Intelligence
Created | Updated Sep 10, 2004
"Intelligence is such a diffuse concept that any theory is bound to be self-defeating. Discuss critically."
One of the initial difficulties that psychologists face when attempting to create a theory for intelligence is what it actually is. It is only within the past 100 years that they have attempted to define intelligence. Prior to this time it was recognised that individuals could be smarter or dumber; cleverer or stupider; or more intelligent than others but no definition was seriously created (Gardner, 1993). In 1923, Boring stated that "Intelligence is what intelligence tests measure" (Kline, 1994:2). A nod, perhaps, towards the recognition that it is a difficult concept to define.
Even today there are still many interpretations as to what intelligence is, although to the person in the street it is generally associated with academic success. This disregards areas such as common sense and practical skills, despite the fact that they both use the brain to achieve their outcomes. For example, a grandmaster at chess is generally perceived as more intelligent than a top class chef. Although each has reached the top of their trade and therefore should be classed as intelligent, the chef's job is seen as more practical than intellectual.
Over the past century, theories of intelligence have gone down one of two paths. Either that there is a single underlying factor that accounts for all intelligent behaviour - a 'general intelligence' or alternatively that there are multiple factors, with specific ones applying to specific situations and different forms of intelligence.
On the 'general intelligence'; path, we find the theories of Charles Spearman, Arthur Jensen, Hans Eysenck, Michael Anderson and; Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
The pluralist viewpoint is supported by the theories of Louis Thurstone, J.P. Guilford, Howard Gardner and Robert Sternberg. Others such as P.E. Vernon, Horn & Cattell, and J.B. Carroll utilise hierarchical models which have a 'general intelligence' type concept at the top and then many subfactors (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
The general intelligence approach supports the work of those who wish to see intelligence as an innate ability. It is often the case that these researchers have a reductionist approach to psychology and believe that the intelligence level will remain constant throughout life.
The first attempts to measure intelligence occurred at the start of the 20th century with the work of Alfred Binet. He was asked by the Parisian board of education to develop a test that would allow educationally subnormal children to be identified, so that these children could then be placed in special classes to assist their learning. Binet's test allowed the authorities to reduce the child's intelligence to a number - Intelligence Quotient (IQ) as Binet termed it (Gould, 1996). Binet did not see this as representing innate intelligence though and actually cautioned against it. However when the test was taken to America by Lewis Terman, it was used for the purpose of proving that certain groups e.g. immigrants / ethnic races were lower in intelligence and this led to sterilisation laws being created (Gould, 1996).
Since Binet's original IQ test, there have been many further attempts to create intelligence tests. Any test that is created needs to be valid and reliable i.e. that it tests what it is intended to measure and that over a period of time it will render the same results if the subject has not improved or declined in the item being tested. Some of the later tests include the Wechsler Scale, Raven's progressive matrices and British Ability Scales (Kline, 1991). Early tests were found to be biased against certain groups of people, for example ethnic races, this was because they contained language or knowledge that the groups were not familiar with. Attempts are therefore made to create culture-free tests that show no bias. Some of the items included in intelligence tests include : reading comprehension, arithmetic, information recall, analogies, picture completion, matrices and completing series of numbers or shapes (Kline, 1991). Tests can be verbal or non-verbal, but most involve the use of pencil and paper. This narrow form of testing therefore excludes areas, such as those put forward by Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (as shall be discussed later), such as musical, bodily-kinaesthetic and interpersonal intelligence and they do not allow for personal qualities such as courage, persistence or creativity.
In 1904, Charles Spearman theorised that all types of intelligence had a common element. Spearman's two factor approach comprises a general intelligence - 'g' and a specific intelligence - 's'. A person's ability to deal with different problems and situations would utilise 'g' in each of them with 's' being variable to the particular situation (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
This theory of 'g' was developed by testing groups of school children on different subjects e.g. classics, french, mathematics and weight discrimination. Spearman found a correlation, where children achieving high scores in one subject, were likely to score well in another (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996). This led him to the conclusion that there must be an underlying 'general intelligence' governing the intellect.
The first plausible alternative to Spearman's two factor theory was created by Louis Thurstone (1938). He opposed Spearman's concept of 'g' by using factor analysis to show that it was purely a statistical average that occurred depending on how the factor axes were 'rotated'. His alternative theory consisted of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA), of which there were seven. These were verbal, comprehension, word fluency, number, memory, perceptual speed, reasoning and spatial visualisation (Gould, 1996).
In 1967, J.P. Guilford put forward his "Structure of Intellect Model". This contained 120 factors in 3 dimensions - often represented as a 4x5x6 cube (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
P.E. Vernon (1956) put forward a hierarchical model that had 'g' at the top, with two major group factors - verbal educational and spatial mechanical abilities. Each of the major group factors was then divided in minor group factors and these divided into specific skills (Anderson, 1992). This combined Spearman's theory of the existence of 'g', but allowed for numerous other factors.
Similarly Horn and Cattell (1966) came up with a hierarchical model that had two broad factors at the top. They termed these fluid ability (Gf) and crystallised ability (Gc). Fluid ability seemed to be a biologically based intelligence and therefore showed similarities with 'g', while crystallised ability correlated highly with fluid ability (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
Further hierarchical models were proposed by Jan-Eric Gustafson (1984) and J.B. Carroll (1993) with each using 'g'; as the main factor (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
In 1983, in his book "Frames of Mind", Howard Gardner proposed a new, wider definition of intelligence, that of multiple intelligences. The seven intelligences he proposed were musical, bodily-kinaesthetic (associated with sporting ability), logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, interpersonal and intrapersonal (Gardner, 1993b). Gardner makes little attempt to explain how these intelligences link together and opponents suggest that maybe it is the presence of 'g'. Instead he concentrates on using his theory to explain how and why different people end up with different careers and interests (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
Robert Sternberg (1985) put forward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. This consisted of three subtheories - the componential, experiential and contextual. It follows the notion that earlier theories of intelligence are not necessarily wrong, just incomplete (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
As has been discussed, intelligence is a diffuse concept. There is no easy definition to explain what it does and does not cover; there are a multitude of theories that have been created over the past century, some utilising a theory of 'general intelligence', others, such as Guilford's using 120 factors. Each theory puts forward different factors. The range of intelligence tests and the question of whether they are valid in measuring intelligence add to the confusion.
For a theory of intelligence to be successful in explaining the concept, it needs to be able to cover all types of intelligence and still be understandable. On the surface, a theory such as Spearman's two factor theory (1904) appears to work well, because it is simple, with the 'general intelligence' factor explaining any form of intelligence.
But whether 'g' exists depends on the mathematics being used. For as Gardner (1993:17) writes
"Given the same set of data, it is possible, using one set of factor analytic procedures, to come up with a picture that supports the idea of a 'g' factor; using another equally valid method of statistical analysis, it is possible to support the notion of a family of relatively discrete mental abilities."
Later theories of intelligence, which use hierarchical models or plural factors become too specific and are not able to explain all types of intelligence.
At present, intelligence is a diffuse concept and there are a multitude of theories that attempt to explain it. Some involve a 'general intelligence', some involve situational factors, some involve both. None of them satisfactorily deals with the scope of intelligence. Until a clear cut definition of intelligence can be given, theories will continue not to be able to explain it. The likelihood of such a definition occurring are virtually zero, as there will always be alternatives given, and so theories of intelligence are bound to be self-defeating.
Bibliography
Anderson, M. (1992) Intelligence and Development - A Cognitive Theory, 1st ed, Oxford:Blackwell Press
Carroll, J.B. (1993) Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-analytic Studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gardner, H. (1993) Frames of Mind - The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, 2nd ed, New York:Basic Books
Gardner, H. (1993b) Multiple Intelligences - The Theory in Practice, 1st ed, New York:Basic Books
Gardner, H.; Kornhaber, M. and Wake, W. (1996) Intelligence - Multiple Perspectives, 1st ed, London:Harcourt - Brace
Goleman, D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence, 1st ed, G.B.:Bloomsbury Publishing
Gould, S.J. (1997) The Mismeasure of Man, 1st ed, G.B.:Penguin Books
Guilford, J.P. (1967) The Nature of Human Intelligence, New York: McGraw-Hill
Gustafsson, J. -E. (1984) A Unifying Model for the Structure of Intellectual Abilities, Intelligence, 8, 179-203.
Horn, J. and Cattell, R.B. (1966) Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallised general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57(5), 253-270.
Kline, P. (1994) Intelligence : The Psychometric View, 1st ed, London:Routledge
Piaget, J. (1967) The Psychology Of Intelligence, 5th ed, London:Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd
Spearman, C. (1904) General Intelligence, objectively determined and measured. American Journal Of Psychology, 15, 201-293.
Sternberg, R.J. (1985) Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Sternberg, R. and Wagner, R. (1986) Practical Intelligence, 1st ed, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Thurstone, L.L. (1938) Primary Mental Abilities, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vernon. P.E. (1956) The Measurement of Abilities. London: University of London Press.
*** Further essays extracts ***
Taken from an essay about how psychological research is influenced by the environment in which it takes place ...
Binet, a French psychologist used a single case study approach while Galton, an English psychologist favoured using the statistical methods that we are familiar with today.
Why then did Galton's scientific methods become accepted instead of Binet's case studies? An explanation for this lies within the politics of the United States at the turn of the 20th century. The United States was seen as a land of prosperity where individuals could live the "American Dream" and become rich. There were few restrictions on immigration and with the outbreak of World War I, many Europeans left their homes in search of peace.
In the late 19th century, Galton, had proposed the concept of eugenics. He believed that intelligence was inherited and that poor families with their large numbers of children were slowly lowering the average level of intelligence (Gould, 1981). In particular he believed that there were differences between the races, with whites being superior to blacks, Jews, eastern Europeans, the Latin and Asians. In fact superior to any race not descended from northern Europeans.
In 1905, Binet had invented an intelligence test to assist with the identification of underperforming school children in Paris. This test and subsequent versions were translated by H.H. Goddard into English and taken to the United States (Gould, 1981). Psychologists like Galton and Goddard seized upon these I.Q. tests as a way to statistically prove their beliefs that intelligence is hereditary (Richards, 1996). Another psychologist, R.M. Yerkes tested almost 2 million soldiers to get scores that backed up the hereditarian view of intelligence. The U.S. government concerned by a weakening of the 'bloodstock' of America allowed themselves to be persuaded by these arguments. This led to the introduction of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924, which restricted the number of immigrants entering the U.S. from certain countries in Southern and Eastern Europe, and involuntary sterilisation laws being passed in many states. Both had the intention of stopping the spread of the 'feebleminded' (Gould, 1981).
... and then later talks about ...
Also with the end of world war II came the end of research trying to prove differences between the races (Billig, 1979). This scientific racism was no longer found to be publicly acceptable following the work of the Nazis and, rightly or wrongly, we see here an area of psychology no longer being investigated due to social pressures.
It was to be almost 25 years before this area of psychology resurfaced with Jensen’s work. In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published his report on the Project Headstart program - "How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?" (Richards, 1996). The project Headstart program was created in 1965 to give children from underprivileged homes an assisted learning experience (Malim & Birch, 1998). Jensen's article stated that the program was not working and attributed it to intelligence being genetically determined (Richards, 1996). In particular he pointed at the poor performance of blacks on IQ tests (they score approximately 15 points lower than white Americans) (Malim & Birch, 1998). His point was that because intelligence is an inherited trait its level could not be changed and therefore there was no use in wasting funding in attempting to do so.
This work reopened the area of racial differences in intelligence. Over the years there have been many stated objections from various sources, for example the validity of the tests, the effects of environmental deprivation over generations, the interaction of genes and environment, the difficulties of defining race and intelligence (Malim and Birch, 1998). Despite these the subject matter continues to get publication, even into the 1990s with the publishing of work by J. Phillippe Rushton, Richard Lynn; and of Herrnstein and Murray's "The Bell Curve" (Cernovsky, 1997). One of the reasons why this is still occurring is that there are still political groups from the extreme right of the political spectrum. These groups are prepared to fund research that supports their views. The work of Rushton, Lynn and Jensen has all benefited from funding by the New York-based Pioneer Fund (Richards, 1996).
Richards (1996:171) states that "one is bound to conclude that the persistence of this controversy owes more to domestic U.S. politics than it does to anything else" and here again this confirms how the political environment affects the development of psychological theory. Without any funding, it would become difficult for these theories of between-race differences to be developed.
*** Third essay extract ***
Taken from an essay about the importance of understanding the history of psychology.
At the turn of the century when psychology was still in its infancy, most psychologists were white, middle or upper class males. They had a belief that women and ethnic races were subordinate to them (Richards, 1996) and attempted to use psychology to prove this. Unsurprisingly they succeeded.
For example, in the late 40s, Cyril Burt researched whether intelligence is an inherited trait or caused by the quality of teaching and the surrounding environment. His work came to the conclusion that intelligence is genetically inherited. His further studies in the 50s and 60s continued to support this claim. As a result of his work, IQ tests were included in exams that determined the future of school children. It was only after his death in the 1970s that the scientific quality of his research data was questioned (Evans and Waites, 1981). Even today, almost 20 years after his work was invalidated, there are still those who believe that Burt's work supports the view that intelligence is inherited.
One of the initial difficulties that psychologists face when attempting to create a theory for intelligence is what it actually is. It is only within the past 100 years that they have attempted to define intelligence. Prior to this time it was recognised that individuals could be smarter or dumber; cleverer or stupider; or more intelligent than others but no definition was seriously created (Gardner, 1993). In 1923, Boring stated that "Intelligence is what intelligence tests measure" (Kline, 1994:2). A nod, perhaps, towards the recognition that it is a difficult concept to define.
Even today there are still many interpretations as to what intelligence is, although to the person in the street it is generally associated with academic success. This disregards areas such as common sense and practical skills, despite the fact that they both use the brain to achieve their outcomes. For example, a grandmaster at chess is generally perceived as more intelligent than a top class chef. Although each has reached the top of their trade and therefore should be classed as intelligent, the chef's job is seen as more practical than intellectual.
Over the past century, theories of intelligence have gone down one of two paths. Either that there is a single underlying factor that accounts for all intelligent behaviour - a 'general intelligence' or alternatively that there are multiple factors, with specific ones applying to specific situations and different forms of intelligence.
On the 'general intelligence'; path, we find the theories of Charles Spearman, Arthur Jensen, Hans Eysenck, Michael Anderson and; Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
The pluralist viewpoint is supported by the theories of Louis Thurstone, J.P. Guilford, Howard Gardner and Robert Sternberg. Others such as P.E. Vernon, Horn & Cattell, and J.B. Carroll utilise hierarchical models which have a 'general intelligence' type concept at the top and then many subfactors (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
The general intelligence approach supports the work of those who wish to see intelligence as an innate ability. It is often the case that these researchers have a reductionist approach to psychology and believe that the intelligence level will remain constant throughout life.
The first attempts to measure intelligence occurred at the start of the 20th century with the work of Alfred Binet. He was asked by the Parisian board of education to develop a test that would allow educationally subnormal children to be identified, so that these children could then be placed in special classes to assist their learning. Binet's test allowed the authorities to reduce the child's intelligence to a number - Intelligence Quotient (IQ) as Binet termed it (Gould, 1996). Binet did not see this as representing innate intelligence though and actually cautioned against it. However when the test was taken to America by Lewis Terman, it was used for the purpose of proving that certain groups e.g. immigrants / ethnic races were lower in intelligence and this led to sterilisation laws being created (Gould, 1996).
Since Binet's original IQ test, there have been many further attempts to create intelligence tests. Any test that is created needs to be valid and reliable i.e. that it tests what it is intended to measure and that over a period of time it will render the same results if the subject has not improved or declined in the item being tested. Some of the later tests include the Wechsler Scale, Raven's progressive matrices and British Ability Scales (Kline, 1991). Early tests were found to be biased against certain groups of people, for example ethnic races, this was because they contained language or knowledge that the groups were not familiar with. Attempts are therefore made to create culture-free tests that show no bias. Some of the items included in intelligence tests include : reading comprehension, arithmetic, information recall, analogies, picture completion, matrices and completing series of numbers or shapes (Kline, 1991). Tests can be verbal or non-verbal, but most involve the use of pencil and paper. This narrow form of testing therefore excludes areas, such as those put forward by Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences (as shall be discussed later), such as musical, bodily-kinaesthetic and interpersonal intelligence and they do not allow for personal qualities such as courage, persistence or creativity.
In 1904, Charles Spearman theorised that all types of intelligence had a common element. Spearman's two factor approach comprises a general intelligence - 'g' and a specific intelligence - 's'. A person's ability to deal with different problems and situations would utilise 'g' in each of them with 's' being variable to the particular situation (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
This theory of 'g' was developed by testing groups of school children on different subjects e.g. classics, french, mathematics and weight discrimination. Spearman found a correlation, where children achieving high scores in one subject, were likely to score well in another (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996). This led him to the conclusion that there must be an underlying 'general intelligence' governing the intellect.
The first plausible alternative to Spearman's two factor theory was created by Louis Thurstone (1938). He opposed Spearman's concept of 'g' by using factor analysis to show that it was purely a statistical average that occurred depending on how the factor axes were 'rotated'. His alternative theory consisted of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA), of which there were seven. These were verbal, comprehension, word fluency, number, memory, perceptual speed, reasoning and spatial visualisation (Gould, 1996).
In 1967, J.P. Guilford put forward his "Structure of Intellect Model". This contained 120 factors in 3 dimensions - often represented as a 4x5x6 cube (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
P.E. Vernon (1956) put forward a hierarchical model that had 'g' at the top, with two major group factors - verbal educational and spatial mechanical abilities. Each of the major group factors was then divided in minor group factors and these divided into specific skills (Anderson, 1992). This combined Spearman's theory of the existence of 'g', but allowed for numerous other factors.
Similarly Horn and Cattell (1966) came up with a hierarchical model that had two broad factors at the top. They termed these fluid ability (Gf) and crystallised ability (Gc). Fluid ability seemed to be a biologically based intelligence and therefore showed similarities with 'g', while crystallised ability correlated highly with fluid ability (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
Further hierarchical models were proposed by Jan-Eric Gustafson (1984) and J.B. Carroll (1993) with each using 'g'; as the main factor (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
In 1983, in his book "Frames of Mind", Howard Gardner proposed a new, wider definition of intelligence, that of multiple intelligences. The seven intelligences he proposed were musical, bodily-kinaesthetic (associated with sporting ability), logical-mathematical, linguistic, spatial, interpersonal and intrapersonal (Gardner, 1993b). Gardner makes little attempt to explain how these intelligences link together and opponents suggest that maybe it is the presence of 'g'. Instead he concentrates on using his theory to explain how and why different people end up with different careers and interests (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
Robert Sternberg (1985) put forward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. This consisted of three subtheories - the componential, experiential and contextual. It follows the notion that earlier theories of intelligence are not necessarily wrong, just incomplete (Gardner, Kornhaber and Wake, 1996).
As has been discussed, intelligence is a diffuse concept. There is no easy definition to explain what it does and does not cover; there are a multitude of theories that have been created over the past century, some utilising a theory of 'general intelligence', others, such as Guilford's using 120 factors. Each theory puts forward different factors. The range of intelligence tests and the question of whether they are valid in measuring intelligence add to the confusion.
For a theory of intelligence to be successful in explaining the concept, it needs to be able to cover all types of intelligence and still be understandable. On the surface, a theory such as Spearman's two factor theory (1904) appears to work well, because it is simple, with the 'general intelligence' factor explaining any form of intelligence.
But whether 'g' exists depends on the mathematics being used. For as Gardner (1993:17) writes
"Given the same set of data, it is possible, using one set of factor analytic procedures, to come up with a picture that supports the idea of a 'g' factor; using another equally valid method of statistical analysis, it is possible to support the notion of a family of relatively discrete mental abilities."
Later theories of intelligence, which use hierarchical models or plural factors become too specific and are not able to explain all types of intelligence.
At present, intelligence is a diffuse concept and there are a multitude of theories that attempt to explain it. Some involve a 'general intelligence', some involve situational factors, some involve both. None of them satisfactorily deals with the scope of intelligence. Until a clear cut definition of intelligence can be given, theories will continue not to be able to explain it. The likelihood of such a definition occurring are virtually zero, as there will always be alternatives given, and so theories of intelligence are bound to be self-defeating.
Bibliography
Anderson, M. (1992) Intelligence and Development - A Cognitive Theory, 1st ed, Oxford:Blackwell Press
Carroll, J.B. (1993) Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor-analytic Studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gardner, H. (1993) Frames of Mind - The Theory of Multiple Intelligences, 2nd ed, New York:Basic Books
Gardner, H. (1993b) Multiple Intelligences - The Theory in Practice, 1st ed, New York:Basic Books
Gardner, H.; Kornhaber, M. and Wake, W. (1996) Intelligence - Multiple Perspectives, 1st ed, London:Harcourt - Brace
Goleman, D. (1996) Emotional Intelligence, 1st ed, G.B.:Bloomsbury Publishing
Gould, S.J. (1997) The Mismeasure of Man, 1st ed, G.B.:Penguin Books
Guilford, J.P. (1967) The Nature of Human Intelligence, New York: McGraw-Hill
Gustafsson, J. -E. (1984) A Unifying Model for the Structure of Intellectual Abilities, Intelligence, 8, 179-203.
Horn, J. and Cattell, R.B. (1966) Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallised general intelligences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 57(5), 253-270.
Kline, P. (1994) Intelligence : The Psychometric View, 1st ed, London:Routledge
Piaget, J. (1967) The Psychology Of Intelligence, 5th ed, London:Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd
Spearman, C. (1904) General Intelligence, objectively determined and measured. American Journal Of Psychology, 15, 201-293.
Sternberg, R.J. (1985) Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Sternberg, R. and Wagner, R. (1986) Practical Intelligence, 1st ed, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press
Thurstone, L.L. (1938) Primary Mental Abilities, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vernon. P.E. (1956) The Measurement of Abilities. London: University of London Press.
*** Further essays extracts ***
Taken from an essay about how psychological research is influenced by the environment in which it takes place ...
Binet, a French psychologist used a single case study approach while Galton, an English psychologist favoured using the statistical methods that we are familiar with today.
Why then did Galton's scientific methods become accepted instead of Binet's case studies? An explanation for this lies within the politics of the United States at the turn of the 20th century. The United States was seen as a land of prosperity where individuals could live the "American Dream" and become rich. There were few restrictions on immigration and with the outbreak of World War I, many Europeans left their homes in search of peace.
In the late 19th century, Galton, had proposed the concept of eugenics. He believed that intelligence was inherited and that poor families with their large numbers of children were slowly lowering the average level of intelligence (Gould, 1981). In particular he believed that there were differences between the races, with whites being superior to blacks, Jews, eastern Europeans, the Latin and Asians. In fact superior to any race not descended from northern Europeans.
In 1905, Binet had invented an intelligence test to assist with the identification of underperforming school children in Paris. This test and subsequent versions were translated by H.H. Goddard into English and taken to the United States (Gould, 1981). Psychologists like Galton and Goddard seized upon these I.Q. tests as a way to statistically prove their beliefs that intelligence is hereditary (Richards, 1996). Another psychologist, R.M. Yerkes tested almost 2 million soldiers to get scores that backed up the hereditarian view of intelligence. The U.S. government concerned by a weakening of the 'bloodstock' of America allowed themselves to be persuaded by these arguments. This led to the introduction of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924, which restricted the number of immigrants entering the U.S. from certain countries in Southern and Eastern Europe, and involuntary sterilisation laws being passed in many states. Both had the intention of stopping the spread of the 'feebleminded' (Gould, 1981).
... and then later talks about ...
Also with the end of world war II came the end of research trying to prove differences between the races (Billig, 1979). This scientific racism was no longer found to be publicly acceptable following the work of the Nazis and, rightly or wrongly, we see here an area of psychology no longer being investigated due to social pressures.
It was to be almost 25 years before this area of psychology resurfaced with Jensen’s work. In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published his report on the Project Headstart program - "How much can we boost IQ and scholastic achievement?" (Richards, 1996). The project Headstart program was created in 1965 to give children from underprivileged homes an assisted learning experience (Malim & Birch, 1998). Jensen's article stated that the program was not working and attributed it to intelligence being genetically determined (Richards, 1996). In particular he pointed at the poor performance of blacks on IQ tests (they score approximately 15 points lower than white Americans) (Malim & Birch, 1998). His point was that because intelligence is an inherited trait its level could not be changed and therefore there was no use in wasting funding in attempting to do so.
This work reopened the area of racial differences in intelligence. Over the years there have been many stated objections from various sources, for example the validity of the tests, the effects of environmental deprivation over generations, the interaction of genes and environment, the difficulties of defining race and intelligence (Malim and Birch, 1998). Despite these the subject matter continues to get publication, even into the 1990s with the publishing of work by J. Phillippe Rushton, Richard Lynn; and of Herrnstein and Murray's "The Bell Curve" (Cernovsky, 1997). One of the reasons why this is still occurring is that there are still political groups from the extreme right of the political spectrum. These groups are prepared to fund research that supports their views. The work of Rushton, Lynn and Jensen has all benefited from funding by the New York-based Pioneer Fund (Richards, 1996).
Richards (1996:171) states that "one is bound to conclude that the persistence of this controversy owes more to domestic U.S. politics than it does to anything else" and here again this confirms how the political environment affects the development of psychological theory. Without any funding, it would become difficult for these theories of between-race differences to be developed.
*** Third essay extract ***
Taken from an essay about the importance of understanding the history of psychology.
At the turn of the century when psychology was still in its infancy, most psychologists were white, middle or upper class males. They had a belief that women and ethnic races were subordinate to them (Richards, 1996) and attempted to use psychology to prove this. Unsurprisingly they succeeded.
For example, in the late 40s, Cyril Burt researched whether intelligence is an inherited trait or caused by the quality of teaching and the surrounding environment. His work came to the conclusion that intelligence is genetically inherited. His further studies in the 50s and 60s continued to support this claim. As a result of his work, IQ tests were included in exams that determined the future of school children. It was only after his death in the 1970s that the scientific quality of his research data was questioned (Evans and Waites, 1981). Even today, almost 20 years after his work was invalidated, there are still those who believe that Burt's work supports the view that intelligence is inherited.
