Q: What is intelligence?
A. As you might imagine given that you selected this topic for THE QUESTION, the answer to the question what is intelligence could be answered in a number of ways. But one answer is that intelligence is a person’s ability to analyze, draw conclusions, and use information to adapt to their everyday environment.
Q. Is there really something like general intelligence or are there just different types of intelligence?
A. This question brings up a long-running debate about the nature of intelligence—research on this issue that goes back about a hundred years. Spearman (1927) proposed that there is a general factor of intelligence which he called “g”. He thought “g” was central to all sorts of more specific abilities which he called “s”. In contrast, Thurstone (1938) thought that intelligence was a constellation of different abilities. Cattell (1963) focused on two types of abilities: crystallized ability (accumulated knowledge or information) and fluid ability (the ability to see relations and analyze information).
Robert Sternberg’s (1985) triarchic theory of intelligence is a contemporary theory of intelligence that focuses on three components of intelligence: componential (basic information processing skills—being able to pay attention to information, remember it, analyze it, break it down to find a solution); experiential (how familiar versus novel a problem is and the ability to creatively solve a problem); contextual (the ability to maximize one’s fit to the environment or context in which one lives). The contextual component of intelligence in Sternberg’s theory is also referred to as practical intelligence.
My work on everyday problem solving derives from Sternberg’s ideas about the contextual component of intelligence and practical intelligence [This reflects my “intellectual lineage;” my graduate school mentor was Cynthia Berg (Strough, Berg, & Sansone, 1996) and Cindy’s mentor was Robert Sternberg (Berg & Sternberg, 1992)]. I examine the strategies people use to try to maximize the fit between themselves and their everyday environments.
My research indicates that compared to younger people (college students) older people (60 and above) use strategies that are more effective for working with other people (Strough, McFall, Flinn, & Schuller, in press). This suggests that the ability to successfully adapt to the interpersonal demands of everyday contexts may improve with age. Other research from my lab indicates that older people are better than younger people at making decisions about when to “call it quits” (Strough, Mehta, McFall, & Schuller, 2008). These findings also are consistent with the idea that the ability to successfully adapt to the demands of everyday contexts—Sternberg’s “practical intelligence”—improves with age.
Another contemporary theory of intelligence is Howard Gardner’s (1999) theory of multiple intelligences. Some types of intelligence Gardner focuses on in his theory are similar to the kinds of intelligence measured on IQ tests (e.g., verbal, quantitative, spatial ability). Other types of intelligence in Gardner’s theory include musical intelligence, bodily-kinesthetic intelligence (e.g., athletic ability), intrapersonal (self-knowledge), and insight about the natural world. Gardner also discusses interpersonal intelligence (e.g., being able to “read” other people).
Q. Does it make sense to say that one person is more intelligent than another person? Or does it make sense only to say that one person has more of a certain type of intelligence?
A. That would depend on whether you believe that intelligence is best represented as “g” or as “s”. But either way, it is accurate to state that there are individual differences in intelligence—as reflected in variation in scores on intelligence tests.
Q. Do IQ tests really measure intelligence?
A. IQ tests measure aspects of intelligence. IQ tests are standardized tests designed to measure aspects of intelligence such as people’s accumulated knowledge (crystallized ability) and their ability to analyze information (fluid ability). It is difficult to develop standardized tests for the experiential and contextual components of intelligence. It is difficult to develop a standardized test of the experiential aspect of intelligence because it pertains to the ability to deal with novelty and devise creative solutions—what is novel for one person may not be a novel problem for another person. It is difficult to develop a single standardized test of the contextual component of intelligence because different people have different environments to which they must adapt. Sternberg has, however, developed tests of what he calls tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge is knowing how to accomplish the goals you value and is consistent with the idea of practical intelligence.
Also, when considering whether IQ scores measure intelligence it is important to keep in mind that IQ scores indicate a person’s standing in relation to their age peers. A person’s score on an IQ test is compared to that of a normative group thought to be that person’s peers. To the extent that the person who is tested is a member of that normative group, their test score tells you something about their standing in relation to that group. In my opinion, IQ scores have taken on a mystique that is disproportionate to what an IQ score actually is. People often want to equate IQ with intelligence. Someone’s score on an IQ test is just a score on a test—a test that measures some of the abilities that are generally agreed to tap at least some aspect of intelligence.
Q. What is the difference between knowledge and intelligence?
A. When psychologists talk about knowledge they usually use that term to refer to a person’s understanding of a given content area—in other words the “facts” a person knows. Intelligence, on the other hand, includes not only knowledge, but the ability to use that knowledge effectively to increase the fit or match to the environment.
Q: What is the difference between wisdom and intelligence?
A. Another great question! Baltes and Staudinger (2000) as well as Sternberg (1998) are widely recognized as the leading experts on wisdom. Baltes and Staudinger (2000) define wisdom as “expertise in the meaning and conduct of life” (p.124). Sternberg (1998) defines wisdom as the use of knowledge for the common good; the ability to balance competing needs of self-interest and the interests of others with the interests of the larger social context within which one lives. So if you take these theorists’ definitions of wisdom, what you see is that wisdom is different from intelligence because of the focus on living one’s life in a way that promotes the common good.
Psychologists such as Baltes and Staudinger (2000) who study adult development and aging are interested in wisdom that people develop as a consequence of learning from their life experiences. Because greater age is associated with more life experience, older people have had more opportunities to learn from experience and develop this type of specialized knowledge about how to live a “good life.”
Q. Is there any correlation between intelligence and “success” in life?
A. This question brings up another term that must be defined. Namely, what do we mean by “success”? If by “success” you mean job performance or say, ability to succeed in graduate school, then there is an association. About 25% of the variance in “success” in these real world outcomes is accounted for by scores on standardized tests like IQ tests (Kuncel, Hezlett, & Ones, 2007; Sternberg, Wagner, Williams & Horvath, 1995). Of course, this means that 75% of the person’s “success” is accounted for by some other factor.
Part of this “other” factor is represented in Sternberg’s theory by the contextual component of intelligence—tacit knowledge or practical intelligence about how to successfully adapt to the demands of a given situation. Another component of real world success is motivation. A person can have a lot of talent, but without the motivation or interest to use their talent, they won’t be as successful.
Q. Anything else?
A. I want to thank you for the opportunity to talk about this topic. I hope that people who might not have thought that much about “The Question: What is Intelligence” will explore some of the psychological research and theories on this topic. I look forward to reading other people’s responses to The Question you raised.
References
Baltes, P.B., & Staudinger, U.M. (2000). Wisdom: A metaheuristic (pragmatic) to orchestrate mind and virtue toward excellence. American Psychologist, 55, 122-136.
Berg, C.A., & Sternberg, R.J. (1992). Adults’ conceptions of intelligence across the lifespan. Psychology and Aging, 7, 221-231.
Cattell, R.B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1-22.
Kuncel, N.R., Hezlett, S.A., & Ones, D.S. (2007). Academic performance, career potential, creativity, and job performance: Can one construct predict them all?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 148-161.
Spearman, C. (1927). The abilities of man: Their nature and measurement. New York Macmillan.
Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge England: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R.J. (1988). A balance theory of wisdom. Review of General Psychology, 2, 347-365.
Sternberg, R.J., Wagner, R.K., Williams, W.M., & Horvath, J.A. (1995). Testing common sense. American Psychologist, 50, 912-927.
Strough, J., Berg, C.A., & Sansone, C. (1996). Goals for solving everyday problems across the life span: Age and gender differences in the salience of interpersonal concerns. Developmental Psychology, 32, 1106-1115.
Strough, J., McFall, J., Flinn, J., & Schuller, K.L. (in press). Collaborative everyday problem solving among same-gender friends in early and later adulthood. Psychology and Aging.
Strough, J., Mehta, C.M., McFall, J.P., & Schuller, K.S. (2008). Are older adults less subject to the sunk-cost fallacy than younger adults? Psychological Science, 19, 650-652.
Thurstone, L.L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Psychometric Monographs, No. 1.
