity) and their correlations with personality factors are too high (failure of
divergent validity).
In scoring their scale, students should first reverse
the numbers (1 = 5, 2 = 4, 3 = 3, 4 = 2, 5 = 1) that they
placed in response to items 5, 28, and 33, and then add
the numbers in front of all 33 items. The authors reported means of 135 and 120 for therapists and prisoners,
respectively, and means of 131 and 125 for females and
males, respectively.
Schutte and her colleagues note that, like most selfreport measures, the scale is susceptible to faking good
and thus should not be used as a method of selecting
individuals for employment or other highly desired
opportunities. However, the scale may be useful for
individuals who (a) wish to understand their own personal characteristics, so they can better set goals and
work toward these goals; (b) experience problems in
areas related to emotional intelligence, such as difficulties in impulse control; or (c) are considering entering
settings or careers in which emotional intelligence is
important.
Research has indicated that high scale scores are
associated with greater optimism, less depression, and
less impulsivity. Scores also predicted first-year college
grades, were positively associated with the “openness to
experience” trait of the Big Five personality dimensions, but were unrelated to cognitive ability.
Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty,
D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L.
(1998). Development and validation of a measure of
emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual
Differences, 25, 167–177.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Myths About Emotional
Intelligence
In a recent review of the literature, Gerald Matthews
and his colleagues identify what they regard as “seven
myths about emotional intelligence” and, in each case,
the prospects for future progress in solving the research
question. They state, “Our aim is not to dismiss work
on EI out of hand, but to examine where the first wave
of research on the construct is meeting barriers to
progress, and whether those barriers can be overcome.”
The myths and prospects follow.
Myth 1: Definitions of EI are conceptually coherent.
They note that there are several different and even conflicting definitions of the construct in the literature.
Prospects for progress are fair. Researchers need to
reach consensus on what EI actually is, with closer ties
to theories of emotion and intelligence.
Myth 2: Measures of EI meet standard psychometric
criteria. Although test reliabilities are often good, the
conceptual problems lead to questionable content validity. Predictive and construct validities are also limited.
Prospects for progress are good. Normal test development may improve predictive validity. Problems of
content and construct validity will be more challenging
due to the uncertain conceptual and theoretical bases of
EI.
Myth 3: Self-report EI is distinct from existing personality constructs. There is much overlap with the Big
Five and narrower constructs such as empathy and optimism. The prospect for progress is poor. At best, these
self-report scales may add further primary or midlevel
personality traits that contribute to contemporary personality models.
Myth 4: Ability tests for EI meet criteria for a cognitive
intelligence. It is still unclear whether ability tests
measure intelligence. Prospects for progress are fair. It
may or may prove true that current tests measure an
ability. Future work needs to validate test scores against
behavioral indices of competence.
Myth 5: EI relates to emotion as IQ relates to cognition.
The idea of separate cognitive and emotional states that
each has its own “intelligence” is confusing and conflicts with many current theories of emotion and selfregulation. Prospects for progress are poor. Models of
self-regulation and executive function that integrate
cognitive, emotional, and motivational functioning
appear to be more likely to explain empirical data.
Myth 6: EI predicts adaptive coping. EI tests may at
times correlate with coping scales and outcome measures. Nonetheless, it is simplistic to think such findings
establish a single continuum of individual differences in
adaptation. Prospects for progress are good. Future
research should be informative about how various components of EI affect outcomes and processes.
Myth 7: EI is critical for real-world success. Thus far,
studies provide an insufficient basis for supposing that
either EI is strongly predictive of outcomes in realworld settings or that interventions to increase EI will
be cost-effective. The prospects for future progress are
fair. At present, there are much better validated personality and ability measures. In the longer term, however,
we can expect tests for emotional skills and knowledge
to have greater utility.
Matthews, G., Roberts, R. D., & Zeidner, M. (2004).
Seven myths about emotional intelligence. Psychological
Inquiry, 15, 179–196.
16 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Fostering Children’s
Emotional Intelligence
In discussing contemporary approaches to intelligence
in class, you may want to include some reference to
Daniel Goleman’s best-seller Emotional Intelligence. As
noted in the text, the ability to manage and use one’s
emotions seems to be a basic aspect of social intelligence. In fact, Daniel Goleman suggests that no psychological skill is more fundamental than impulse control. He cites the marshmallow challenge used by psychologist Walter Mischel during the 1960s at a preschool on the Stanford University campus.
Mischel invited 4-year-olds into a small room and
offered them a marshmallow. They were told, however,
that if they were willing to wait while he ran an errand,
they could have two marshmallows on his return. Some
children grabbed the single treat the minute he was out
the door. Some lasted a few minutes before they gave
in. Others were determined to wait. In the seemingly
endless 15-to-20-minute interval, they resisted temptation in a variety of ways. They covered their eyes, they
sang to themselves, they played games with their hands
and feet, and some even tried to go to sleep.
The importance of how children reacted to the
marshmallow challenge became clear some 12 to 14
years later. Those who resisted temptation at 4 were, as
adolescents, more socially competent, personally effective, and self-assertive. They were less likely to freeze
under stress and pursued challenges even in the face of
difficulties. They were more self-reliant, confident,
trustworthy, and dependable.
Even more remarkable was that when again evaluated as high school graduates, those who resisted were
far superior students to those who acted on whim. They
were better able to put their ideas into words, to use and
respond to reason, and to concentrate, and they were
more eager to learn. They also had dramatically higher
scores on their SAT tests. The one-third of children who
at 4 grabbed for the marshmallow most eagerly had an
average verbal score of 524 and a quantitative score of
528. The one-third who waited the longest had average
scores of 610 and 652, respectively, a total score that
was 210 points higher than the scores of those without
self-control. Walter Mischel suggested that the “goaldirected self-imposed delay of gratification” is the
essence of emotional self-regulation. It represents the
ability to deny impulse in the service of a goal, whether
it be building a business, solving an algebraic equation,
or pursuing the Stanley Cup.
Psychologist John Gottman suggests that helping a
child master his or her emotional world is crucial to
success in adult life. His research team, supported by
NIMH, studied 119 children in two, 10-year investiga-
tions and found that those who thrived had parents who
understood their own emotions and could transmit this
knowledge to their children.
Gottman’s definition of emotional intelligence
complements that provided in the text. He suggests that
(1) a person must know his or her own emotions and
how to manage them, including the ability to delay
gratification and how to deal with life’s peaks and valleys; (2) a person must be able to recognize emotions in
others and to respond to them empathetically; (3) a person must be able to handle relationships with others
well; and (4) a person must be confident of his or her
feelings and abilities and thus able to motivate him- or
herself in an optimistic fashion.
Gottman and his colleagues find that in handling
their children’s emotions, parents fall into one of four
parenting styles. Dismissing parents attempt to distract
the child and typically treat their children’s emotions as
trivial. Because they view their children’s strong emotions as reflecting badly on their own parenting, they
try to shut them down. Disapproving parents tend to
judge and criticize their child’s emotional expression.
They view children who show strong negative emotions
as difficult and manipulative. Laissez-faire parents
accept all emotional expression but offer no guidance.
When parents fail to set limits, their children are typically out of control.
Emotion coaches view their children’s emotions as
an opportunity for intimacy and teaching. They are sensitive to even subtle emotional states. They listen empathetically and validate their children’s emotions, but
they do not dictate how a child should feel. By helping
their children label their fear, anger, and sadness, they
help them to transform what is often amorphous and
uncomfortable into something that is definable, has
boundaries, and is a normal part of life. Finally, they
help the child to identify goals, to set limits, and to
problem solve, but they do not take over.
Gottman argues that emotional intelligence is a significant predictor of children’s success in life. Their
academic achievement is greater even when standard IQ
scores are controlled for. In addition, they have fewer
behavior problems and better physical health. Their
relationships with others are more meaningful. Emotional intelligence seems to provide a buffer against
stress if there is marital conflict or even divorce.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence. New York:
Bantam Books.
Gottman, J. (1997). The heart of parenting: Raising an
emotionally intelligent child. New York: St. Martin’s
Press.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 17
B. Intelligence and Creativity (pp. 438–439)
Classroom Exercise: Assessing Creativity
A variety of tests have been designed to assess creativity. In the Unusual Uses Test, respondents are given two
minutes to name as many uses as they can for a common object such as a toothpick, a brick, or a paper cup.
To illustrate, use Tony Buzan’s quick test: give students
two minutes to write down all the different uses they
can think of for an ordinary paper clip. Have them
score their responses by adding up the total number of
uses and dividing by two to give an average number per
minute. This test, Buzan notes, is given in schools and
business organizations to determine “inherent creative
capacity.” An average score is 4, 8 is an unusually high
score, 12 is very rare, and 16 makes you better than one
in a thousand. The Remote Associates Test (see
Handout 11–12) is another popular test of creativity.
Still a third, the Consequences Test, asks such questions
as: What would happen if everyone in the world suddenly went blind?
Buzan, T. (1984). Make the most of your mind. New
York: Linden Press.
Russell Baker, a columnist for the New York Times,
once provided these creative responses.
Try to think of four to eight things that might happen if we
suddenly had three arms.
1. When asked by their wives to bring home a case of milk,
a wheel of cheese, five gallons of paint, etc., men would
say, “I’ve only got three hands.”
2. The millions of people unable to afford new three-armed
wardrobes— dresses, shirts, suits, etc.—would have to
wear their extra arms under their clothing. Thus, eventually, everybody would become ashamed of having a third
arm and women would be arrested for showing them on
the beach.
3. The price of manicures would rise fifty percent.
4. Some embittered failure whose future was destroyed
because he failed to do well on a psychological test
would immediately start eliminating America’s leading
research psychologists, always carrying the murder
weapon in the new third hand which the F.B.I. would
have had no time to fingerprint.
Think of eight to twelve uses for each one of the following
objects: a rubber ball, a brick, a wire clothes hanger, and a
one foot ruler.
Uses for rubber ball: (1) Games. (2) Plug up rainspouts.
(3) Throw at neighbors’ dogs when they start sniffing around
your boxwood.
Uses for a brick: (1) Construction. (2) Destruction. (3) Place
under short movie actors during love scenes to put them in
kissing range of leading ladies. (4) Hold in hand when greeting encyclopedia salespeople at front door.
Uses for a wire clothes hanger: (1) Hang clothes on. (2)
Unbend and use curled end to jab ineffectually at rubber ball
plugging up rainspout. (3) When visiting an enemy, place wire
hanger in one of his closets containing other wire hangers,
thus triggering wire hangers’ well-known propensity to tangle
with other wire hangers and inducing nervous breakdown in
enemy when he goes to closet.
Uses for a one foot ruler: (1) Prop windows open. (2) Snap in
two to relieve nervous tension. For this purpose, keep one foot
ruler in closet containing wire hangers.
Russell Baker, “Observer: Three Arms and a Wire
Hanger,” New York Times, December 12, 1965.
Copyright © 1965 by The New York Times Company.
Reprinted by permission.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Creative People—Ten
Antithetical Traits
In his recent book Creativity: The Work and Lives of 91
Eminent People, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describes
creative people as having the unusual capacity to adapt
to almost any situation and to make do with whatever
is at hand to reach their goals. According to
Csikszentmihalyi, “complexity” is the one word that
best expresses how their personalities differ from those
of others. Creative people tend to integrate certain
thoughts and actions that are segregated in most people.
They are a conglomerate of contradictory extremes;
instead of being an “individual” each of them is a “multitude.” Csikszentmihalyi identifies ten antithetical traits
that creative people integrate in dialectical tension. The
traits are described as follows:
1. Creative people demonstrate a great deal of physical energy but they also rest often and sleep a lot.
In short they control their energy. They view periods of reflection and idleness as important for the
success of their work.
2. Creative people are smart and naive at the same
time. They demonstrate both wisdom and childlikeness. In his study of the major creative geniuses of
this century, Howard Gardner noted that a certain
immaturity, both emotional and mental, can go
hand in hand with the deepest insights.
3. Creative people manage to combine playfulness
with discipline, responsibility with irresponsibility.
A playfully light attitude is accompanied by a quality of doggedness, endurance, and perseverance.
4. Creative people alternate between imagination and
a rooted sense of reality. Csikszentmihalyi notes
that new ideas are often viewed as fantasies unrelated to current reality. This is useful because the
whole point of art and science is to go beyond what
we now consider real in order to create a new reality. What makes a novel idea creative is that when
we have conceived it, sooner or later we recognize
that, strange as it is, it is true.
5. Creative people tend to be both introverted and
extraverted. Most of us tend to prefer either being
18 Chapter 11 Intelligence
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
alone or with others. Creative people like to be
both, depending on the time and the situation.
Creative people are simultaneously humble and
proud. They know that they have accomplished a
great deal and yet are aware that they “stand on the
shoulders of giants.” Moreover, they are usually so
focused on future challenges that past accomplishments are quickly forgotten.
Creative people escape rigid gender stereotyping.
They tend to be androgynous, both aggressive and
nurturant, sensitive and rigid, dominant and submissive.
Creative people are both traditional and rebellious.
Being only traditional leaves one unchanged.
However, taking chances without regard to what
has been valued in the past rarely leads to novelty
that is recognized as an improvement.
Creative people are passionate about their work but
extremely objective as well. Without passion we
quickly lose interest in a difficult task. Without
being objective, our work often is not very good
and lacks credibility.
Creative people are sensitive, which often exposes
them to suffering and pain, yet also leads them to
experience a great deal of enjoyment. Being alone
at the forefront can expose one to vicious attack
and ridicule. At the same time, when one is working in his or her area of expertise, worries and
cares are often replaced by a sense of bliss.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: The work and
lives of 91 eminent people. New York: HarperCollins.
D. Is Intelligence Neurologically Measurable?
(pp. 439–441)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Reaction Time, Intelligence,
and Longevity
Some research has indicated that intelligence predicts
longevity. In a recent study, Ian Deary and Geoff Der
report that reaction time may explain why lower IQ is
associated with earlier death.
The researchers followed a sample of 898 adults
from age 56 until age 70. They measured general intelligence and simple and choice reaction times and identified a variety of demographic and lifestyle factors and,
of course, survival. By the end of the study, 185 (99
men, 86 women) had died. The results indicated that
intelligence tested at age 56 was significantly related to
being alive or dead 14 years later. This association
remained after adjusting for differences in smoking,
education, and social class as possible confounding
variables.
Simple and choice reaction times assessed at age
56 were also significantly associated with mortality in
the following 14 years. And once again, smoking, edu-
cation, and social class had little effect on the strength
of this relationship. Reaction times were actually
stronger predictors of mortality than was intelligence;
perhaps, most importantly, the effect of IQ on mortality
was no longer significant after adjusting for reaction
time. Deary and Der conclude that these results suggest
that a reduced efficiency in information processing may
be the crucial link between lower mental ability and
death.
The investigators indicate that future research may
help us better understand the relationships between IQ,
reaction time, and longevity. For example, is the relationship between IQ and longevity one that appears
only in middle age and actually as a precursor of physiological decline? Or is this relationship one that is characteristic of healthy people throughout life, for instance,
showing itself even in young, healthy adults? Studies
that answer this question (by examining these relationships in younger age groups) may help in formulating
effective interventions that promote health and
longevity.
Deary, I. J., & Der, G. (2005). Reaction time explains
IQ’s association with death. Psychological Science, 16,
64–69.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Reaction Time and
Intelligence
Arthur Jensen, in a review of the extensive literature
showing reaction time (RT) to be correlated with
intelligence, discusses the possible neurological underpinnings for this fascinating link.
First, RT correlates with general intelligence, or the
g factor common to all measures of complex cognitive
performance. Indeed, the most highly g-loaded tests
show the highest correlations with RT. Second, simple
RT (for example, the time to react to the onset of a single stimulus whose nature and location are already
known to the subject) actually shows very little correlation with g. It is under the more complex conditions of
discrimination and choice, which involve retrieval of
information from short-term (STM) or long-term memory (LTM), that RT shows the positive link with intelligence. Although the speed of RT under these conditions
is significantly longer and involves more central information processing than simple RT, it is seldom longer
than one second. Third, the RT-g correlation begins to
diminish beyond a level of task complexity that makes
for RTs longer than one second. As tasks become more
difficult, subjects may use unique strategies that are less
related to g. Finally, RT decreases with age from childhood to maturity just as one would predict from mental
growth curves. Moreover, RT slows with aging in later
life, mirroring the decline in scores on psychometric
tests of fluid intelligence (see Chapter 4).
Chapter 11 Intelligence 19
Jensen suggests three neurological bases for the
link between reaction time and intelligence. Most obviously, the speed of transmission through nerve pathways, which includes both nerve conduction velocity
(NCV) and speed of synaptic transmission, may be
important simply because of the brain’s limited capacity
for processing information. As Jensen explains, if all
the information needed for problem solution is not
processed before it is lost, it must be taken in again by
repetition of the stimulus or repeated retrieval from
LTM. Thus, achieving a solution is a race between
speed of processing and rate of decay or loss of the
information needed. Thus, individuals with faster speed
of processing have faster RTs on elementary cognitive
tasks than persons with slower processing speed; they
can also acquire knowledge and skills faster, retrieve
information from LTM more efficiently, and solve more
complex problems on mental tests. Second, research
indicates that intraindividual variability in RT, measured as the individual’s standard deviation of RT over
trials (RTSD), is more highly correlated (negatively)
with g than is the mean or median RT over trials. Hans
Eysenck has argued that RTSD is an index of noise, or
errors, in neural transmission of information in the
brain. It is the noise rather than the actual speed of
transmission that is essential to understanding the RT-g
relationship. Jensen prefers the construct of “neural
oscillation” to explain RTSD. Slower oscillation makes
for both larger RTSD and lower g. Third, Jensen suggests that the explanation of the RT-g correlation also
requires the concept of variance in working memory
capacity. Working memory (WM), or immediate consciousness, is the active part of STM. Its capacity,
measured as bits of information, is the product of speed
of information transmission and the duration of the neural traces of information. (Duration of neurally encoded
information in WM reflects the rate of decay of neural
traces that originated from external stimuli or from neurally encoded information brought up momentarily from
LTM.) Recent research suggests that RT tasks become
more g loaded as they tend to strain the capacity of
WM, but not beyond the point of breakdown and loss
of information. Indeed, tasks at the level of complexity
at which the threshold of breakdown is reached are the
best measures of an individual’s level of g.
Jensen, A. (1993). Why is reaction time correlated with
psychometric g? Current Directions in Psychological
Science, 2, 53–56.
III. Assessing Intelligence (pp. 442–450)
A. The Origins of Intelligence Testing (pp. 442–444)
Classroom Exercise: A World War I IQ Test
The text indicates that the world’s first mass administration of an IQ test occurred during World War I. With
the aid of Lewis Terman, the U.S. government developed tests to evaluate new immigrants and 1.7 million
World War I army recruits. “There is nothing about an
individual as important as his IQ,” stated Terman. The
army’s use of intelligence tests boosted the credibility
of psychology as a profession but at the same time
stimulated public debate about the validity of the tests
and their implications for American democracy.
Handout 11–8 provides some sample items from
those tests. Here are the correct answers as reported by
historymatters@gmu.edu.
1. C. tobacco 2. B. cards 3. B. sheep 4. A. flour 5. D.
red 6. A. fowl 7. D. author 8. A. B. T. Babbitt 9. C.
writer 10. C. Franklin 11. B. it is more comfortable 12.
A. it makes a man more useful and happy 13. C. tell
him of his mistake 14. A. it is better for the health 15.
B. signal the engineer to stop the train 16. C. use the
sun or a compass for a guide 17. B. it is more honorable
18. A. it prepares them for adult life 19. C. they can
make more by investing the money the house would
cost 20. B. it is more nourishing
Many doubted the broad claims of those who promoted
army intelligence tests. You might read the “The March
of the Psychos” to your students. This mock of psychologists appeared in the April 1918 issue of the army
post newspaper Camplife Chickamauga.
“The March of the Psychos”
The valiant, bespectacled psychos are we
Prepared to assign every man his degree
And the place he’s best fitted for in the armee
By psychologee, psychologee.
Bill Kaiser will shake in this throne ’cross the sea
When he feels the earthquake of our efficiency
Pencils up! Forward march! to the great victory
Of psychologee in the Army.
Source: “The March of the Psychos,” Camplife Chickamauga,
April 1918. Reprinted in Joanne Brown, The Definition of a
Profession: The Authority of Metaphor in the History of
Intelligence Testing, 1890–1930. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1992.
20 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Videocassette: Psychology: The Human Experience,
Module 17: Pros and Cons of Intelligence Tests
See the Faculty Guide that accompanies the
Psychology: The Human Experience teaching modules
by Coast Learning Systems for a description.
B. Modern Tests of Mental Abilities (pp. 444–446)
Student Project: Joining Mensa
Mensa, an organization of intellectually superior individuals, was founded in 1946 by two British barristers
who thought it might be an interesting experiment to
gather together people of exceptionally high intelligence. Mensa is a Latin word meaning “table” and
symbolizes the coming together of equals. Its original
agenda was to discuss and arrive at ways of preserving
world peace. While the organization has been accused
of elitism, its membership, which now numbers about
100,000, in 100 countries, contends that it is no more
elite than any organization with a requirement for
admission. In the United States there are more than
50,000 members belonging to 138 local groups. It is
estimated that five million are eligible. Their activities
range from parties to museum trips. Each chapter is
headed by a local secretary, and almost every group
publishes its own newsletter. Truck drivers, professors,
housewives, bartenders, janitors, and priests are all represented. Mensa has a gifted-children’s program, a
scholarship fund, a research foundation, a national magazine, and a program in which members work with
prison inmates. There are over 150 “SIGs”—special
interest groups—through which mensans can get
together by mail or in person to share a common
interest.
To qualify for membership in Mensa, you must
score in the top 2 percent of any standard intelligence
test, which means a minimum score of 132 on the
Stanford-Binet and 130 on the most current Wechsler
scales, the two major tests of intelligence described in
the text. Each year about thirty thousand people apply
for membership; only about 1 of every 25 applicants is
admitted.
Students interested in joining Mensa can learn
more by writing American Mensa, 1229 Corporate
Drive West, Arlington, TX. 76006. The organization
provides information on how to qualify for membership
either by taking an intelligence test or by submitting
“prior evidence” if such a test has already been taken.
Handout 11–9, provided by Abbie F. Salny, will tell
students whether they are likely candidates for Mensa.
Answers are:
1. Friday
2. a. P Y The alternate letters starting with S spell
“silver anniversar,” and this sequence completes
the phrase “silver anniversary.”
3. 25
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
ANNIVERSARY
MENSA
b
b
b
TOM
HOUSE
JANE
9 p.m.
b. Both grow in the ground.
a. Alternate numbers go up by 2 and down by 1,
starting with 1, and 10.
e is the only one that is not an artistic work made
by man.
PARACHUTE
5
c
LAND
c. The number of lines goes down opposite the
stick, up on the side with the stick, and the stick
alternates from lower left to top right.
Respondents score one point for each correct
answer. They should add 5 points if they finished in less
than 20 minutes, and 3 points if in less than 30 minutes.
Scores range from 0 to 25. On the basis of the scores of
some Mensa members who took the test, Salny provides the following interpretation of scores.
25
25–24
14–19
10–13
Below 10
You’re an excellent Mensa candidate.
You can almost surely pass the Mensa
supervised test.
A very good candidate for Mensa.
A fair candidate.
Everyone has an off day!
Mensa members Marvin Grosswirth and Salny also
have provided good advice in interpreting scores of any
intelligence test. While performing well is to a degree
predictive of school success, they state:
An intelligence test does not measure drive, persistence,
creativity or any of the myriad other skills that often
count for more in achieving success out of school. A low
score on an I.Q. test does not mean probable failure in
life. All it means is that the person taking the test did
poorly on that particular test. Most of us do not spend
our lives in situations that can be measured by paperand-pencil tests. Since this is so, scores obtained on such
tests should be viewed with some restraint if they are
high and with some skepticism if they are low. They
measure only one aspect of a total life pattern.
The Mensa genius quiz book. (1981). Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley, 139.
Salny, A. (1988). The Mensa books of words, word
games, puzzles, and oddities. New York: HarperCollins.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 21
Classroom Exercise: Analogies and Intelligence
Analogies, which measure our ability to perceive relationships, have appeared on many intelligence-related
tests. One of the subtests on the WAIS-R measures
respondents’ abilities to see similarities. The Miller
Analogies Test (MAT) is a difficult 50-minute test consisting of 100 verbal analogies, that was developed to
measure scholastic aptitude for graduate study. It has
also been used for selection and placement in industry.
Analogies provide a good example of how intelligence-related tests measure developed ability, both aptitude and achievement, since the solution to any analogy
requires a certain store of information as well as the
ability to reason about it. The MAT has on occasion
been criticized for being more a test of “vocabulary
achievement” than “reasoning aptitude.” At the same
time, the MAT has been found to be predictive of graduate school performance. Students are certain to have
encountered analogies on achievement as well as aptitude tests. Indeed, the Test Bank accompanying the
Myers text includes analogies that require basic knowledge of the subject matter.
Handout 11–10 enables students to test their skill at
analogies and to compare their scores with those of
Mensa members. The items come from the Mensa
Genius Quiz Book. The answers, along with the percentage of Mensa members who answered each question correctly, follow. No member got them all right.
The average score was fifteen correct and the average
time was just over 10 minutes.
1. (c) Both grow on trees, as potatoes and peanuts
both grow underground. (71%)
2. (b) Both of the second pair speak Portuguese, as
both of the first pair speak Spanish. (86%)
3. (c) 32° is freezing on the Fahrenheit scale, as 0° is
freezing on the Celsius scale. (86%)
4. (e) Pesetas are the monetary unit in Spain, as
drachmas are in Greece. (34%)
5. (d) Each is the reverse of the word. (34%)
6. (b) The first pair are names of people applied to
food; macadam and poinsettia are the names of
people applied to objects. (10%)
7. (b) Foliage refers to leaves. (87%)
8. (c) The number cubed: 2 × 2 × 2 equals 8;
5 × 5 × 5 equals 125. (81%)
9. (e) The year when a revolution took place. (33%)
10. (a) The first pair is the first two vowels, the
second is the first two consonants. (20%)
11. (d) A ramekin is a small baking dish. (57%)
12. (c) Both are famous animals of their kind. (81%)
13. (a) Potter. (95%)
14. (e) Istanbul is the new name of Constantinople, as
Sri Lanka is the new name of Ceylon. (80%)
15. (a) Margaret Mitchell wrote Gone with the Wind.
(80%)
16. (c) Each is part of a larger grouping. (89%)
17. (b) They are members of the same family. (14%)
18. (d) Carter preceded Reagan and Roosevelt preceded Truman, as U.S. president. (71%)
19. (d) Both were scientists who studied astronomy
and the human brain, respectively. (61%)
20. Second drawing from the left: Top and bottom lines
reversed, right to left reversed. (89%)
Grosswirth, M., & Salny, A. (1981). The Mensa genius
quiz book (pp. 140–142). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
C. Principles of Test Construction (pp. 446–449)
Classroom Exercise: Issues in Testing
Richard A. Griggs uses a one-minute "intelligence" test
to stimulate class discussion of many important aspects
of testing. In addition, the exercise allows you to review
principles of statistics introduced in Chapter 1 and elements of problem-solving presented in Chapter 10.
Prepare transparencies of Handouts 11–11a and
11–11b or make enough copies for each student to have
one of each. (Students should not know there are two
tests so avoid numbering them.) Distribute the first
“intelligence” test, then instruct students to number 1
through 24 on a separate sheet of paper for their
answers. Make sure students understand that this is not
an accepted intelligence test but only an informal exercise devised for a classroom activity. Reiterate this
again at the end of the activity.
Instruct the class as follows: “There are 24 items
on the test. Each item is made up of letters, words, geometric shapes, and lines. Convert each to a verbal
equivalent word or phrase. An example is STTHEORY”
(write this sample item on the chalkboard). Ask your
class for answers. If the correct response is not forthcoming, indicate that the answer is “the inside story”
(the word the is inside the word story).
Allow 1 minute for the test. To protect student
anonymity, you may want to collect the answers without names and redistribute to the class for tallying
(although Griggs has never had a problem with students
worrying about anonymity). To get approximate estimates of measures of central tendency and variance,
have all the students raise their hands and then put them
down after counting one past their total number of
responses on the test. The range is typically large (4 to
13, or so, with a median of 6 or 7). In reviewing these
basic statistical concepts, you might note problems
raised with skewed distributions (distributions for the
test are usually skewed by a few high scores).
Review the answers by having students volunteer
their own responses. Pause especially with some of the
harder items (e.g., items 11, 12, 19, 21, 22, 23). Ask
students who did solve these items to provide cues for
the rest of the class. These problems nicely illustrate
22 Chapter 11 Intelligence
fixation and the “aha” of insight discussed in the previous chapter.
Ask students if they believe the test is a good
measure of intelligence. Because the test is relatively
easy, they are likely to suggest that performance is
more a function of time and writing speed than of intelligence. Ask, “How might psychologists decide whether
this test or any test is valid?” After a brief discussion,
announce that the first test was only a “warm-up” and
distribute the second test. Again have students provide
answers to numbers from 1 through 24 on a separate
sheet of paper.
After a minute has passed, announce that you will
give them additional time for this more difficult test.
Clearly, they will recognize that more than time and
motor speed are required. Allow a total of about five
minutes and then tally their responses. Check central
tendencies and range again. Have students provide
answers for the first few items and explain that at the
end of the activity you will distribute a complete
answer sheet so as not to deprive anyone of the pleasure
of insight and solution.
If time allows, you can extend the discussion of
statistics by noting the need for variance in the calculation of correlations assessing validity and reliability. In
discussing validity, note the importance of establishing
some criterion, an independent measure of what the test
claims to measure. As the text explains, aptitude tests
must have predictive or criterion-related validity, which
means they predict future achievement.
Finally, relate predictive validity to the question of
bias. Note that everyone acknowledges that intelligence
tests are usually biased in requiring certain cultural
experiences for optimal performance. Contrast this intuitive sense of bias with bias in the statistical sense, that
is that it has different predictive validity for different
ethnic groups. Griggs suggests the following hypothetical: Assume that performance on this test is strongly
related to performance on intelligence tests and equally
so for various ethnic groups. Given this assumption,
what can you conclude about the validity and possible
bias of the test? Clearly, bias has multiple meanings and
a test can be biased in one sense but not in another.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
Circles under the eyes
Highchair
Paradise
Touchdown
Six feet underground
Mind over matter
He’s beside himself
Backward glance
Life after death
GI overseas
Space program
See-through blouse
Just between you and me
Answers to test 1
1. Sandbox
2. Man overboard
3. I understand
4. Reading between the lines
5. Long underwear
6. Crossroads
7. Downtown
8. Tricycle
9. Split-level
10. Three degrees below zero
11. Neon lights
Classroom Exercise: Reliability and Validity
Ed Morris provides a simple yet compelling exercise to
highlight the distinction between validity and reliability.
He introduces his class to the Morris Shoe-Size
Intelligence test: IQ = shoe size × 10. After classroom
laughter subsides, Morris argues that his test is much
more reliable than most IQ tests on the market. Met
with disbelief, he explains the important distinction
between reliability and validity. “Retests” of his
shoe-size intelligence test obviously produce highly
consistent results (reliability); however, the test does
Answers to Test 2
1. Split-second timing
2. A long letter from home
3. All between us is over now
4. Six of one, half a dozen of another
5. It’s a small world after all
6. Unfinished symphony
7. Blood is thicker than water
8. Seven-up
9. Condescending
10. Scrambled eggs
11. No two ways about it
12. Line up in alphabetical order
13. A gross injustice
14. The odds are overwhelming
15. He’s an exponent of capitalism
16. Astronaut
17. Ambiguous
18. A wolf in sheep’s clothing
19. Sailing, sailing, over the seven seas
20. Assassinate
21. For no apparent reason whatsoever
22. A little misunderstanding between friends
23. A bad spell of weather
24. He came out of nowhere
Griggs, R. A. (2000). A one-minute “intelligence” test.
Teaching of Psychology, 27, 132–135. In Morris, S.
(1983). Omni games: The best brain teasers from Omni
magazine (p. 49). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 23
not measure or predict what it is supposed to (validity).
Jon Mueller’s “head circumference” IQ measure illustrates the same point. Ask your students if measuring
the circumference of a person’s head would provide an
IQ test that is reliable, valid, both, or neither. Such a
measure would certainly produce consistent scores.
Jane Halonen passes along (from an unknown
source) the “t-test” measure of intelligence. Tell students to take out pencil and paper and on the signal
“go” to write as many of the letter “t” as they can in 15
seconds. Ask students to report their results, placing
them in a frequency distribution on the board (also a
good way to review descriptive statistics). Ask, “Is this
a good measure of intelligence?” A lively discussion
will follow as some students report simple strategies
that maximized their scores (e.g., drawing a horizontal
line across the page and then quickly intersecting it
with short vertical lines). Clearly, the t-test measures
something but not the construct of intelligence. Repeat
the t-test. Scores are likely to increase dramatically. The
test not only lacks validity, it shows little test-retest reliability. If you like, you can extend the discussion to the
effect of nonstandard test conditions, interrater reliability (what constitutes an acceptable “t”?), etc.
Halonen, J. (2002, September 10). Reliability and
validity. Message posted to PSYCHTEACHER@list.
kennesaw.edu.
Morris, E. (2002, September 12). Reliability and validity.
Message posted to PSYCHTEACHER@list.kennesaw.
edu.
Mueller, J. (2002, September 10). Reliability and
validity. Message posted to PSYCHTEACHER@list.
kennesaw.edu.
Classroom Exercise: Remote Associates Test
You can best introduce principles of sound test construction in the context of a specific test. Handout
11–12, an analog of the Remote Associates Test (RAT)
devised by Irving Sarnoff and Martha Mednick to
assess creativity, provides one opportunity to do this.
The Mednicks suggest that creativity involves the ability to see relationships between ideas that are remote
from each other. They quote Albert Einstein: “The psychical entities which seem to serve as elements in
thought are certain signs and more or less clear images
which can be combined.” Similarly, the mathematician
Poincaré stated, “Ideas rose in crowds; I felt them collide until pairs interlocked so to speak, making a stable
combination. By morning I had established the existence of a class of Fuchsian functions.”
The commercial RAT test (published by Houghton
Mifflin Company) consists of 40 items, which respondents are given 40 minutes to answer. Twenty-five to
thirty minutes should be sufficient for Handout 11–12.
Have students complete it in class or take it home and
time themselves. The answers follow.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
phone
book
fire
pin
cheese
chair
slow
foot
party
hard
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
green
floor
stone
bar
fountain
ball
go
cover
type
chair
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
lead
top
tack
watch
cat
stop
mail
bubble
black
end
After students have completed the test, review the
general concepts of standardization, reliability, and
validity, and ask students how they would apply to this
test.
In standardizing their test, the Mednicks administered it to a variety of college and professional groups
reporting means, standard deviations, and the percentile
equivalents of raw scores. Both internal (odd-even) and
test-retest (alternative forms) reliability were assessed,
with the former producing a coefficient of .92, and the
latter, .81. Finally, the authors report a number of studies demonstrating the test’s validity. Psychology graduate students who had high test scores tended to be rated
as highly creative by their research advisors. IBM technicians who had high scores were more likely to make
award-winning suggestions for company improvements.
Mednick, S. A., & Mednick, M. T. (1967). Remote associates test. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
IV. The Dynamics of Intelligence (pp. 450–454)
A. Stability or Change? (pp. 450–452)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Why Do Intelligent People
Fail?
Intelligent people sometimes make a mess of their lives.
Why? Robert Sternberg describes 20 stumbling blocks
that can get in the way of even the brightest people.
They also help explain why even the best measures of
intelligence may account for only small proportions of
the variance in real-world performance. The stumbling
blocks are worth listing in class and may even help students understand discrepancies between their scholastic
aptitude scores and academic performance.
1. Lack of motivation. A talent is irrelevant if a person
is not motivated to use it. Motivation may be external (for example, social approval) or internal (satisfaction from a job well-done, for instance).
External sources tend to be transient, while internal
sources tend to produce more consistent
performance.
24 Chapter 11 Intelligence
2. Lack of impulse control. Habitual impulsiveness
gets in the way of optimal performance. Some
people do not bring their full intellectual resources
to bear on a problem but go with the first solution
that pops into their heads.
3. Lack of perseverance and perseveration. Some
people give up too easily, while others are unable
to stop even when the quest will clearly be fruitless.
4. Using the wrong abilities. People may not be using
the right abilities for the tasks in which they are
engaged.
5. Inability to translate thought into action. Some
people seem buried in thought. They have good
ideas but rarely seem able to do anything about
them.
6. Lack of product orientation. Some people seem
more concerned about the process than the result of
activity.
7. Inability to complete tasks. For some people, nothing ever draws to a close. Perhaps it’s fear of what
they would do next or fear of becoming hopelessly
enmeshed in detail.
8. Failure to initiate. Still others are unwilling or
unable to initiate a project. It may be indecision or
fear of commitment.
9. Fear of failure. People may not reach peak performance because they avoid the really important
challenges in life.
10. Procrastination. Some people are unable to act
without pressure. They may also look for little
things to do in order to put off the big ones.
11. Misattribution of blame. Some people always
blame themselves for even the slightest mishap.
Some always blame others.
12. Excessive self-pity. Some people spend more time
feeling sorry for themselves than expending the
effort necessary to overcome the problem.
13. Excessive dependency. Some people expect others
to do for them what they ought to be doing themselves.
14. Wallowing in personal difficulties. Some people let
their personal difficulties interfere grossly with
their work. During the course of life, one can
expect some real joys and some real sorrows.
Maintaining a proper perspective is often difficult.
15. Distractibility and lack of concentration. Even
some very intelligent people have very short attention spans.
16. Spreading oneself too thin or too thick.
Undertaking too many activities may result in none
being completed on time. Undertaking too few can
also result in missed opportunities and reduced levels of accomplishment.
17. Inability to delay gratification. Some people
reward themselves and are rewarded by others for
finishing small tasks, while avoiding bigger tasks
that would earn them larger rewards.
18. Inability to see the forest for the trees. Some people
become obsessed with details and are either unwilling or unable to see or deal with the larger picture
in the projects they undertake.
19. Lack of balance between critical, analytical thinking and creative, synthetic thinking. It is important
for people to learn what kind of thinking is expected of them in each situation.
20. Too little or too much self-confidence. Lack of selfconfidence can gnaw away at a person’s ability to
get things done and become a self-fulfilling
prophecy. Conversely, individuals with too much
self-confidence may not know when to admit they
are wrong or in need of self-improvement.
Robert Sternberg’s Why Smart People Can Be So
Stupid more fully examines why intelligent people
sometimes think and behave in such stupid ways that
they end up destroying their livelihood and even their
own lives. Contributors to the volume—scholars from
diverse research areas of human intelligence—discuss
the nature and theory of stupidity, whether stupidity is
measurable, and, most importantly, how stupidity contributes to stupid behavior.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2002). Why smart people can be
so stupid. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Intelligence applied. New York:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
B. Extremes of Intelligence (pp. 452–454)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Giftedness
Ellen Winner provides a helpful review of current theory and research on giftedness. She notes that since
Terman’s 1925 longitudinal study of children with high
IQs (as described in the text), consensus has emerged
that giftedness is not captured by unidimensional IQ
measures. Some researchers have differentiated mathematical and verbal giftedness. Others have made more
specific distinctions. Winner suggests that our understanding is most likely to advance if we define giftedness as unusually high ability in any area—for example,
music, spatial ability, interpersonal sensitivity, and
global IQ—and then attempt to identify the correlates
(e.g., drive, creativity) and the developmental path.
Are gifted individuals qualitatively or quantitatively different? Do gifted individuals stand out primarily
in the speed with which their abilities develop and with
which they process information or do they develop and
process information qualitatively differently from the
way most people do? Winner notes that clinical observations suggest a qualitative difference. For example,
high-IQ children consider many possible interpretations
Chapter 11 Intelligence 25
of a question, grasp the essential elements of a complex
problem, and often pose deep philosophical questions.
Gifted children also seem to display an intense drive or
“rage to master.” They typically work with no external
prodding or reinforcement, make discoveries on their
own, and appear to teach themselves. Winner argues,
however, that we need controlled studies that move
beyond anecdotal evidence to determine whether high
ability is always accompanied by such qualitative
cognitive and motivational differences.
Is giftedness a matter of nature or nurture? Both
laypersons and some researchers, particularly those who
study IQ-gifted children, have viewed giftedness as an
innate ability. Those psychologists who focus on the
study of specific talent or expertise often provide a contrasting environmental perspective. The role of nurture
is suggested in early research on eminent scientists who
differed from their less eminent colleagues not in intelligence but in the capacity to concentrate and work
hard. Persons who excel in the arts, mathematics, or
athletics testify to the importance of strong family support and years of training. The best musicians in one
study had engaged in twice as many hours of deliberate
practice as had the least successful ones. Such findings,
argues Winner, do not rule out the importance of innate
talent. Those who are extremely talented in a specific
area are likely to have a strong drive to master that
area. Parental accounts of child prodigies suggest that
they showed very early signs of talent that often seemed
to emerge from nowhere. The most eminent classical
composers began to compose and made lasting contributions after fewer years of formal training than did
their less eminent peers. Winner concludes that
“whether nature or nurture accounts for more of the
variance in giftedness remains to be determined, and
the answer to this question is likely to differ across different domains of giftedness.”
How uneven are the cognitive profiles of gifted
individuals? Simonton argued that achievement in any
domain requires various innate components, with some
domains requiring far more than others. Moreover,
components develop independently over time, with
level of ability determined by a multiplicative composite of these components. This analysis suggests that
profiles may be uneven. Indeed, adults with high IQs
show lower correlations among IQ subtests than do
those with ordinary IQs. Similarly, the cognitive profiles of academically gifted children are often quite
uneven with mathematical ability far outstripping verbal
ability, or vice versa. Individuals gifted in art or music
may have only an average IQ. Savants provide the most
striking cases of unevenness as extraordinary ability
coexists with a subnormal IQ.
Among unanswered questions are the following:
Does the role of practice and its interaction with innate
talent differ across domains? What forms of early
prodigiousness do and do not predict creative eminence
in adulthood? Can brain imaging demonstrate differences in the brain organization and functioning of
savant and nonsavant gifted individuals working in the
same domain. Finally, how should gifted children be
educated, a question of enormous practical importance?
Winner, E. (2000). Giftedness: Current theory and
research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5,
153–156.
V. Genetic and Environmental Influences on
Intelligence (pp. 454–466)
Classroom Exercise: Incremental Versus Entity Theories
of Intelligence
Relative to the nature-nurture argument is the important
distinction between incremental and entity theorists (see
Prologue of these Resources, p. 9). Entity theorists tend
to think that human characteristics are fixed. Incremental theorists are inclined to believe that characteristics are malleable. Handout 11–13, designed by Carol
Dweck (1999), assesses the degree to which respondents believe that their own intelligence is changeable.
To obtain a total score, students should first reverse the
numbers they placed in front of statements 3, 5, 7, and
8 (change 1 to 6, 2 to 5, 3 to 4, 4 to 3, 5 to 2, and 6 to
1). Then they should add up the numbers in front of all
eight statements. Scores range from 8 to 48. Scores
below the midpoint of 28 reflect the belief that one’s
intelligence is fixed (entity theorists); scores above 28
indicate the belief that one’s intelligence is malleable
(incremental theorists).
These two theories profoundly affect motivation.
“If my traits are fixed, then I can’t do much to change.
I’m stuck with who I am. The best I can do is to validate what strengths I might already have and hope that
they will help me win approval and avoid rejection.
There is no sense in trying to promote growth in others
either, as they will remain who they are despite my best
efforts. On the other hand, if my traits are malleable, I
have the potential to improve.” This mindset encourages us to look for ways to grow, to solve our problems,
and to remedy our weaknesses. It also encourages us to
look for potential in others and help them to grow.
Carol Dweck has specifically studied how these
two different theories play out in the domain of intelligence. To illustrate, you might pose the following problems in class:
Imagine the following: You see a puzzle in a science
magazine and it’s labeled “Test Your IQ!” You work on it
for a very long time, get confused, and start over. You
make very slow progress but finally solve it. How do you
feel? Do you feel sort of dumb because it required so
much effort? Or do you feel smart because you worked
hard and mastered it?
26 Chapter 11 Intelligence
Or, consider this challenge:
Imagine a child you know who keeps getting lots and
lots wrong on his or her schoolwork and asks you for
help. What would you say or do?
(Source: Both problems from Dweck, C. S. (1999). Selftheories: Their role in motivation, personality, development (pp. 39, 84). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.)
Entity and incremental theorists think about effort
differently. Entity theorists view the effort necessary to
solve the science magazine’s IQ puzzle as evidence of
low intelligence. They agree with the statements, “If
you have to work hard on some problems, you’re probably not very good at them,” and “Things come easily
to people who are true geniuses.” Incrementalists, on
the other hand, see effort as something that activates
people’s intelligence and allows them to use it to full
advantage. They are more likely to believe, “When you
are good at something, working hard allows you to really understand it” and “Even geniuses have to work hard
for their discoveries.”
Entity and incremental theorists also respond differently to the child who is doing poorly on his or her
schoolwork. Entity theorists tend to be stumped. They
often have little advice because “it either comes naturally or it doesn’t come.” At best, they express sympathy.
Those who believe that achievement comes only after a
long, effortful process have lots of advice. One incremental theorist responded (Dweck, 1999):
Do you quit a lot? Do you think for a minute and then
stop? If you do, you should think for a long time—two
minutes maybe and if you can’t get it you should read
the problem again. If you can’t get it then, you should
raise your hand and ask the teacher. (p. 84)
People with a fixed view of intelligence see their
poor performance on a task as meaning that they are
dumb. In fact, many indicate that when they fail, they
feel “worthless” or “like a complete loser.” They also
conclude, “If I didn’t do as well in school as I hoped,
I’d think less of myself as a person.” In short, they generalize from academic performance to intelligence to
personal worth. Those with a malleable view of intelligence see failure as indicating that in order to succeed,
they have to do something different in the future. Most
important, they intend to do it. For these people, a specific performance may reflect something about skill
level at the moment, but it says nothing about broader
intellectual abilities. And it certainly suggests nothing
about the individual’s worth as a person.
Dweck notes that most famous geniuses worked
extraordinarily hard, and many of them had very ordinary beginnings. Charles Darwin, Leo Tolstoy, William
James, John Stuart Mill, and Norbert Weiner were not
exceptional children. Brilliant musicians, too, are more
often made than born. Researchers find that, as kids,
these musicians put in thousands of hours of practice.
Those who study creativity have proposed the “tenyear” rule: no truly great creative contributions come
without at least 10 years of intense effort and preparation. Mozart’s earliest compositions were neither original nor particularly noteworthy.
None of this means that people only pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Social support is
important. It can be foolish, cautions Dweck, to believe
that a person continuing in the same environment will
change without any educational or psychological help.
Our personal strivings are vital but so are external supports. Parents and teachers play a particularly important
role. When students do well, adults should praise their
efforts, not their ability. In dealing with a student’s failure, parents and teachers should avoid any global statements and should instead give specific feedback on
what the student did wrong and what he or she might
try next.
Parents and teachers can also teach students to relish a challenge. Doing easy tasks is often a waste of
time. The fun comes in confronting something difficult
and finding strategies that work. Finally, adults should
help children value learning, advises Dweck, more than
grades. Too often kids rely on grades to prove their
worth. Sure, grades are important. But they are not as
significant as learning.
Dweck, C. S. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in
motivation, personality, development. Philadelphia:
Psychology Press.
A. Genetic Influences (pp. 455–457)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Genes and Intelligence
While virtually everyone agrees that both genes and
environment influence intelligence scores, Sandra Scarr
proposes that differences among people can be best
explained as genotype-environment effects. That is, the
genotype is the driving force behind development,
determining how responsive people are to various
opportunities in their environments. Genetic differences
cause people to experience different environments, and
thus to develop different levels and profiles of intelligence. Scarr describes three kinds of genotype-environment effects that account for the way intelligence develops: a passive effect, whereby the genetically related
parents provide an environment that is correlated with
the genotype of the child; an evocative effect, in which
the child’s genotype influences the responses elicited
from others; and an active effect, in which the genotype
influences the child’s selection of experiences.
Presumably, the passive influence declines from infancy
to adolescence, while the active influence increases
over this same period.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 27
Scarr uses the theory to explain three important
findings from research on twins and families: first, that
identical twins come to be more similar than fraternal
twins, and biological siblings come to be more similar
than adopted siblings; second, that similarities between
fraternal twins and between siblings decline from infancy to adolescence; third, that identical twins reared in
different homes have unexpected similarities.
Scarr’s theory accounts for these findings both in
terms of the degree of genetic similarity of twins and
siblings and the degree of similarity between their environments. Assuming that individuals’ environments are
equally influenced by their genotypes, the similarity in
the environments of two individuals becomes a function
of their genetic similarity. For identical twins, the home
environments provided by the parents, the responses the
pair evoke from others, and the active choices the twins
make in their environments lead to striking similarities
in their learning histories. For fraternal twins, a somewhat lower genotype-environment correlation is found,
and thus their environments are moderately similar.
Since the genotypes of adopted siblings are not correlated, neither will be the environments they choose as they
grow older. Actually, the correlation of .60 to .75 for
intelligence between infant fraternal twins is higher
than genetic theory would allow. For older fraternal
twins, the correlation is the usual .55. Similarly, the
intelligence correlation of .25 to .39 for adopted
siblings in early childhood declines to zero in late
adolescence.
How does this theory explain the declining similarities of fraternal twins and adopted siblings? It does so
by noting that the relatively passive influence, which is
created by parents, declines with age, while the active
influence, related more to genotype, increases with age.
As fraternal twins grow older, they choose less similar
environments, whereas their early home environment
was intensely similar. Adopted siblings move from an
early, similar environment created by their adoptive
parents to environments of their own choosing. Because
their genotypes are not related, neither are the chosen
environments.
The high degree of resemblance between identical
twins reared apart is also explained in terms of genotype-environment effects. Given opportunities to choose
from varied opportunities, identical genotypes are
expected to make similar choices. They can also be
expected to evoke similar responses from others.
Differences in their environment would arise only if
their opportunities were restricted so that similar choices could not have been made.
Scarr, S. (1984). Intelligence. In A. Rogers and C.
Scheirer (Eds.), The G. Stanley Hall lecture series, Vol. 4.
Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
B. Environmental Influences (pp. 457–459)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Teaching Intelligence
David Perkins and Tina Grotzer address the question of
whether interventions can teach people to think better
and even raise their IQ. Their review indicates that an
increasing number of studies show that thinking skills
can be taught. They cite the following examples:
1. Project Intelligence, also known as Odyssey, seeks
to teach both the strategies and spirit of good thinking in reasoning, problem solving, and decision
making. Designed for seventh graders, six instructional units identify strategies and provide abundant practice. Scores on a variety of tests, including
the Cattell Culture Fair Test and the Test of
General Abilities, indicated that intervention students outperformed controls.
2. The Philosophy for Children Program uses stories
focused on everyday events to help children from
kindergarten to high school reflect on the process
of inquiry, inductive reasoning, and the nature of
explanation. In addition to producing gains in reading and mathematics performance, the program
increases reasoning ability in other domains.
3. Schoenfeld’s Heuristic Instruction taught heuristics
for mathematics problems that helped students
reorganize their patterns of problem solving.
Intervention students outscored controls not only in
solving mathematics problems but in a transfer test
of recognizing related problems. They made greater
gains in generating plausible solutions to problems
and in systematicity and thoughtfulness such as
knowing how to begin.
4. The Cognitive Acceleration through Science
Education (CASE) program teaches patterns of
thinking in science (such as the isolation and control of variables) while attending to metacognition
and transfer of knowledge and strategies. CASE
introduces cognitive dissonance around particular
puzzles that prompts students to examine their
assumptions and prior conceptions. In addition to
showing improvement on science achievement
tests, participants showed transfer to other subjects.
In short, the strategies seemed to help students
become more intelligent learners.
5. The Practical Intelligence for Schools (PIFS) program attempts to foster students’ understanding of
five themes: knowing the point of the topic, technique, or assignment; knowing one’s strengths and
weaknesses; knowing the demands of different subjects and assignments; knowing steps and strategies; and reflection in assessing and revising.
Students in the experimental group did better in
measures of practical and academic abilities. They
also did better on practical abilities in reading,
28 Chapter 11 Intelligence
homework, and test taking. PIFS students were
rated as more apt to display active-learning skills
and behaviors.
Perkins and Grotzer note that these successful programs invariably seek to reorganize thinking. They do
so by attending to five important categories of cognitive
reorganization: thinking strategies, metacognition (monitoring and management of one’s thinking), dispositions
(beliefs about the importance of effort in learning and
problem-solving), distributed cognition (knowing how
to use physical, social, and symbolic support systems),
and transfer (broadening the application of acquired
concepts and behaviors).
Do the interventions lead to genuine gains in intelligence? Perkins and Grotzer argue that how one
answers that question depends largely on one’s definition of intelligence. If one takes an essentialist view,
defining intelligence in terms of neurological efficiency,
the programs only sometimes and modestly advance
intelligence. However, taking a more eclectic view, the
interventions clearly “teach intelligence because they
provide people with the psychological resources to
think better across a range of contexts.”
Perkins, D. N., & Grotzer, T.A. (1997). Teaching intelligence. American Psychologist, 52, 1125–1133.
C. Group Differences in Intelligence Test Scores
(pp. 459–464)
Classroom Exercise: Blacks as a “Castelike” Minority
You can introduce John Ogbu’s “caste” point of view to
extend the text discussion of how most expert psychologists agree that the racial gap in intelligence scores is
environmentally determined. Begin by distributing a
copy of Handout 11–14, from “Tom, the Dancing Bug.”
Ogbu, a Nigerian anthropologist, suggests that
most blacks in the United States are in a social position
strikingly similar to other “castelike” minorities, such
as the Harijans of India, the Maoris of New Zealand,
and the Burakumi of Japan. The gap in intelligence
scores between the privileged in these countries and
their respective minority groups is about the same (10
to 15 points) as it is between whites and blacks in the
United States.
In brief, Ogbu argues that the black–white intelligence-score gap and controversy is not a uniquely
American issue. The same gap and debate occur wherever there are castelike divisions. Being a castelike
minority means being a victim of prejudice, which, as
we know, has a number of disastrous psychological
consequences. Most minority children grow up believing that life will be restricted to a small and unrewarding set of options. They are convinced that it will be
difficult if not impossible to advance in mainstream
society. As a result, black children turn their back on
school as a possible avenue to a better future. In addition, teachers come to expect less of black children and
tacitly treat them in ways that make the expectation
come true. “Too many educators underestimate the ability of poor kids generally, and castelike minorities in
particular,” writes Frederick Erikson of the University
of Pennsylvania. “One of the most powerful influences
on a black child is the beliefs of his teachers about his
academic performance.” Poor school performance and
low intelligence scores are sometimes the product of a
self-fulfilling prophecy.
The poverty that inevitably comes with castelike
status also worsens the chances of educational success.
These impoverished children experience stresses from
which their more privileged classmates are insulated.
When something goes wrong in the family, they are
much more likely to carry their problems into their
school life and it affects their performance.
Perhaps most surprising is Ogbu’s study comparing
two groups of black high school students, one doing
well in school and the other failing. The group who
fared poorly saw being studious as betraying their racial
identity—by “acting white” in the students’ words. “It’s
not that the black children can’t do the work, but they
don’t make the effort,” said Ogbu. “The underlying
issue for them is one of racial identity. They see doing
well and getting a high-status job as selling out. You see
the same dynamic among Mexican-American children.
They identify achievement with betraying their roots.”
The power of the environment to shape intelligence
scores becomes most evident when castelike minorities
emigrate. Once they become acclimated in a country
where they are free of social discrimination, their children’s intelligence scores and school performance
match those of other children in the new country. For
example, the intelligence-score gap between the
Burakumi and other Japanese is about as large as that
between blacks and whites in the United States.
However, when the Burakumi come to this country,
where they are treated like any other Japanese, their
children do as well on intelligence tests and in school as
do other Japanese.
Goleman, D. (1991). An emerging theory on blacks’ IQ
scores. In D. Goleman (Ed.), Psychology updates. New
York: HarperCollins.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Environmental Explanation
of Group Differences
The existence of hereditary variation within a group
does not necessitate a hereditary explanation for the differences between groups. You can extend the text illustration of this important point with a similar example
provided by Stephen Jay Gould. He argues that even if
intelligence were 70 percent heritable, this would not
prove that racial or cultural differences were genetic.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 29
For example, height is about 95 percent heritable. Imagine now, he says, a group of malnourished Africans
whose average height is several inches less than that of
North Americans. The Africans would not remain shorter if they were properly fed. Similarly, the average
height in Japan has gone up several inches since World
War II, but no one argues that the Japanese gene pool
has changed.
Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York:
Norton.
D. The Question of Bias (pp. 464–466)
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The National Commission on
Testing and Public Policy
In May 1990, the National Commission on Testing and
Public Policy released a study highly critical of standardized, multiple-choice tests. It called for a restructuring of educational and employment testing in order to
promote the talents of all Americans. “From Gatekeeper
to Gateway: Transforming Testing in America” was
based on a three-year study of more than 75 scholarly
reports, as well as hearings across the country. Funded
by the Ford Foundation, the commission included business and education leaders, experts on minority issues,
a former president of the College Board, and two psychologists. They heard testimony from various groups,
including the American Psychological Association.
According to Commission Director George
Madaus, the most important goal of educators and businesspeople is “to move away from a single test score to
select people, the way we’ve been using them, to open
doors, to identify talent and to help nurture talent.” The
study reported that standardized test scores often are the
single barrier keeping promising students out of schools
and competent employees from obtaining jobs or promotions.
In conducting its work, the Commission recognized
that the United States will face a severe labor shortage
in the coming years. They wrote, “In the past, the nation was able to rely upon a largely unskilled and abundant labor supply to fuel the growth of its economy.
Tests were most often used to select among plentiful
students and workers, and few worried about those
rejected.” Now, however, “America’s entry-level work
force is shrinking and is increasingly composed of linguistic, racial and cultural minority groups whose talents and capacities have often been underdeveloped and
undervalued.”
With this reality in mind, the Commission concluded that no testing program should be tolerated if it leads
to classification of people as “not able to learn” and
shunts them into dead-end situations. In terms of educational testing policy, tests should assess what students
are ready to learn next and not what they are unable to
learn.
Among the Commission’s more specific recommendations were the following.
1. Ban standardized testing for all elementary students, especially for those in preschool and first
grade.
2. Instead of merely completing multiple-choice tests,
candidates should supply answers, perform acts,
and demonstrate skills.
3. The fairness and accuracy of all test-based classifications should be evaluated critically in terms of
the opportunities being allocated.
4. Test scores should not be used by themselves to
determine kindergarten entry, grade promotion,
graduation, or employment opportunities.
5. The effectiveness of institutions and programs
should be assessed differently from that of
individuals.
Moses, S. (1990, August). Panel says tests shut too many
out. APA Monitor, p. 28.
Staff (1990, May 23). Panel flunks standardized testing.
Grand Rapids Press, pp. A1, A4.
Videocassette: The Brain, 2nd ed., Module 4:
Intelligence and Culture
See the Faculty Guide that accompanies The Brain
video modules for a description.
Classroom Exercise: Culture-Biased and Culture-Fair
Tests
In response to the criticism that tests are culturally
biased, several psychologists have attempted to devise
instruments that are culture-fair. The Culture Fair
Intelligence Test (CFIT) assesses individual intelligence
in a manner designed to reduce, as much as possible,
the influence of verbal fluency, cultural climate, and
educational level. Presumably, the test permits a cleaner
separation of natural ability from specific learning and
thus enables a better analysis and prediction of the individual’s ultimate potential.
Handout 11–15 contains four sample items from
Scale 2, Form A of the CFIT. These items are used to
introduce each of the four tests that compose the scale.
Instruct students to examine the thinking processes they
use to arrive at the correct answers. Read the following
instructions for each item.
1. “Look at the first item. See how the black part
moves. It begins at the top and moves around the
circle. Look at the five choices for the right answer.
Which one is it? (Pause.) Yes, it’s number ‘1’. Put
‘1’ in the empty box.”
30 Chapter 11 Intelligence
2. “Look at the second item. There are five figures in
a row. Four are the same and one is different in
some way from all the others? Which one is it?
(Pause.) Yes, it’s the first one. It’s black and all the
others are white. Put ‘1’ in the empty box.”
3. “Look at the third item. There are four small boxes
in the large square at the left. (Point.) One of them
is dotted and empty. Which one of the five boxes
on the right (point) is the correct one to fill in the
dotted empty box? (Pause.) Yes, it’s ‘4’. Put ‘4’ in
the empty box.”
4. “Look at the fourth item. In the separate box at the
left (point) the dot is inside the egg-shaped figure,
but under the line Now we have to find another
box where we can do just the same. Which one is
it? (Pause.) Yes, the second. That’s the only right
one. Put ‘2’ in the empty box.”
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Intelligence as Culturally
Defined
In the first section of the text chapter, Myers notes that
intelligence is a socially constructed concept. Cultures
deem “intelligent” whatever attributes enable success in
their culture. Psychologists who view intelligence as the
successful adaptation to the environment are skeptical
about the prospects for a “culture-free” test of intelligence. They maintain that tests designed for one culture
are notoriously faulty when applied to another. Joseph
Glick’s study of Liberia’s Kpelle tribesmen provides a
classic and amusing example. Glick asked the tribesmen to sort a group of objects sensibly. To his puzzlement, they insisted on grouping the objects by function
(for example, placing a potato with a hoe) rather than
by taxonomy (placing the potato with other foods). On
the basis of Western standards, this indicated an inferior
style of sorting and lower intelligence. After Glick
demonstrated the “correct” answer, one of the tribesmen
remarked that only a stupid person would sort things
that way. When Glick thereafter asked tribesmen to sort
items the way a stupid person would, they sorted them
taxonomically without hesitation or difficulty.
Sternberg and Kaufman show how, in contrast to
Western cultures, African and Asian cultures are much
more likely to emphasize social skills in their conception of intelligence. For example, in Africa, intelligence
includes skills that help to establish and maintain harmonious and stable intergroup relations. Chewa adults
in Zambia emphasize social responsibility, cooperation,
and obedience as important to intelligence. Intelligent
children are expected to be respectful to adults. Similarly Kenyan parents emphasize responsible participation in family and social life as important aspects of
intelligence. In Zimbabwe, the word for intelligence,
ngware, means to be prudent and cautious, particularly
in social relationships.
McKean, K. (1985, October). Intelligence: New ways to
measure the wisdom of man. Discover, 25–4 1.
Sternberg, R. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (1998). Human abilities. In J. T. Spence, J. M. Darley, & D. J. Foss (Eds.),
Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 49, pp. 479–502).
Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: The SAT: A Case Study in
Testing
The history of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), a test
used in college admissions, provides a wonderful case
study for discussing the controversy that has surrounded
intelligence testing. It provides the opportunity to introduce the distinction between aptitude and achievement
tests, the concepts of reliability and validity, and the
question of bias in testing. You might either introduce
or conclude your discussion of this chapter with the
topic. Richard C. Atkinson’s personal perspective on the
history of this test provides an excellent source of material for classroom lecture and discussion. You might
begin the discussion by asking students whether they
believe SAT scores should be used in college admissions or the awarding of scholarships. Why or why not?
Atkinson notes that after World War II, U.S. colleges and universities gradually adopted standardized
tests as part of their admissions process. Most schools
used the SAT; some used the American College Testing
Program (ACT).
The College Board, which owns the SAT, has made
a series of changes in the test since its beginnings. The
original SAT became the SAT I—a 3-hour test that
emphasized verbal aptitude but added a section on math
skills typically taught in grades one through eight. The
College Board also added 23 one-hour SAT II tests to
measure a students’ achievement in specific subjects,
including history, chemistry, and the foreign languages.
As Atkinson explains, most colleges required only the
SAT I, although some also required two or three SAT II
tests. Typically, when the SAT has been mentioned in
the media, the reference has been to the SAT I.
Throughout its history, the SAT has been surrounded by controversy. Carl Brigham, a Princeton psychologist who created the original SAT, modeled the test after
earlier IQ tests and regarded it as a measure of innate
mental ability. Even Alfred Binet, who thought such
tests could be useful in a clinical setting, rejected the
notion that they provided a meaningful measure of
mental ability that could be used to rank individuals of
normal intelligence.
In serving on the Board on Testing and Assessment
(a board of the National Research Council that advises
the federal government on testing issues), Atkinson was
distressed that members of the College Board touted the
SAT as a true measure of intelligence and seemed
oblivious to research suggesting that achievement tests
Chapter 11 Intelligence 31
were a better predictor of college success than aptitude
tests. Also troubled by what he thought was his granddaughter’s waste of study time preparing for the SAT,
Atkinson drafted a paper arguing that admissions tests
should not try to measure “innate intelligence” but
should focus on achievement, that is, what the student
had actually learned in high school. In addition, he
argued that such tests should include an essay component and should cover more advanced mathematics.
Finally, he argued that a crucial aspect of admissions
tests was to convey to students, teachers, and parents
the importance of learning to write and the necessity of
mastering at least eighth- through tenth-grade mathematics.
In 2001, the unpublished paper became the basis
for Atkinson’s famous speech. As president of the
University of California, he announced that he would
recommend that University of California, one of the
largest public educational systems in the country, no
longer use the SAT in its admissions process. Once a
distinguished visiting scholar at ETS, Atkinson himself
took several SAT sample tests, hoping to find some
value in them. His conclusion? “America’s overemphasis on the SAT is compromising our educational system.” He argues that when students do poorly, neither
parents nor teachers can point to specific concepts they
need to work on. At a time when states are stressing
standards and accountability, the SAT seems tied to neither. He proposes new standardized tests linked to state
standards so that anyone who masters the curriculum
can succeed.
Research findings at the University of California
lended support to Atkinson’s claims. A study that examined the effectiveness of high school grades and various
combinations of SAT I and SAT II scores in predicting
college success found that the SAT II was a far better
predictor of college grades than the SAT I. The data
also indicated that the predictive validity of the SAT II
is much less affected by differences in socioeconomic
background than is the SAT I. Finally, the data indicated that the best single predictor of student performance
was the SAT II writing test. Atkinson notes that, given
the importance of writing ability at the college level, it
should not have been surprising that a test of actual
writing correlates strongly with college grades.
Largely in response to Atkinson’s criticisms, the
trustees of the College Board announced in late June
2002 major changes to the SAT I. Beginning in spring
2005, the revised SAT I includes a 25-minute essay
requiring students to produce an actual writing sample,
a more substantial mathematics section, and a reading
comprehension section that does not include verbal
analogies. Many observers concluded that the College
Board met Atkinson’s challenge by recasting the SAT I
as an out-and-out achievement test of reading, writing,
and math. Atkinson himself states, “I believe this is an
ideal solution that reflects the changes called for in my
speech.” The University of California plans to use the
new SAT I and to continue to augment it with two
SAT II tests.
There seems little doubt that the College Board (a
powerful group of 4300 educational institutions) is
using the new SAT to mold the U.S. secondary system.
By requiring an essay, it is telling schools to produce
better writers. By including advanced algebra, it is calling for a curriculum that emphasizes mathematics. The
SAT, some observers (e.g., Cloud, 2003) note, could
help produce a national curriculum without the passage
of a single law. Clearly, some students will do better on
the new test, while others will do worse. For example,
girls tend to do better than boys on writing exams and
thus girls could profit from the new essay. Boys usually
outperform girls on the math section, but the new exam
actually contains fewer abstract-reasoning items on
which boys often excel. “There’s a danger that making
the test too curriculum-dependent will actually increase
overall score gaps for some minority groups,” notes
Rebecca Zwick, a former chair of the College Board’s
SAT Committee. “Because we have such huge disparities in the quality of schooling in this country, kids who
go to crummy schools may be disadvantaged.”
Atkinson, R. C. (2005, May). College admissions
and the SAT. APS Observer, 15–22.
Cloud, J. (2003, October 27). Inside the new SAT.
Time, 48–56.
Goldstein, A. (2001, February 26). Is this the end for the
SAT? Time, 62–63.
Henry, T. (1993, February 2). SATs are of little use to
colleges, study says. USA Today, p. 1D.
Kelly, D. (1993, August 19). Overall SAT scores are
higher, but girls still lag. USA Today, p. 3D.
Kelly, D. (1996, August 23). SAT adjustment worth 100
points. USA Today, pp. 1D, 2D.
Markheim, M. B. (1999, September 1). Students to get
SAT credit for ‘striving.’ USA Today, p. 1A.
Markheim, M. B. (2002, June 26). SAT exam up for big
revision, USA Today, p. 1A.
Lecture/Discussion Topic: Unanswered Questions about
Intelligence
The publication of Herrnstein and Murray’s The Bell
Curve in the fall of 1994 resurrected old questions
about the nature of intelligence and the meaning of
intelligence test scores. In an effort to address this
debate, the American Psychological Association
appointed a Task Force to prepare an authoritative
report on intelligence. Chaired by Ulric Neisser, the
Task Force published its report in the February 1996
32 Chapter 11 Intelligence
issue of the American Psychologist. The article provides
an excellent review of the intelligence literature and
ends with directions for future research. You might conclude your discussion of the text chapter by citing the
following issues that the Task Force believes still need
to be answered.
1. Genetic factors contribute substantially to individual differences in intelligence but the pathway by
which genes produce their effects is still unknown.
Moreover, the impact of genetic differences
increases with age, but we do not know why.
2. Environmental factors also make a significant contribution to the development of intelligence.
However, we do not clearly understand what those
factors are or how they work. School attendance is
important but we do not know what aspects of
schooling are critical.
3. The effect of nutrition is unclear. Obviously, severe
childhood malnutrition has negative effects but the
notion that particular “micronutrients” may
increase intelligence in otherwise adequately fed
populations has not been convincingly demonstrated.
4. Measures of information-processing speed correlate
with intelligence scores but there is no easy theoretical interpretation of these findings.
5. Mean scores on intelligence tests are rising steadily, going up a full standard deviation in the last half
century. No one is certain why this is happening or
what it means.
6. The difference between the intelligence test scores
of blacks and whites (about one standard deviation,
although it may be decreasing) does not result from
any obvious biases in test construction and administration. Nor does this difference simply reflect
differences in socioeconomic status. Although
explanations based on caste and culture may be
appropriate, they lack firm empirical support. There
is certainly no support for a genetic interpretation.
7. Standardized tests do not sample all forms of intelligence. Obvious examples include creativity, wisdom, practical sense, and social sensitivity. We
know little about these abilities in terms of how
they develop or how they are related to more traditional measures of intelligence.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 33
HANDOUT 11–1
Fact or Falsehood?
T F
1.
People with higher IQs have longer life spans.
T F
2.
Exceptionally creative architects, mathematicians, scientists, and engineers usually
score no higher on intelligence tests than do their less creative peers.
T F
3.
Highly educated people die with more synapses than their less-educated peers.”
T F
4.
There is a slight positive correlation between brain size and intelligence score.
T F
5.
The concern with individual differences in intelligence is strictly a twentiethcentury American phenomenon.
T F
6.
Today’s Americans score higher on IQ tests than Americans did in the 1930s.
T F
7.
How quickly 2- to 7-month-old babies become bored with a picture is one indicator
of later intelligence.
T F
8.
Among the mentally retarded, males outnumber females by 50 percent.
T F
9.
As adopted children grow older, their intelligence scores become more similar to
those of their biological parents than to those of their adoptive parents.
T F
10.
Aptitude score is a much better predictor of the college performance of whites than
it is of blacks.
34 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–2
Behavioral Checklist
Rate each of the following in terms of how characteristic it is of you. Write a number from 1 to 9 in the blank before
each item, with “1” meaning “extremely uncharacteristic of me” and “9” meaning “extremely characteristic of me.”
I.
Practical problem-solving ability
1. Reasons logically and well
2. Identifies connections among ideas
3. Sees all aspects of a problem
4. Keeps an open mind
5. Responds thoughtfully to others’ ideas
6. Sizes up situations well
7. Gets to the heart of the problem
8. Interprets information accurately
9. Makes good decisions
10. Goes to original sources for basic information
11. Poses problems in an optimal way
12. Is a good source of ideas
13. Perceives implied assumptions and conclusions
14. Listens to all sides of an argument
15. Deals with problems resourcefully
II.
Verbal ability
16. Speaks clearly and articulately
17. Is verbally fluent
18. Converses well
19. Is knowledgeable about a particular area of subject matter
20. Studies hard
21. Reads with high comprehension
22. Reads widely
23. Writes without difficulty
24. Sets aside time for reading
25. Displays good vocabulary
III. Social competence
26. Accepts others for what they are
27. Admits mistakes
28. Displays interest in the world at large
29. Is on time for appointments
30. Has social conscience
31. Thinks before speaking and doing
32. Displays curiosity
33. Does not make snap judgments
34. Makes fair judgments
35. Assesses well the relevance of information to a problem at hand
36. Is sensitive to other people’s needs and desires
37. Is frank and honest with self and others
38. Displays interest in the immediate environment
Source: Excerpt from INTELLIGENCE APPLIED by Robert J. Sternberg. Copyright © 1986. Reprinted by permission.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 35
HANDOUT 11–3
Maudsley Personality Inventory, Short Form
Instructions: The following questions pertain to the way people behave, feel, and act. Decide whether the items represent your usual way of acting or feeling, and circle either “Yes” or “No” for each. If you find it absolutely impossible
to decide, circle the “?,” but use this answer sparingly.
1. Do you sometimes feel happy, sometimes depressed, without any apparent reason?
YES
?
NO
2. Do you have frequent ups and downs in mood, either with or without apparent cause?
YES
?
NO
?
NO
3. Are you inclined to be moody?
YES
4. Does your mind often wander while you are trying to concentrate?
YES
?
NO
5. Are you frequently “lost in thought” even when supposed to be taking part in a conversation?
YES
?
NO
6. Are you sometimes bubbling over with energy and sometimes very sluggish?
YES
?
NO
7. Do you prefer action to planning for action?
YES
?
NO
8. Are you happiest when you get involved in some project that calls for rapid action?
YES
?
NO
9. Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends?
YES
?
NO
10. Are you inclined to be quick and sure in your actions?
YES
?
NO
11. Would you rate yourself as a lively individual?
YES
?
NO
12. Would you be very unhappy if you were prevented from making numerous social contacts?
YES
?
NO
Source: Eysenck, H. J. (1970). The structure of human personality. Copyright © 1970 H. J. Eysenck. Reprinted by permission of Thomson Publishers, Ltd.
36 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–4
Questionnaire for Business Management
This task asks you about your views on matters pertaining to the work of a manager. The questions ask you to rate
the importance you would assign to various items in making work-related decisions and judgments. Use a 1 to 7
rating scale, with 1 signifying “not important,” 4 signifying “moderately important,” and 7 signifying “extremely
important.”
1
not
important
2
3
4
moderately
important
5
6
7
extremely
important
Try to use the entire scale when responding, although not necessarily for each question. For example, you may decide
that none of the items listed for a particular question are important, or that they all are. There are, of course, no “correct” answers. You are encouraged to scan briefly the items of a given question before responding, to get some idea of
the range of importance for the items. Remember, you are being asked to rate the importance you personally would
assign each item in making the judgment or decision mentioned in the question stem.
1.
It is your second year as a mid-level manager in a company in the communications industry. You head a department of about 30 people. The evaluation of your first year on the job has been generally favorable. Performance
ratings for your department are at least as good as they were before you took over, and perhaps even a little better. You have two assistants. One is quite capable, but the other just seems to go through the motions without
being of much real help.
You believe that, although you are well-liked, there is little that would distinguish you in the eyes of your
superiors from the nine other managers at a comparable level in the company.
Your goal is rapid promotion to the top of the company. The following is a list of things you are considering doing in the next two months. You obviously cannot do them all. Rate the importance of each as a means of
reaching your goal.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
2.
Participate in a series of panel discussions to be shown on the local public television station.
Find ways to make sure your superiors are aware of your important accomplishments.
As a means of being noticed, propose a solution to a problem outside the scope of your immediate department that you would be willing to take charge of.
When making decisions, give a great deal of weight to the way your superior likes things to be
done.
Accept a friend’s invitation to join the exclusive country club that many higher-level executives
belong to.
Your company has sent you to a university to recruit and interview potential trainees for management positions.
You have been considering characteristics of students that are important to later success in business. Rate the
importance of the following student characteristics by the extent to which they may lead to later success in
business.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
ability to set priorities according to the importance of the task
motivation
ability to follow through and complete tasks
ability to promote one’s ideas, to convince others of the worth of one’s work
the need to win at everything no matter what the cost
Chapter 11 Intelligence 37
HANDOUT 11–4 (continued )
3.
A number of factors enter into the establishment of a good reputation in a company as a manager. Consider the
following factors and rate their importance.
a. critical thinking ability
b. speaking ability
c. extent of college education and the prestige of the school attended
d. no hesitancy to take extraordinarily risky courses of action
e. a keen sense of what superiors can be sold on
4.
Rate the following strategies of working according to how important you believe them to be for doing well at
the day-to-day work of a business manager.
a. Think in terms of tasks accomplished rather than hours spent working.
b. Be in charge of all phases of every task or project you are involved with.
c. Use a daily list of goals arranged according to your priorities.
d. Carefully consider the optimal strategy before beginning a task.
e. Reward yourself upon completion of important tasks.
5.
You are looking for several new projects to tackle. You have a list of possible projects and desire to pick the
best two or three. Rate the importance of the following considerations when selecting projects.
a. Doing the project should prove to be fun.
b. The project should attract the attention of the local media.
c. The project is of special importance to me personally.
d. The risk of making a mistake is virtually nonexistent.
e. The project will require working directly with several senior executives.
Source: Excerpt from INTELLIGENCE APPLIED by Robert J. Sternberg. Copyright © 1986. Reprinted by permission.
38 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–5
Autism-Spectrum Quotient
For each statement, indicate your agreement or disagreement by circling the appropriate alternative.
1. I prefer to do things with others rather than on my own.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
2. I prefer to do things the same way over and over again.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
3. If I try to imagine something, I find it very easy to create a picture in my mind.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
4. I frequently get so strongly absorbed in one thing that I lose sight of other things.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
5. I often notice small sounds when others do not.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
6. I usually notice car number plates or similar strings of information.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
7. Other people frequently tell me that what I’ve said is impolite, even though I think it is polite.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
8. When I’m reading a story, I can easily imagine what the characters might look like.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
9. I am fascinated by dates.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
10. In a social group, I can easily keep track of several different people’s conversations.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Chapter 11 Intelligence 39
HANDOUT 11–5 (continued )
11. I find social situations easy.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
12. I tend to notice details that others do not.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
13. I would rather go to a library than to a party.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
14. I find making up stories easy.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
15. I find myself drawn more strongly to people than to things.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
16. I tend to have very strong interests, which I get upset about if I can’t pursue.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
17. I enjoy social chitchat.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
18. When I talk, it isn’t always easy for others to get a word in edgewise.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
19. I am fascinated by numbers.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
20. When I’m reading a story, I find it difficult to work out the characters’ intentions.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
21. I don’t particularly enjoy reading fiction.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
is to
40 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–5 (continued )
22. I find it hard to make new friends.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
23. I notice patterns in things all the time.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
24. I would rather go to the theater than to a museum.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
25. It does not upset me if my daily routine is disturbed.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
26. I frequently find that I don’t know how to keep a conversation going.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
27. I find it easy to ‘read between the lines’ when someone is talking to me.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
28. I usually concentrate more on the whole picture, rather than on the small details.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
29. I am not very good at remembering phone numbers.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
30. I don’t usually notice small changes in a situation or a person’s appearance.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
31. I know how to tell if someone listening to me is getting bored.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
32. I find it easy to do more than one thing at once.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
33. When I talk on the phone, I’m not sure when it’s my turn to speak.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Chapter 11 Intelligence 41
HANDOUT 11–5 (continued )
34. I enjoy doing things spontaneously.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
35. I am often the last to understand the point of a joke.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
36. I find it easy to work out what someone is thinking or feeling just by looking at their face.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
37. If there is an interruption, I can switch back to what I was doing very quickly.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
38. I am good at social chitchat.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
39. People often tell me that I keep going on and on about the same thing.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
40. When I was young, I used to enjoy playing games involving pretending with other children.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
41. I like to collect information about categories of things (e.g., types of cars, birds, trains, plants).
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
42. I find it difficult to imagine what it would be like to be someone else.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
43. I like to carefully plan any activities I participate in.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
44. I enjoy social occasions.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
42 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–5 (continued )
45. I find it difficult to work out people’s intentions.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
46. New situations make me anxious.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
47. I enjoy meeting new people.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
48. I am a good diplomat.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
49. I am not very good at remembering people’s date of birth.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
50. I find it very easy to play games with children that involve pretending.
Definitely
agree
Slightly
agree
Slightly
disagree
Definitely
disagree
Source: Baron-Cohen, et al. (2001). The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/High-functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31, 517. (Test items appear in Appendix 1: The AQ.) Copyright © 2001. Reprinted by permission.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 43
HANDOUT 11–6
Charles and Margaret are both engineers and have been married for 5 years. Three years ago, Charles was
offered a job in Europe. Margaret agreed to quit her job in the United States and move to Europe with
Charles. The job was an excellent career move for Charles. Soon after the move they had a baby. After the
birth, Margaret decided to start working again and, with effort, found a very exciting job that paid well and
promised real security. Meanwhile, Charles was offered a transfer back to the United States. Margaret feels
she needs another year or two in her new job to meaningfully advance her career. She is also tired of moving. She has already given up a lot of time following Charles around. Charles knows that his wife’s job is as
important as his own but he thinks returning to the United States would help both their careers in the end.
What should Charles do?
Source: R. J. Sternberg, Wisdom, schooling, and society. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American
Psychological Association, Chicago, IL. Copyright © 2002. Reprinted by permission of Dr. Robert Sternberg.
44 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–7
Emotional Intelligence Scale
Instructions: Indicate the extent to which each item applies to you using the following scale:
1 = strongly disagree
2 = disagree
3 = neither disagree nor agree
4 = agree
5 = strongly agree
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
I know when to speak about my personal problems to others.
When I am faced with obstacles, I remember times I faced similar obstacles and overcame them.
I expect that I will do well on most things I try.
Other people find it easy to confide in me.
I find it hard to understand the nonverbal messages of other people.
Some of the major events of my life have led me to re-evaluate what is important and not important.
When my mood changes, I see new possibilities.
Emotions are some of the things that make my life worth living.
I am aware of my emotions as I experience them.
I expect good things to happen.
I like to share my emotions with others.
When I experience a positive emotion, I know how to make it last.
I arrange events others enjoy.
I seek out activities that make me happy.
I am aware of the nonverbal messages I send to others.
I present myself in a way that makes a good impression on others.
When I am in a positive mood, solving problems is easy for me.
By looking at their facial expressions, I recognize the emotions people are experiencing.
I know why my emotions change.
When I am in a positive mood, I am able to come up with new ideas.
I have control over my emotions.
I easily recognize my emotions as I experience them.
I motivate myself by imagining a good outcome to tasks I take on.
I compliment others when they have done something well.
I am aware of the nonverbal messages other people send.
When another person tells me about an important event in his or her life, I almost feel as though I have
experienced this event myself.
When I feel a change in emotions, I tend to come up with new ideas.
When I am faced with a challenge, I give up because I believe I will fail.
I know what other people are feeling just by looking at them.
I help other people feel better when they are down.
I use good moods to help myself keep trying in the face of obstacles.
I can tell how people are feeling by listening to the tone of their voice.
It is difficult for me to understand why people feel the way they do.
Source: Reprinted from Personality and Individual Differences, 25, N. S. Schutte et al. Development and validation of a
measure of emotional intelligence, 167–177. Copyright 1998, with permission from Elsevier.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 45
HANDOUT 11–8
World War I Intelligence Test
Match your wits with World War I-era recruits with the following questions from actual army intelligence tests.
Circle the letter in front of the correct answer.
1. Bull Durham is the name of a
A. chewing gum
B. aluminum ware
C. tobacco
D. clothing
8. Soap is made by
A. T. Babbitt
B. Smith & Wesson
C. W. L. Douglas
D. Swift & Co.
2. Seven-up is played with
A. rackets
B. cards
C. pins
D. dice
9. Laura Jean Libby is known as a
A. singer
B. suffragist
C. writer
D. army nurse
3. The Merino is a kind of
A. horse
B. sheep
C. goat
D. cow
10. An air-cooled engine is used in the
A. Buick
B. Packard
C. Franklin
D. Ford
4. The most prominent industry of Minneapolis is
A. flour
B. packing
C. automobiles
D. brewing
11. A house is better than a tent, because
A. it costs more
B. it is more comfortable
C. it is made of wood
5. Garnets are usually
A. yellow
B. blue
C. green
D. red
6. The Orpington is a kind of
A. fowl
B. horse
C. granite
D. cattle
7. George Ade is famous as a
A. baseball player
B. comic artist
C. actor
D. author
12. Why does it pay to get a good education?
A. it makes a man more useful and happy
B. it makes work for teachers
C. it makes demand for buildings for schools and
colleges
13. If the grocer should give you too much money in
making change, what is the right thing to do?
A. buy some candy off him with it
B. give it to the first poor man you meet
C. tell him of his mistake
14. Why should food be chewed before swallowing?
A. it is better for the health
B. it is bad manners to swallow without chewing
C. chewing keeps the teeth in condition
46 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–8 (continued )
15. If you saw a train approaching a broken track, you
should
A. telephone for an ambulance
B. signal the engineer to stop the train
C. look for a piece of rail to fit in
16. If you are lost in a forest in the daytime, what is
the thing to do?
A. hurry to the nearest house you know of
B. look for something to eat
C. use the sun or a compass for a guide
17. It is better to fight than to run, because
A. cowards are shot
B. it is more honorable
C. if you run you may get shot in the back
18. Why should all parents be made to send their children to school? Because
A. it prepares them for adult life
B. it keeps them out of mischief
C. they are too young to work
19. Why do some men who could afford to own a
house live in a rented one? Because
A. they don’t have to pay taxes
B. they don’t have to buy a rented house
C. they can make more by investing the money
the house would cost
20. Why is beef better food than cabbage? Because
A. it tastes better
B. it is more nourishing
C. it is harder to obtain
Source: Reprinted by permission of the American Social History Project/Center for Media and Learning. The Graduate
Center. CUNY. historymatters@gmu.edu.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 47
HANDOUT 11–9
How Smart Are You?
The following twenty questions represent what you may encounter on an intelligence test, although we tried to make
them a little more amusing than the average IQ-type question. Take the twenty questions and mark your answers carefully. Time yourself very carefully and work as quickly as you can.
Time Started:
1. The day before two days after the day before tomorrow is SATURDAY. What day is it today?
2. What comes next, most logically, in the following sequence?
SAIBLCVDEERFAGNHNIIJVKELRMSNAOR
a. P Y
b. B Q
c. R R
d. B R
3. What is one twentieth of one half of one tenth of 10,000?
4. What is the following scrambled word?
NNREAIVARYS
5. In the following examples, each set of symbols stands for a worD. Study all three words given and the symbol
equivalent and translate the fourth line into a word.
GREEN
GRASS
MARKS
6. Which of the sentences given below means approximately the same as: “beauty is only skin deep”?
a. Some actresses are made up by the studios so that you cannot tell what they really look like.
b. Don’t judge a book by its cover.
c. Some people have prettier appearances than others.
d. Good looks don’t matter that much.
48 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–9 (continued )
7. Which of the figures shown below the line of drawings best continues the sequence?
a
b
c
d
8. Canoe is to ocean liner as glider is to:
a. kite
b. airplane
c. balloon
d. car
9. Everyone at the Mensa party contest won prizes. Tom won more than Sally; Ann won less than Jane; Jane won
less than Sally but more than Walter. Walter won fewer prizes than Ann. Who won the most prizes?
10. There is one five-letter word which can be inserted in each of the two blanks below. When you have put in the
right word, you will have four new words, two on each line.
(Example: Place WORK on the line between HAND
PLACE, giving HANDWORK and WORKPLACE.)
BOAT
WORK
DOG
HOLD
11. Tom, Jim, Peter, Susan, and Jane all took the Mensa test. Jane scored higher than Tom, Jim scored lower than
Peter but higher than Susan, and Peter scored lower than Tom. All of them are eligible to join Mensa, but who
had the highest score?
12. If it were two hours later, it would be half as long until midnight as it would be if it were an hour later. What
time is it now?
13. Pear is to apple as potato is to:
a. banana b. radish
c. strawberry d. lettuce
14. Continue the following number series below with the group of numbers which best continues the series.
1 10 3 9 5 8 7 7 9 6 ? ?
a. 11 5
b. 10 5
c. 10 4 d. 11 6
15. Which of the following is least like the others?
a. poem
b. novel
c. painting
d. statue
e. flower
16. What is the following word when it is unscrambled?
H C P R AAT E U
17. What is the number that is one half of one quarter of one tenth of four hundred?
18. Which of the sentences given below means approximately the same as the proverb: “Don’t count your chickens
until they are hatched”?
a. Some eggs have double yolks so you can’t really count eggs and chickens.
b. You can’t walk around the henhouse to count the eggs because it will disturb the hens and they won’t lay
eggs.
c. It is not really sensible to rely on something that has not yet happened and may not ever happen.
d. Since eggs break so easily, you may not be accurate in your count of future chickens.
19. The same four-letter word can be placed on the blank lines below to make two new words from each of those
shown. Put in the correct four-letter word to make four new words from those shown below.
WORK to make BACKHAND AND HANDWORK.)
(Example: HAND could be placed between BACK
HEAD
MARK
DREAM
FALL
Chapter 11 Intelligence 49
HANDOUT 11–9 (continued )
20. Which of the figures shown below the line of drawings best completes the series?
Cricket So tware
a
b
c
d
Time finished:
Source: Intelligence test from The Mensa book of words, word games, puzzles, and oddities (pp. 145–149) by Victor
Serebriakoff and Abbie F. Salny. Copyright © 1988 by Abbie F. Salny. Reprinted by permission of HarperCollins
Publishers, Inc.
50 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–10
Analogies Test
Time started
Time elapsed
Choose the word or number in the second pair that is most closely related to the first. For example: Apple is to pear as
veal is to a) pork b) fish. The answer would be a, since apple and pear are both fruit and veal and pork are both meat.
1. Potatoes are to peanuts as apples are to:
a) carrots b) lilies c) peaches d) tomatoes
e) cucumbers
2. Spain is to Argentina as Portugal is to:
a) Trinidad b) Brazil c) Mexico d) Guyana
e) Canada
3. Celsius is to 0° as Fahrenheit is to:
a) 100° b) 0° c) 32° d) 212° e) 112°
4. Drachma is to Greece as peseta is to:
a) Mexico b) Italy c) Canada d) Brazil
e) Spain
5. Loops is to spool as straw is to:
a) pinker b) hay c) painting d) warts
e) rosy
6. Napoleon is to Melba as macadam is to:
a) roads b) poinsettia c) overshoes
d) trees e) food
7. Rich is to money as leafy is to:
a) vase b) foliage c) mountain
d) flower e) dog
8. The number 2 is to 8 as 5 is to:
a) 15 b) 100 c) 125 d) 10 e) 60
9. 1789 is to France as 1648 is to:
a) Germany b) Switzerland c) New
Zealand d) United States e) England
10. The letter A is to E as B is to:
a) C b) D c) G d) H e) Q
11. Retort is to chemist as ramekin is to:
a) painter b) engineer c) dressmaker
d) cook e) lawyer
12. Black Beauty is to horse as Lassie is to:
a) cow b) bird c) dog d) whale e) camel
13. Palette is to artist as kiln is to:
a) potter b) painter c) goldsmith d) writer
e) cook
14. Ceylon is to Sri Lanka as Constantinople is to:
a) New Constantine b) Leningrad c) New York
d) London e) Istanbul
15. The Raven is to Poe as Gone with the Wind is
to:
a) Mitchell b) Keats c) Robbins d) Susann
e) Blake
16. Star is to constellation as constellation is to:
a) sun b) earth c) galaxy d) planetoid
e) moon
17. Onions are to leeks as crocuses are to:
a) apples b) saffron c) tulips d) lilacs
e) bananas
18. Reagan is to Carter as Truman is to:
a) Dewey b) Jackson c) Kennedy
d) Roosevelt e) Johnson
19. Halley is to comet as Broca is to:
a) printing b) tires c) automobiles
d) brain e) fruit
20.
isis
toto
as
as
is to
is
to
Time finished
Source: Marvin Grosswirth & Dr. Abbie Salny, The Mensa genius quiz book, Copyright 1981 by Marvin Grosswirth.
Reprinted with permission of Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. (MENSA 1-800-66-MENSA Code 4794)
Chapter 11 Intelligence 51
HANDOUT 11–11a
1
2
SAND
5
WEAR
LONG
9
LE
VEL
13
CHAIR
17
MIND
MATTER
21
GI
CCC
CC
C
MAN
BOARD
R
R OA D
A
D
10 O
M.D
Ph.D
B.S.
6
14
DICE
DICE
3
STAND
I
7
T
O
W
N
11
4
READING
8
12
KNEE
LIGHTS
15
T
O
U
C
H
16
18
19
HE’S/HIMSELF ECNALG
20
22
24
23
PROGRAM
CYCLE
CYCLE
CYCLE
B
L
O
U
S
E
GROUND
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
FEET
DEATH/LIFE
J
U
YOU S ME
T
Source: Griggs, R. A. (2000). A one-minute “intelligence” test. Teaching of Psychology, 27, 132–135. From: Morris, S.
(1983). Omni games: The best brain teasers from Omni magazine (p. 49). Copyright © 2000. Reprinted by permission of
Richard A. Griggs.
52 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–11b
1
E
2
HOM
TIMING
TIM ING
5
6
ALL
World
3
UALLS
NOW
7
SYMPHON
4
ONE ANOTHER
ONE ANOTHER
ONE ANOTHER
ONE ANOTHER
ONE ANOTHER
ONE ANOTHER
8
N
E
V
E
S
BLOOD
WATER
9
C
10
O
N
13
11
SGEG
14
17
NO WAYS IT WAYS
15
1 3 5 7 9
JUS 144 TICE
12
WHELMING
18
16
HE’S
(CAPITALISM)
19
AM U OUS WWOOIOfL
EILN PU
NaCI - H2O
NaCI - H2O
ASTRO ∅
20
A
SAS
CCCCCCC
21 No No No No
RENT RENT
REAS
WHATSOEVER
22
FRIEND
23
STAND
FRIENDS
WHEATHER
24
NOWHERE
Source: Griggs, R. A. (2000). A one-minute “intelligence” test. Teaching of Psychology, 27, 132–135. From: Morris, S.
(1983). Omni games: The best brain teasers from Omni magazine (p. 49). Copyright © 2000. Reprinted by permission of
Richard A. Griggs.
Chapter 11 Intelligence 53
HANDOUT 11–12
Remote Associates Test
Instructions: In this test you are presented with three words and asked to find a fourth word that is related to all three.
Write this word in the space to the right.
For example, what word do you think is related to these three?
paint
doll
cat
...........................
The answer in this case is “house”: House paint, doll house, and house cat.
1. call
pay
line
__________________ 1
2. end
burning
blue
__________________ 2
3. man
hot
sure
__________________ 3
4. stick
hair
ball
__________________ 4
5. blue
cake
cottage
__________________ 5
6. man
wheel
high
__________________ 6
7. motion
poke
down
__________________ 7
8. stool
powder
ball
__________________ 8
9. line
birthday
surprise
__________________ 9
10. wood
liquor
luck
__________________ 10
11. house
village
golf
__________________ 11
12. plan
show
walker
__________________ 12
13. key
wall
precious
__________________ 13
14. bell
iron
tender
__________________ 14
15. water
pen
soda
__________________ 15
16. base
snow
dance
__________________ 16
17. steady
cart
slow
__________________ 17
18. up
book
charge
__________________ 18
19. tin
writer
my
__________________ 19
20. leg
arm
person
__________________ 20
21. weight
pipe
pencil
__________________ 21
22. spin
tip
shape
__________________ 22
23. sharp
thumb
tie
__________________ 23
24. out
band
night
__________________ 24
25. cool
house
fat
__________________ 25
26. back
short
light
__________________ 26
27. man
order
air
__________________ 27
28. bath
up
gum
__________________ 28
29. ball
out
jack
__________________ 29
30. up
deep
rear
__________________ 30
Source: Gardner, R. (1980). Exercises for general psychology (pp. 115–116). Minneapolis: Burgess. Reprinted with permission from PSYCHOLOGY TODAY MAGAZINE. Copyright © 1980 (Sussex Publishers, Inc.).
54 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–13
Theories of Intelligence Scale
This questionnaire has been designed to investigate the ideas about intelligence. There are no right or wrong answers.
We are interested in your ideas.
Using the scale below, please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements
by writing the number that corresponds to your opinion in the space next to each statement.
1
Strongly
Agree
2
Agree
3
Mostly
Agree
4
Mostly
Disagree
5
Disagree
6
Strongly
Disagree
1. You have a certain amount of intelligence, and you can’t really do much to change it.
2. Your intelligence is something about you that you can’t change very much.
3. No matter who you are, you can significantly change your intelligence.
4. To be honest, you can’t really change how intelligent you are.
5. You can always substantially change how intelligent you are.
6. You can learn new things, but you can’t really change your basic intelligence.
7. No matter how much intelligence you have, you can always change it quite a bit.
8. You can change even your basic intelligence level considerably.
Source: C. S. Dweck. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development (p. 178).
(Philadelphia: Psychology Press).
Chapter 11 Intelligence 55
HANDOUT 11–14
Source: By Ruben Bolling, from his weekly comic strip “Tom the Dancing Bug.” Distributed by Quaternary Features, P.O.
Box 72, New York, NY 10021. © 1994 R. Bolling. Email tomdbug@aol.com.
56 Chapter 11 Intelligence
HANDOUT 11–15
Culture Fair Intelligence Test
Source: Sample Tests from Scale 2 of the Culture Fair Intelligence Test. Copyright © 1949, 1960 by the Institute for
Personality and Ability Testing, Inc., Champaign, Illinois, USA. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission.