[SIGNATURE ASSIGNMENT – TYPES OF INTELLIGENCE] April 18, 2013
John Jackson
“The principle goal of education in the schools should be creating men and women
who are capable of doing new things, not simply repeating what other generations
have done; men and women who are creative, inventive and discoverers, who can be
critical and verify, and not accept, everything they are offered.”
Jean Piaget
The term intelligence is a vast and difficult term to explain. There are so many types
of intelligence! Psychologist Howard Gardner proposed his Theory of Multiple
Intelligences and states that there are eight distinct and separate intelligences: linguistic,
logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, and
naturalistic (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg 220.) These varying types of intelligence
make it impossible to label an individual as simply ‘intelligent’ or ‘non-intelligent’, as there
are too many factors that make up an individual’s intelligence. According to Gardner,
typical intelligence tests only measure the first three of these abilities: linguistic, spatial,
and logical-mathematical due to these intelligences being the most valued in Western
civilization (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg 220.) This makes mistaking intelligence
very common, and would seem to make mislabeling an intelligent person as non-intelligent
a routine practice.
There are even more types of intelligence than the eight previously mentioned!
Fluid intelligence is the ability to process information (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg
219) whereas crystallized intelligence refers to the accuracy and the amount of information
available for processing (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg 219.) Psychologists test an
individual’s fluid intelligence through tests that pose abstract problems that must be solved
in a given amount time, while crystallized intelligence is tested via vocabulary, factual
information, etc. Both types of intelligence can be applied to Gardner’s Theory of Multiple
Intelligences, i.e. an individual can test high in crystallized linguistic intelligence ( they have
a vast vocabulary and can regurgitate grammatical rules with ease), but said individual
tests low in fluid spatial intelligence (meaning they can’t solve abstract spatial problems in
a given amount of time.)
Let’s take a step back for a moment and define the term intelligence. In the text
Introducing Psychology by Schacter Gilbert and Wegner, intelligence is defined as ‘a
hypothetical mental ability that enables people to direct their thinking, adapt to their
circumstances, and learn from their experiences‘ (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg
212.) The key word is that intelligence is hypothetical, meaning that intelligence is all-in-all
highly conjectural, or not readily proven by available evidence. Yet we use the term
intelligence in daily conversation; we use it to describe not only individuals, but pets,
electronics (artificial intelligence), thought processes, decisions, and innumerable other
human and non-human traits, characteristics, and processes.
Once the theme of intelligence in psychology was generally accepted, it became
crucial to be able to test and measure overall intelligence as well as specific intelligence.
The first intelligence testing was performed in France to group young students together
into comparable learning atmospheres. Students from varying socio-economic
backgrounds came to school at greatly differing levels of learning ability, and through
rudimentary intelligence testing they were able to be ‘sorted’ and therefore make the most
academic progress possible. This idea was the basis for the intelligence quotient (IQ)
testing and deviation IQ testing which is so readily used today. The overall thought process
of measuring intelligence is highly scrutinized, as there are many factors which play a role
in intellectual success, such as motivation, affability, pride in learning, etc (Schacter, Gilbert
& Wegner, 2011, pg 215.) There is always room for error when a hypothetical property
(intelligence) is used to measure consequential behavior (earning large income, becoming
a leader in school, etc.) This is why intelligence testing can be, at times, ‘taken with a grain
of salt.’
People with low measured intelligence typically have poorer life outcomes
(Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg 217.) The top five percent of a sampled group scored
around 130 on a standard IQ test. Of this group, zero percent of men were ever
incarcerated, zero percent were high school dropouts, there were no chronic welfare
recipients, two percent live in poverty, and two percent of men were unemployed more
than one month out of a year. Contrast this with the opposite end of the spectrum, the
bottom 5 percent of adults who scored around a 70 in the IQ test: 7 percent of men had
been incarcerated, fifty-five percent dropped out of high school, thirty percent live in
poverty, thirty-one percent had chronic welfare recipients, and twelve percent of men had
been unemployed more than one month out of a year (Schacter, Gilbert & Wegner, 2011, pg
217.)
IQ Population Percentages
Total population distribution
5%
20%
50%
20%
5%
avg IQ 70
avg IQ 80
avg IQ 100
avg IQ 120
avg IQ 130
Out of labor force more than 1 month out of year (men)
22
19
15
14
10
Unemployed more than 1 month out of year
22
19
15
14
10
Divorce in 5 years
21
22
23
15
9
Had children outside of marriage (women)
32
17
8
4
2
Lives in poverty
30
16
6
3
2
Ever incarcerated (men
7
7
3
1
0
High school dropout
55
35
6
.4
0
Chronic welfare recipient’s (mothers)
31
17
8
2
0
This topic really intrigued me, more so than any other topic covered in Psychology
1010. I believe that one of life’s greatest goals and challenges is to truly learn to understate
yourself and how you operate; to understand your strengths and weaknesses, desires,
shortcomings, personality traits, etc. In short, I love how personable this topic is, especially
Gardeners Theory of Multiple Intelligences. One of the criticisms of his theory is it’s
difficult to differentiate between personality and cognitive ability – basically he’s being
charged with a ‘guilty’ sentence to helping people understand and discover themselves on a
deeper level. To me, that is a thing of beauty!
This topic has given me ample opportunity to learn about myself, to dive into the
different methods of intelligence testing to learn what my strengths and weaknesses are,
and how to capitalize on those strengths during my career. If I know what my strong
intelligences are, I can use that information to put myself into situations to succeed, and I
can avoid careers/jobs/situations that will make me unhappy due to inability to function
due to low intelligence in a given area. This topic has also impacted my development by
giving me knowledge of areas in which I am weak, so I can cultivate (or try to at least) a
higher intelligence in given area.
Schacter, D., Gilbert, D., & Wegner, D. (2011). Introducing psychology. New York: Worth Publishers.
Jean piaget quotes. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/12064.Jean_Piaget