Advertisement

The Concept and Utility of Intelligence

  • Earl Hunt

Abstract

Debates over intelligence have recurred through history. The idea that some of us are simply smarter than others touches a raw nerve in a society that tries to combine an Athenian commitment to democracy with a capitalist commitment to reward according to product. What happens when we are confronted with evidence that socially important talents are not distributed equally over society, and even more frighteningly, that there are powerful biological forces working to continue the differential distribution of ability across generations? This argument was made in 1869 by Francis Galton in his work Hereditary Genius,1 and again more than one-hundred years later by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray in The Bell Curve 2 The intervening years have witnessed a great deal of point and counterpoint on the issue, battles fought with more than the normal academic bickering because they expose the conflict between our ideal of a democratic society of equals and the practice of rewarding the best individual effort. We would be more comfortable if we could keep these beliefs as separate as we keep our feelings about baby lambs and lamb chops.

Keywords

Intelligence Test General Intelligence Fluid Intelligence Educational Test Service Referent Population 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Galton, E (1869), Hereditary Genius. An Inquiry Into Its Laws and Consequences, Appleton, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Herrnstein, RJ., and Murray, C. (1994), The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life, The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brody, N.P. (1992), Intelligence, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hunt, E. (1995), Will We Be Smart Enough? A Cognitive Analysis of the Coming Workforce, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sternberg, R J. (1990), Metaphors of Mind: Conceptions of the Nature of Intelligence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaplan, R.M. (1985) The Controversy Related to the Use of Psychological Tests. in Wolman, B.B. (Ed.) Handbook of Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. NewYork: Wiley-Interscience, 465–504.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wechsler,D. (1975), “Intelligence Defined and Redefined: A Relativistic Approach,” American Psychologist, 30, 135–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Seligman, D. (1994), A Question of Intelligence, Citadel Press, New York.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hunter, J.E., and Schmidt, F.L. (1990), Methods of Meta-Analysis, Sage, Newbury Park, CA.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sternberg, RJ., Wagner, R.K., Williams, W.M., and Horvath, J.A. (1995), “Testing Common Sense,” American Psychologist, 50, 912–927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Earles, J.A., and Ree, MJ. (1992), “The Predictive Validity of the ASVAB for Training Grades,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 721–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hunter, J.E. (1986), “Cognitive Ability, Cognitive Aptitudes, Job Knowledge, and Job Performance,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29, 340–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McHenry, J J., Hough, L.M., Toquam, J.L., Hanson, M.A., and Ashworth, S. (1990), “Project A Validity Results: The Relationship Between Predictor and Criterion Domains,” Personnel Psychology, 43, 335–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Howard, A., and Bray, D.W. (1988), Managerial Lives in Transition: Advancing Age and Changing Times, Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cascio, W.F. (1995), “Whither Industrial and Organizational Psychology in a Changing World of Work?,” American Psychologist, 50, 928–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goleman, D. (1995), Emotional Intelligence: Why It Matters More Than IQ, Bantam Books, New York.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gardner, H. (1983), Frames of Mind: The Theory ofMultiple Intelligences, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spearman, C. (1904), “General Intelligence, Objectively Determined and Measured,” American Journal of Psychology, 15,201–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Spearman, C. (1927), The Abilities of Man, MacMillan, London.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jensen, A.R. (1980), Bias in Mental Testing, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thurstone, L.L. (1938), Primary Mental Abilities, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cattell, R.B. (1971), Abilities: Their Structure,Growth, and Action, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Horn, J.L. (1985), “Remodeling Old Models of Intelligence,” in Wolman, B.B. (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence. Theories, Measurements, and Applications, Wiley, New York, pp. 267–300.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Horn, J.L. (1986), “Intellectual Ability Concepts,” in Sternberg, R.J. (Ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence. Vol. 3. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 35–77.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Horn, J.L., and Noll, J. (1994), “A System for Understanding Cognitive Capabilities: A Theory and the Evidence on Which it is Based,” in Detterman, D.K. (Ed.), Current Topics in Human Intelligence,Vol. g, Ablex Publishing, Norwood, NJ, pp. 151–204.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Carroll, J.B. (1993), Human Cognitive Abilities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Newell, A. (1990), Unified Theories of Cognition, Harvard Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carpenter, P.A., Just, M.A., and Shell, P. (1990), “What One Intelligence Test Measures. A Theoretical Account of Processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test,” Psychological Review, 97,404–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wigdor, A.K., and Green, B.F., Jr. (1991), Performance Assessment in the Workplace, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hartigan, J.A., and Wigdor, A.K. (Eds.), (1989), Fairness in Employment Testing: Validity, Generalization, Minority Issues,and the General Aptitude Test Battery, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ackerman, P. (1987), “Individual Differences in Skill Learning: An Integration of Psychometric and Information Processing Perspectives,” Psychological Bulletin,102, 3–2 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Levidow, B.B, (1994) The Effect of High School Physics Instruction on Measures of General Knowledge and Reasoning Ability, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Joslyn, S. (1995), Individual Differences in Time Pressured Decision Making, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ericsson, K.A., Krampe, R.Th., and Tesch-Romer, C. (1993), “The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance,” Psychological Review, I00, 363–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Gardner, H. (1993), Creating Minds: an Anatomy of Creativity Seen Through the Lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham,and Gandhi, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Simonton, D.K. (1984), Genius, Creativity, and Leadership: Historiometric Inquiries,Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Detterman, D.K., and Daniel, M.H. (1989), “Correlations of Mental Tests with Each Other and with Cognitive Variables Are Highest in Low IQ Groups,” Intelligence, 13, 349–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Reich, R.(1991), The Work ofNations: Preparing Ourselves for2 lst Century Capitalism, Knopf, New York.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Frank, R.H., and Cook, P.J. (1995), The Winner-Take-All Society, Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Nickerson, R.S., Perkins, D.N., and Smith, E.E. (1985), The Teaching of Thinking, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bruer, J.T. (1993), Schools for Thought: A Science of Learning in the Classroom, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schaie, K.W. (1994), “The Course of Adult Intellectual Development,” American Psychologist, 49, 304–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Earl Hunt

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations