Abstract
The presumption underlying this chapter is either that intelligence is a useful psychological concept for all human populations or that its use is to be avoided everywhere. In the first of three sections, we summarize the early—and often abject—history of intelligence testing in cross-cultural context. In the second section, we present a differentiated conceptual and methodological approach to the analysis of psychometric equivalence or invariance in cross-cultural data. In the third section, we link levels of psychometric equivalence to levels of transfer and adaptation of tests for use across populations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Context refers to the social and ecological environment in which humans function. The term has a more limited meaning than “culture” (see Poortinga, 2021).
- 2.
We do not argue that genetic underpinnings of population differences in intellectual functioning can be ruled out. However, before we can even consider to examine such underpinnings, the equivalence and validity of test score differences have to be demonstrated. Moreover, it requires the identification of genetic variations that directly causally affect intellectual functioning within and across populations. The only relevant empirical research to date are genome-wide association studies that explore correlations between the genetic variations and intelligence scores (GWAS studies; e.g., Lee et al., 2018). However, they offer no evidence for the equivalence and validity of the test score differences, nor can they identify direct causal effects.
- 3.
Grigorenko et al. administered also two Western intelligence tests to the children. Only the cognitive component showed some (moderate) correlations with scores on these tests.
- 4.
In a fairly recent monograph, Lynn (2006) continues to attribute subnormal intelligence to the Bushmen, referring to work by Reuning. This is a blatant misrepresentation of Reuning’s views. On the basis of field observations and of their performance on a range of tests, he considered the Bushmen to be “clever” (see Reuning & Wortley, 1973, for extensive evidence).
- 5.
Relativism precludes any form of equivalence as a construct does not cross borders.
References
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Breugelmans, S. M., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. L. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Brouwers, S. A., Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Van Hemert, D. A. (2009). Variation in Raven’s Progressive Matrices scores across time and place. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 330–338.
Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge University Press.
Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1–22.
Cronbach, L. J., & Drenth, P. J. D. (Eds.). (1972). Mental tests and cultural adaptation. Mouton.
Dasen, P. R., Dembele, B., Ettien, K., Kabran, K., Kamagaté, D., Koffi, D. A., & N'Guessan, A. (1985). N’gloulé, l’intelligence chez les Baoulé [N’goulé, intelligence with the Baoule]. Archives de Psychologie, 53, 293–324.
Fitts, P. M., & Posner, M. I. (1968). Human performance. Brooks/Cole.
Flynn, J. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 171–191.
Fontaine, J. R. J. (2005). Equivalence. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social measurement (Vol. 1, pp. 803–813). Academic Press.
Fontaine, J. R. J. (2008). Traditional and multilevel approaches in cross-cultural research: An integration of methodological frameworks. In F. J. R. Van de Vijver, D. A. Van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 65–92). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fontaine, J. R. J. (2011). A fourfold conceptual framework for cultural and cross-cultural psychology: Relativism, construct universalism, repertoire universalism and absolutism. In F. J. R. van de Vijver, A. Chasiotis, & S. M. Breugelmans (Eds.), Fundamental questions in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 165–189). Cambridge University Press.
Fontaine, J. R. J., & Breugelmans, S. M. (2021). Emotion between universalism and relativism: Finding a standard for comparison in cross-cultural emotion research. In M. Bender & B. G. Adams (Eds.), Methods and assessment in culture and psychology (pp. 144–169). Cambridge University Press.
Grigorenko, E. L., Geissler, P. W., Prince, R., Okatcha, F., Nokes, C., Kenny, D. A., Bundy, D. A., & Sternberg, R. J. (2001). The organization of Luo conceptions of intelligence: A study of implicit theories in a Kenyan village. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 25, 367–378.
Helms-Lorenz, M., van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in cognitive performance and Spearman’s hypothesis: g or c? Intelligence, 31, 9–29.
International Test Commission. (2017). The ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (2nd ed.). [www.InTestCom.org].
Jensen, A. R. (1974). How biased are culture-loaded tests? Genetic Psychology Monographs, 90, 185–244.
Kan, K.-J., Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2013). On the nature and nurture of intelligence and specific cognitive abilities: The more heritable, the more culture dependent. Psychological Science, 24, 2420–2428.
Klineberg, O. (1935). Race differences. Harper & Row.
Lee, J. J., Wedow, R., Okbay, A., et al. (2018). Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals. Nature Genetics, 50, 1112–1121.
Lynn, R. (2006). Race differences in intelligence, an evolutionary analysis. Qashington Summit Publishers.
MacCann, C., Joseph, D. L., Newman, D. A., & Roberts, R. D. (2014). Emotional intelligence is a second-stratum factor of intelligence: Evidence from hierarchical and bifactor models. Emotion, 14, 358–374.
Mann, C. W. (1940). Mental measurements in primitive communities. Psychological Bulletin, 37, 366–395.
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). Macmillan.
Mundy-Castle, A. C. (1974). Social and technological intelligence in Western and non-Western cultures. Universitas, 4, 46–52.
Pietschnig, J., & Voracek, M. (2015). One century of global IQ gains: A formal meta-analysis of the Flynn effect (1909–2013). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 282–306.
Poortinga, Y. H. (1989). Equivalence of cross-cultural data: An overview of basic issues. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 737–756.
Poortinga, Y. H. (2021). Concept and method in cross-cultural and cultural psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Poortinga, Y. H., & Van de Vijver, F. J. R. (1987). Explaining cross-cultural differences: Bias analysis and beyond. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18, 259–282.
Porteus, S. D. (1937). Primitive intelligence and environment. Macmillan.
Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (2004). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Harcourt Assessment.
Reuning, H., & Wortley, W. (1973). Psychological studies of the Bushmen. Psychologia Africana, Monograph Supplement, No. 7.
Scribner, S. (1979). Modes of thinking and ways of speaking: Culture and logic reconsidered. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing (pp. 223–243). Ablex.
Sonke, C. J., Poortinga, Y. H., & De Kuijer, J. H. J. (1999). Cross-cultural differences on cognitive task performance: The influence of stimulus familiarity. In W. J. Lonner, D. L. Dinnel, D. K. Forgays, & S. A. Hayes (Eds.), Merging past, present, and future in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 146–158). Swets and Zeitlinger.
Sonke, C., Van Boxtel, G., Griesel, R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2008). Brain wave concomitants of cross-cultural differences in scores on simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 37–54.
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.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Leung, K. (2021). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research (2nd ed.). Sage.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (1997). Towards an integrated analysis of bias in cross-cultural assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 29–37.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2005). Conceptual and methodological issues in adapting tests. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 39–63). Erlbaum.
Van De Vijver, F. J. R., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2020). Dealing with methodological pitfalls in cross-cultural studies of stress. In T. Ringeisen, P. Genkova, & F. T. L. Leong (Eds.), Handbuch Stress und Kultur: Interkulturelle und kulturvergleichende Perspektiven (pp. 1–19). [Chapter 2-1]. Springer.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., Van Hemert, D. A., & Poortinga, Y. H. (2008). Conceptual issues in multilevel models. In F. J. R. Van de Vijver, D. A. Van Hemert, & Y. H. Poortinga (Eds.), Multilevel analysis of individuals and cultures (pp. 3–26). Erlbaum.
Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Willemsen, M. E. (1993). Abstract thinking. In J. Altarriba (Ed.), Culture and cognition (pp. 317–342). North Holland.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fontaine, J.R.J., Poortinga, Y.H. (2022). The Status of Intelligence as a Panhuman Construct in Cross-Cultural Psychology. In: Sternberg, R.J., Preiss, D.D. (eds) Intelligence in Context. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92798-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92798-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-92797-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-92798-1
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)