NATURE OF INTELLIGENCE

Intelligence is “the aggregate or global capacity of an individual to act purposefully, to

think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment” (Wechsler, 1939).

Boring (1923) operationally defined that “intelligence is what intelligence tests

measure”.

Nature vs Nurture: Evidence pointing to the influence of heredity on intelligence

comes mainly from family and the twin studies. The results of a large number of
studies indicate that closer the genetic relationship, the more similar is the tested
intelligence. Heritability estimates for intelligence have ranged from 0.45 to 0.87
(Jennsen, 1973). The lower estimate is based on the assumption that a sizeable
portion of variation in IQ scores can be attributed to a genetic environmental
covariation. Parents can influence their offspring both by direct genetic transmission
and by the kind of environment they provide. It has been recognised that children
from lower social class families generally perform less well on intelligence tests than
those from higher social classes. Studies of family influences suggest that greater
parental attention received by children of smaller families and the first born may
result in higher IQ scores.

Individual Differences: The normal distribution: most of the population falls in the
middle range of IQ scores between 84 and 116.

• Very Superior Intelligence (gifted) - Above 130

• Above Average Intelligence - 110 to 129

• Average Intelligence - 90 to 109

• Below Average Intelligence – 40 to 89

• Severe Mental Retardation - 25 to 39

• Profound Mental Retardation - Below 25

Age Differences: Generally, the growth of intelligence is rapid during early childhood
and then slows down in teens. Longitudinal studies using Wechsler’s tests have
shown that mental ability increases up to the age of twenty-six, after which it levelled
off and remains unchanged till late thirties. There is a gradual decrease in the
intellectual ability after forty with a sharp decline after sixty.

Gender Differences: Boys and girls tend to be equivalent in most aspects of

intelligence — The average IQ scores of boys and girls is virtually identical. The
extremes (both low and high ends) are over-represented by boys

o Girls as a group: Tend to be stronger in verbal fluency, in writing, in perceptual

speed (starting as early as the toddler years).
o Boys as a group: Tend to be stronger in visual-spatial processing, in science,
and in mathematical problem solving (starting as early as age 3).

Poverty/SES: The more years children spend in poverty, the lower their IQs tend to
be. Children from lower and working-class homes average 10-15 points below their
middle-class age mates on IQ tests. In many countries, children from wealthier
homes score better on IQ test than children from poorer homes. The greater the gap
in wealth in a country, the greater the difference in IQ scores.

Chronic inadequate diet can disrupt brain development. Chronic or short-term

inadequate diet at any point in life can impair immediate intellectual functioning.
Reduced access to health service, poor parenting, and insufficient stimulation and
emotional support can impair intellectual growth.

Race/Ethnicity: Overall, differences in IQ scores of children from different racial and

ethnic groups describe children’s performance ONLY in the environments in which
the children live. These findings do not indicate potential, nor do they tell us what
these children would do if they live someplace else. The current group differences in
IQ are due to environmental differences — as discrimination and inequality decrease
—IQ differences decrease.
THEORIES OF INTELLIGENCE

 SPEARMAN’S TWO FACTOR THEORY

Charles Spearman (1863-1945), an English psychologist and the originator of

factor analysis was the first to claim that intelligence consists of general ‘g’ factor
and specific ‘s’ factors. His theory is known as ‘Two Factor Theory’ (1904). One of
his major contributions to the history of psychology is the development and use of
‘factor analysis’. He used the techniques of factor analysis and correlational
analysis to find out the ‘g’ and ‘s’ factor. Factor analysis involves finding out the
correlation of related variables, and then grouping the variables to form clusters
and derive the underlying factors. Thus, a larger number of variables are reduced
to a lesser number of factors.

Charles Spearman published an epoch-making study in 1904, which indeed

proved to be the crucial step toward quantitative testing of theories, as opposed
to simple quantification or measurement. He used the techniques of correlational
analysis and factor analysis, both of which had been developed earlier by Karl
Pearson, in relation to the scores obtained by groups of children on various
intelligence tests. His historical significance can be seen in the development of
the factor analytical method and in its explicit use for the first time. It is with
regard to such importance that Guilford (1954, p. 472) has stated: “No single
event in the history of mental testing has proved to be of such momentous
importance as Spearman’s proposal of his famous two-factor theory in 1904.”

Spearman was critical of Binet and Simon’s (1905) practice of assembling a

hodgepodge of problems for testing intelligence without first testing for the
presence of a general factor or without weighing the problems in terms of their
loadings on the general factor. He was concerned to test the theory that the
obtained intercorrelations between various tests of intelligence were due entirely
to a general intellective factor “g”. In addition to that, he also recognised specific
factors, “s” factors, which were specific to particular tests.

Spearman believed that all intellectual activity contained some element or factor
in common. This “g”, or general factor, was postulated to be important in every
mental act, although some acts were thought to depend upon it more than others.
The difference between people in intelligence was a matter of how much “g” they
possessed. In his book, ‘The Abilities of Man’ (1927), Spearman elaborated that
all intellectual activities share a single common factor that runs through all the
activities a person performs during his life. Spearman called this general factor as
‘mental energy’ which is determined innately. A person cannot be trained to have
a higher ‘g’ factor. It is a part of who they are. People possess general
intelligence or ‘g’ in varying degrees. On the basis of this general intelligence, we
describe a person as either intelligent or dull. This ‘g’ is the major determinant of
one’s score in any intelligence test. In addition to this general or ‘g’ factor, he
recognised the specific factors, each called ‘s’, which are specific to different
abilities. For example, test of arithmetic, spatial relationships, verbal fluency, each
of these specific intelligence tests measure a separate ‘s’. An individual’s
intelligence score reflects the amount of ‘g’ plus the magnitude of various ‘s’
factors possessed by the individual. For example, one’s performance in spatial
intelligence test would be a function of a person’s general intelligence (g) and his
spatial ability (s).

Spearman noticed that children who perform well in one subject tend to have
good marks in other subjects also. So, your intelligence is a sum of “g” factor and
“s” factor. The “g” factor affects all kind of mental activities whereas; “s” factor
influences your performance on specific or particular mental activity. Further, “g”
factor is innate, and constant throughout one’s life, present in all cognitive
activities. Whereas “s” factor is learned and varies with the task. Within the same
individual, one can have many “s” factors and, it is associated with only the
specific task. People who are high on “g” factor are more intelligent than others.
One’s overall score on an intelligence test represents “g” factor. Greater ‘G’ in an
individual leads to greater success in life. ‘S’ factor is acquired from the
environment.

Spearman statistically analysed the interrelation among various scores obtained

by different individuals on various tests. A positive correlation between any two
test or mental function implies a factor common to both or ‘g’ and two specific
factors ‘s’. Let us assume that, the two tests are M (mechanical) and N
(numerical), the common factor in these tests is ‘g’ and the specific factors are sM
and sN. Similarly, let V (verbal) and S (spatial) be two other tests with ‘g’ as the
 common factor and sV and sS are the specific factors as shown in Figure 4aF
below (In the Figure 4aF, g refers to ‘general ability’ and s refers to ‘specific
abilities’). Spearman’s theory states that the objective of psychological tests
should be to measure individual’s ‘g’ as it runs through all the abilities and
predicts individual’s performance. Individuals differ on the basis of ‘g’ they
possess.

In this figure, “Spearman’s “g” factor is shown as the large central circle and the
specific factors “s” as small circles grouped about G. Each ellipse stands for a
mental test. The ellipses are permitted to overlap G to different extents in order to
indicate the fact that some tests are more heavily “loaded” with G than others. The
amount of correlation between any two tests is determined by the extent to which the
two tests are loaded with G. Thus, tests a and b will have a relatively high
correlation, since they have much in common in G. Tests a and c will be scarcely
correlated at all, since both have small loadings with G.” (Guilford, 1953).
Inter correlation matrices prepared by Spearman and his students showed that some
tests had something in common besides factor G. That meant that there were some
correlations that were over and above that demanded by a single common factor G.
Spearman at first attributed this to overlapping S factors. However, some tests may
have a higher correlation than that attributable to G alone. Such an additional
common factor became known as a group factor, which was found to play a role not
only in two tests but also in a number of tests. “Among the group factors that
Spearman and his associates came to recognise are verbal ability, numerical ability,
and possible factors of mental speed, mechanical ability, attention, and imagination”
(Guilford, 1953).

Spearman’s theories of intelligence are very stimulating and his contribution to the
psychology of intelligence can be regarded important mainly for two major reasons.
1) First, he developed the mathematical models for studying “g” and for that purpose
he laid the foundation of factor analysis. The logic and method of correlational
analysis was afterward followed by other researchers for developing multi-factorial
theories of intelligence. 2) Second major importance of Spearman’s work is that it
established a scholarly tradition in the investigation of human abilities. According to
Nunnally (1978, p. 508) “Spearman was concerned much more with understanding
human abilities than with just measuring them. Spearman had many interesting
theories about G, its biological basis, the influence of culture, the interaction of G
with manifestations of abilities in daily life, and the relation of G to speed, fatigue,
and other variables”.

Critical Appraisal of Two-Factor Theory: Several criticisms were levelled against

formulation of the two-factor theory. One of the standard criticisms of the factor
analytic approach is that it was purely psychometric and failed to provide a cognitive
theory. However, Sternberg and Frensch (1990) have convincingly argued that this
criticism was misplaced. Spearman (1923) proposed that intelligence depended on a
number of qualitative principles of cognition, for example “the presenting of any
character together with any relation tends to evoke immediately the knowing of the
correlative character” (p.91). According to M. W. Eysenck (1990) Spearman also
described “five quantitative principles of cognition, which are relevant to intelligence:
conative control, fatigue, mental energy, primordial potencies, and retentivity”.
Jensen (1998) confirmed the existence of “g” by the method of confirmatory factor
analysis.

 THURSTONE’S THEORY OF MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCE

Louis Thurstone (1935) objected to Spearman’s emphasis on general intelligence.

He suggested that intelligence can be divided into a number of primary mental
abilities (PMA) by using factor analysis. There are basically seven PMA and all are
independent of each other.

Using improved techniques of statistical analysis, he came to vastly different

conclusions from Spearman about nature of intelligence. Thurstone generalised
Spearmen’s methods and formulas, translated them into matrix algebra and carried
out large scale studies, using as many as fifty-seven tests on one group of subjects.
On the basis of these studies, he concluded that instead of Spearmen’s “g” factor,
seven primary abilities fitted the data much better.

Eysenck (1972) has given two reasons of this type of apparently conflicting findings.
The first related to population sampled. Spearman had worked with random samples
of the population (usually children), Thurstone worked only with students. The
second related to the choice of tests: “Spearman has explicitly stated that tests
should not be too similar to each other; if they were, then the “s” factors would
overlap and cause additional correlations which would emerge as separate factors
and disturb the unit rank of the matrix. Thurstone used groups of tests which were
very similar, often almost identical, and consequently his study could certainly not be
considered as a test of Spearman’s hypothesis” (Eysenck, 1972).

L.L. Thurstone suggested that intelligence is a composite of seven distinct primary

mental abilities (PMA). He recognized the diversity of human abilities. Using
improved statistical techniques, he developed a new factor model of intelligence. He
analysed the inter-correlation of the scores of 57 tests on a large group of subjects,
and identified seven factors. These factors were called primary mental abilities or
PMA.
These are described as follows:

 Inductive Reasoning: The ability to find rules or the logical reasoning ability.
It is the ability to find general rules and principles from the given information.
 Memory: The ability to memorize and recall. It is the ability to memorize
events, list of words, mathematical formulas, dates, definitions etc.
 Numerical Ability: The ability to solve arithmetic problems. It is the ability to
use numbers with speed and accuracy, to compute answers to mathematical
problems. It measures the speed and accuracy of computational skills.
 Perceptual Speed: The ability to visualize details rapidly. It is the ability to
perceive or grasp perceptual details quickly and accurately, to see differences
and similarities among things.
 Spatial Relations: The ability to understand relationship. The ability to
visualise and manipulate different geometric patterns, forms and imaginary
objects in space.
 Verbal Comprehension: The ability of reading comprehension; define and
understand words, concepts, ideas; verbal reasoning.
 Word Fluency: The ability to produce words rapidly, i.e., to use words quickly
and fluently in performing tasks like naming word, rhyming, solving cross word
puzzles.

Thurstone views each of these mental abilities as independent of each other. Each
of them can be assessed separately and there cannot be a single score for
intelligence. He suggests a cognitive ability profile for the individual rather than a
single IQ score. Thurstone later on incorporated in his subsequent work “a
hierarchical structure of intellect, with “g” at the top, and the “primary abilities”
(whose inter correlations necessitated the postulation of “g”) at a lower level; the
actual tests used, whose inter correlations gave rise to the “primary abilities”, would
of course be at a lower level still” (Eysenck, 1972).

CLASSIFICATION OF INTELLIGENCE THEORIES

Theories of intelligence have evolved through a succession of paradigms:

psychological measurement (often called psychometrics); cognitive psychology,
which concerns itself with the mental processes by which the mind functions the
merger of cognitive psychology with contextualism (the interaction of the
environment and processes of the mind); biological science, which considers the
neural bases of intelligence. Theories of intelligence or other theories of intelligent
behaviour have been based on psychometric, developmental, and information
processing model respectively (Flanagan and Harrison 2005). The first two types of
theories represent traditional approaches and the third is more recent in origin.

The psychometric approach which has resulted in many tests of intelligence and a
variety of statistical methods for analysing scores on these tests focuses on
individual differences in cognitive abilities and the search for the causes of these
differences. Among theories or models of cognitive abilities based on the
psychometric approach and stemming in particular from the results of factor
analyses are: -
 Spearman’s two-factor theory: It was developed in 1904 by an English
Psychologist Charles Spearman, who proposed that intellectual abilities were
comprised of two factors: one general ability or common ability known as ‘G’
factor and the other a group of specific abilities known as ‘S’ factor. ‘G’ factor
is universal inborn ability. Greater ‘G’ in an individual leads to greater success
in life. ‘S’ factor is acquired from the environment. It varies from activity to
activity in the same individual.
 Thurstone’s Group Factor theory: Primary mental abilities: States that
intelligent activities are not an expression of innumerable highly specific
factors, nor is it the expression primarily of a general factor that pervades all
mental activities. Instead, there are ‘certain’ mental operations that have in
common a ‘primary’ factor that gives them psychological and functional unity
and that differentiates them from other mental operations. These mental
operations then constitute a group. In other words, there are a number of
groups of mental abilities, each of which has its own primary factor, giving the
group a functional unity and cohesiveness. Each of these primary factors is
said to be relatively independent of the others. Thurstone has given the
following seven primary factors: (i) The Number Factor (N)—Ability to do
Numerical Calculations rapidly and accurately. (ii) The Verbal Factor (V)—
Found in tests involving Verbal Comprehension. (iii) The Space Factor (S)—
 Involved in any task in which the subject manipulates the imaginary object in
space. (iv) Memory (M)—Involving ability to memorize quickly. (v) The Word
Fluency Factor (W)—Involved whenever the subject is asked to think of
isolated words at a rapid rate. (vi) The Reasoning Factor (R)—Found in tasks
that require a subject to discover a rule or principle involved in a series or
groups of letters. (vii) The Perception Factor (P) — Found in tasks where the
subject has to perceive or grasp details quickly and accurately. Based on
these factors Thurstone constructed a new test of intelligence known as ‘‘Test
of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA).”

Difference between Psychometric and Cognitive Approach to Intelligence:

Psychometric theories derive from studying individual differences in test

performance. Questions about the structure of human intelligence, including the
importance of general intelligence, have dominated psychometric theories. Major
theories include Spearman’s two-factor theory, Thurstone’s Multifactor theory, and
Guilford’s Structure of Intellect Model. Cognitive theories derive from studying the
processes involved in intelligent performance. These processes range from the very
simple (e.g., inspection of time) to the fairly complex (e.g., working memory).
Different theorists have focused on different processes (or aspects of these
processes, such as processing speed). Cognitive-contextual theories emphasize
processes that demonstrate intelligence within a particular context (such as a cultural
environment). Major theories include Sternberg’s triarchic theory, Gardner’s theory of
multiple intelligences, and Piaget’s theory of development.

There is a fundamentally different question in the cognitive approach from the one
that drives the psychometric approach. The psychometric approach is focused on
whether people answer items on intelligence tests correctly, while the cognitive
approach is focused on how people answer the items, and why some
people are better than others at answering items of various intelligence tests.

The psychometric approach to studying intelligence involves obtaining scores from

many people on a variety of tests. The results are factor-analysed in order to
describe the pattern of correlations between the tests, and the factors are named
according to the tests that assess them. Theories regarding the structure of cognitive
abilities have been developed based on the results of these studies, but the
psychometric approach is primarily centred on observing relationships between test
scores. In other words, the psychometric approach is data-driven. The cognitive
approach is theory-driven: It begins with a model of how cognition works, and seeks
to explain individual differences in intelligence via individual differences in the ability
to perform the processes specified in the model.