Human attempts to measure human intelligence have been prevalent since the beginning of humanity. Initially, this was not done numerically; people were simply given jobs as scribes based on qualitative measures, such as lineage. However, in the early 20th century, psychologists began to measure mental faculty numerically, devising what would eventually evolve into the IQ test.
French psychologist Alfred Binet, alongside Théodore Simon, devised the IQ's test most notable ancestor: the Simon-Binet test. It was published in 1905 and was initially created to identify mental retardation in schoolchildren. For that reason, the skills tested were incredibly specific to schoolchildren; one of the skills tested was paper-cutting. Binet believed that his test would correctly identify children who needed medical care for their cognitive development; however, he stressed that he believed that intelligence could not be described simply numerically. Alfred Binet believed that intelligence should instead be judged qualitatively.
The test was translated into English, and published by Henry Goddard, an American psychologist who would become a prominent figure in the eugenics movement. This test was revised by Stanford psychologist Lewis Terman in 1916; the product of this revision was the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales. This test would grow rapidly in popularity and be used the next year by the United States Army to assign recruits to appropriate tasks. Around 1.75 million men were tested, though the test's reliability was doubted due to its alleged culturally bias. Some argued that the test gave too great an advantage to native-born, wealthier Americans, who would likely have a firm command of the English language, better education and wider cultural experiences.
The results of the testing were malevolently presented as evidence for the eugenics movement. Recruits from higher socioeconomic backgrounds scored higher, giving eugenicists like Goddard the statistics to make their case for eugenics. He reasoned that poor cognitive performance, or "feeble-mindedness" (as he called it), was hereditary, and therefore that individuals with such characteristics should be prevented from having offspring. Some American states adopted laws mandating that some people be sterilised. These laws resulted in approximately 64,000 people being sterilised.
The most popular modern-day tests are the revisions of the test originally developed by David Wechsler, a 20th century Romanian psychologist; they are the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales (WAIS) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The former is administered to individuals over the age of 16, and the latter is administered to those between 6 and 16. The WAIS was developed in accordance with Wechsler's definition of intelligence. Writing in The Measurement of Adult Intelligence, he defined intelligence as,
By using the definition above, Wechsler concedes that levels of intelligence change subject to the environment that one is in. The definition also suggests that intelligence can be enhanced or diminished. To summarise, the application of Weschler's theory of intelligence changes from situation to situation. "To act purposefully" in a classroom would be asking your teacher to re-iterate a previously taught concept. In stark contrast, acting purposefully on the battlefield would likely involve making an instinctive decision. This is one of the primary criticism of the IQ test; it uses culture-specific standards to assess individuals in a wide range of circumstances.
In an effort to combat this, British psychologist Raymond Cattell published the Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT). It is a test that assesses intelligence using non-verbal problems. Cattell's reasoning was that by avoiding questions which tested verbal ability or vocabulary, cultural disparities could be eliminated from the test. Although Cattell's test can be more widely used than Wechsler's, it is not completely free from cultural bias. According to Carolyn M. Callahan and Holly L. Hertberg Davis, educational psychologists at the University of Virginia,
However, there is evidence to suggest that IQ scores have some value. A 2006 study by Paul Irwing and Richard Lynn (University of Manchester and University of Ulster, respectively), found that there was a moderately strong correlation of .368 between IQ at age 8, and income at age 43 amongst males (the figure was .317 amongst females). The same study found that as the complexity of a job increased, the greater correlation there was between job performance and IQ. Below is an extract from Irwing and Lynn's study (The Relation Between Childhood IQ and Income in Middle Age):
A 2001 study by Lawrence J. Whalley (professor of mental health) and Ian J. Deary (professor of differential psychology) found that those with an IQ of 115 were 21% more likely to be alive at 76 than those with an IQ of 100. The study was conducted by taking intelligence testing data from a 1932 test in Scottish schools and finding out what number of them were still alive at the age of 76, in 1997. The study noted that high-IQ men were more likely than low-IQ men to die in active service in the Second World War. Thus we can conclude that there is an even greater correlation between IQ and age at death than the study suggests; if men with higher IQs had not died in the early 1940s, they would have had a greater impact on the study data.
IQ is also a good predictor of likelihood to take the US presidency. A 2006 study by Dean Simonton (researcher at the University of California at Davis) found that the mean IQ score of the 42 men who served as President up until 2006 was 152.
Are IQ scores useful? I believe that there is enough evidence to suggest that IQ scores are not arbitrary, that they have practical value. For this reason, I believe that IQ tests should be administered in educational settings. For example, to identify gifted students with great levels of potential. However, I am still skeptical as to whether IQ is useful enough for it to influence public policy. We should treat attempts by legislators to use IQ tests to make law with caution, or we risk becoming redolent of eugenicists, and ignoring the intrinsic uniqueness and value of each human life.
French psychologist Alfred Binet, alongside Théodore Simon, devised the IQ's test most notable ancestor: the Simon-Binet test. It was published in 1905 and was initially created to identify mental retardation in schoolchildren. For that reason, the skills tested were incredibly specific to schoolchildren; one of the skills tested was paper-cutting. Binet believed that his test would correctly identify children who needed medical care for their cognitive development; however, he stressed that he believed that intelligence could not be described simply numerically. Alfred Binet believed that intelligence should instead be judged qualitatively.
The test was translated into English, and published by Henry Goddard, an American psychologist who would become a prominent figure in the eugenics movement. This test was revised by Stanford psychologist Lewis Terman in 1916; the product of this revision was the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales. This test would grow rapidly in popularity and be used the next year by the United States Army to assign recruits to appropriate tasks. Around 1.75 million men were tested, though the test's reliability was doubted due to its alleged culturally bias. Some argued that the test gave too great an advantage to native-born, wealthier Americans, who would likely have a firm command of the English language, better education and wider cultural experiences.
The results of the testing were malevolently presented as evidence for the eugenics movement. Recruits from higher socioeconomic backgrounds scored higher, giving eugenicists like Goddard the statistics to make their case for eugenics. He reasoned that poor cognitive performance, or "feeble-mindedness" (as he called it), was hereditary, and therefore that individuals with such characteristics should be prevented from having offspring. Some American states adopted laws mandating that some people be sterilised. These laws resulted in approximately 64,000 people being sterilised.
The most popular modern-day tests are the revisions of the test originally developed by David Wechsler, a 20th century Romanian psychologist; they are the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales (WAIS) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC). The former is administered to individuals over the age of 16, and the latter is administered to those between 6 and 16. The WAIS was developed in accordance with Wechsler's definition of intelligence. Writing in The Measurement of Adult Intelligence, he defined intelligence as,
...the global capacity of a person to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment.
By using the definition above, Wechsler concedes that levels of intelligence change subject to the environment that one is in. The definition also suggests that intelligence can be enhanced or diminished. To summarise, the application of Weschler's theory of intelligence changes from situation to situation. "To act purposefully" in a classroom would be asking your teacher to re-iterate a previously taught concept. In stark contrast, acting purposefully on the battlefield would likely involve making an instinctive decision. This is one of the primary criticism of the IQ test; it uses culture-specific standards to assess individuals in a wide range of circumstances.
In an effort to combat this, British psychologist Raymond Cattell published the Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT). It is a test that assesses intelligence using non-verbal problems. Cattell's reasoning was that by avoiding questions which tested verbal ability or vocabulary, cultural disparities could be eliminated from the test. Although Cattell's test can be more widely used than Wechsler's, it is not completely free from cultural bias. According to Carolyn M. Callahan and Holly L. Hertberg Davis, educational psychologists at the University of Virginia,
...the abilities measured by nonverbal tests—especially those that use only figural reasoning items, under-represent the construct of intelligence.It is argued for these reasons that IQ tests are inaccurate. Those skeptical of the validity of IQ tests cite Binet's belief that intelligence could only be truly evaluated qualitatively, they reason that Wechsler's intelligence test favours candidates who can take the test in their first language. They argue that even "culture fair" intelligence tests are subject to bias.
However, there is evidence to suggest that IQ scores have some value. A 2006 study by Paul Irwing and Richard Lynn (University of Manchester and University of Ulster, respectively), found that there was a moderately strong correlation of .368 between IQ at age 8, and income at age 43 amongst males (the figure was .317 amongst females). The same study found that as the complexity of a job increased, the greater correlation there was between job performance and IQ. Below is an extract from Irwing and Lynn's study (The Relation Between Childhood IQ and Income in Middle Age):
For the least complex jobs, such as sales, service occupations, machinery workers, packers and wrappers, the correlations between intelligence and job proficiency lay in the range between 0 and .19. For jobs of intermediate complexity, such as supervisors, clerks and assemblers, the correlations lay in the range between .20 and .34. For the most complex jobs, such as electrical workers and managerial and professional occupations, the correlations lay in the range between .35 and .47.The study seemingly suggests that in cognitively demanding jobs, IQ was a good predictor of job proficiency; therefore IQ must have some ability to evaluate cognitive performance. Moreover, a 2007 study of the relationship between ACT scores and general cognitive ability found there was a correlation of .767 between IQ scores and ACT scores. Given that the ACT is an American college readiness test, we can conclude that IQ is also a good predictor academic performance.
A 2001 study by Lawrence J. Whalley (professor of mental health) and Ian J. Deary (professor of differential psychology) found that those with an IQ of 115 were 21% more likely to be alive at 76 than those with an IQ of 100. The study was conducted by taking intelligence testing data from a 1932 test in Scottish schools and finding out what number of them were still alive at the age of 76, in 1997. The study noted that high-IQ men were more likely than low-IQ men to die in active service in the Second World War. Thus we can conclude that there is an even greater correlation between IQ and age at death than the study suggests; if men with higher IQs had not died in the early 1940s, they would have had a greater impact on the study data.
IQ is also a good predictor of likelihood to take the US presidency. A 2006 study by Dean Simonton (researcher at the University of California at Davis) found that the mean IQ score of the 42 men who served as President up until 2006 was 152.
Are IQ scores useful? I believe that there is enough evidence to suggest that IQ scores are not arbitrary, that they have practical value. For this reason, I believe that IQ tests should be administered in educational settings. For example, to identify gifted students with great levels of potential. However, I am still skeptical as to whether IQ is useful enough for it to influence public policy. We should treat attempts by legislators to use IQ tests to make law with caution, or we risk becoming redolent of eugenicists, and ignoring the intrinsic uniqueness and value of each human life.
Comments
Post a Comment