BACHELOR OF PSYCHOLOGY WITH HONOURS (BPSY)

SEMESTER 2 / 2019

ABPG1203

HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF PSYCHOLOGY

MATRICULATION NO : 970927025543001
IDENTITY CARD NO. : 970927-02-5543
TELEPHONE NO. : 014-7591945
E-MAIL : amadtubasa97@oum.edu.my
LEARNING CENTRE : BANGI LEARNING CENTER
Question 1:

Psychology is both an applied and theoretical discipline; therefore, it could be used in a

numbers of ways such as in intelligence tests.

Based on the statement above:

Discuss TWO types of intelligence tests in details. Analyse the limitation of both
intelligence test. Then, suggest TWO specific practical ways of the usage of intelligence
test in your everyday lives.

[Total: 40 marks]

For people living in the prevailing conditions of the developed world, IQ is highly
heritable, and by adulthood the influence of family environment on IQ is undetectable.
That is, significant variation in IQ between adults can be attributed to genetic variation,
with the remaining variation attributable to environmental sources that are not shared
within families. In the United States, marked variation in IQ occurs within families, with
siblings differing on average by around 12 points. On average, IQ scores are stable over
a person's lifetime, but some individuals undergo large changes. For example, scores can
be affected by the presence of learning disabilities. Originally, IQ was calculated with the
formula. A 10-year-old who scored as high as the average 13-year-old, for example,
would have an IQ of 130 {100 + (13/10)}. Because this formula only worked for
children, it was replaced by a projection of the measured rank on the Gaussian bell curve
with a center value (average IQ) of 100, and a standard deviation of 15 or occasionally
16. Thus the modern version of the IQ is a mathematical transformation of the rank (see
quartile, percentile, percentile rank), which is the primary result of an IQ test. To
differentiate the two scores, modern scores are sometimes referred to as "deviance IQ",
while the age-specific scores are referred to as "ratio IQ".

There are many different intelligence test types and uses. However, in almost every case,
intelligence tests measure four key areas of mental capacity. The first is verbal
intelligence. Verbal intelligence is classified as the kind of intelligence that makes an
individual a strong communicator and also proves strength in the areas of reading
comprehension and verbal dexterity. Intelligence tests for verbal intelligence are usually
fairly easy for people with large vocabularies, and who read easily and quickly. The
second category that most intelligence tests measure is numerical intelligence. Not simply
related to mathematical calculations, numerical intelligence is considered to be related to
overall intelligence in a number of ways. The skill does tend to be measured by assessing
the test-takers ability to complete complex calculations and even more simple ones.
Related to numerical intelligence is spatial intelligence. Spatial intelligence is the ability
to solve complex problems that require an understanding of spatial relationships such as
distance, size and area. Finally, the last type of intelligence measured by an intelligence
test is logical intelligence. This somewhat nebulous-sounding skill is simply the ability to
apply reason and logic to situations and scenarios. This ability is critical and comes into
play in many situations in life. There are two major types of intelligence test, those

1
administered to individuals and those administered to groups. The two main individual
intelligence tests are the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test and the Wechsler tests, i.e.
Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children (WISC) and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale (WAIS) for adults. The individual intelligence tests require one-on-one
consultation. A list of some of the more commonly used intelligence measures is given
below. Note that some of these are "nonverbal" instruments. These tests rely on little or
no verbal expression and are useful for a number of populations, such as non-native
speakers, children with poor expressive abilities, or students with loss.

For each test, the three part listing includes:

Test
Age Range
Description

Test = Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fifth Edition (SBIS-V)

Age range = 2 – 90+
Description = An update of the SB-IV. In addition to providing a Full Scale score, it
assesses Fluid Reasoning, Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, Visual-Spatial
Processing, and Working Memory as well as the ability to compare verbal and nonverbal
performance.

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition (WISC-IV)

6 – 16-11
An update of the WISC-III, this test yields a Full Scale score and scores for Verbal
Comprehension, Working Memory, Perceptual Reasoning, and Processing speed.

Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Cognitive Abilities

2 – 90+
This test gives a measure of general intellectual ability, as well as looking at working
memory and executive function skills.

Cognitive Assessment System (CAS)

5 - 17
Based on the “PASS” theory, this test measures ‘Planning, ‘Attention, ‘Simultaneous,
and ‘Successive cognitive processes.

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)

16 - 89
An IQ test for older children and adults, the WAIS provides a Verbal, Performance, and
Full Scale score, as well as scores for verbal comprehension, perceptual organization,
working memory, and processing speed.

Comprehensive Test of Nonverbal Intelligence (CTONI)

6 – 18-11

2
Designed to assess children who may be disadvantaged by traditional tests that put a
premium on language skills, the CTONI is made up of six subtests that measure different
nonverbal intellectual abilities.

Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test (UNIT)

5 - 17
Designed to assess children who may be disadvantaged by traditional tests that put a
premium on language skills, this test is entirely nonverbal in administration and response
style.

Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (KABC)

2-6 to 12-5
This test measures simultaneous and sequential processing skills, and has subscales that
measure academic achievement as well.

Group-administered intelligence tests involve a series of different problems and are

generally used in mass testing situations such as the military and schools. Examples of
group tests are:

Multidimensional Aptitude Battery

The Cognitive Abilities test
Scholastic Assessment Tests

There has been a trend towards the use of multiple choice items. Many of theses tests
have separately timed sub-tests. A major distinction made between types of items is
verbal and non-verbal. In recent years there has been a trend away from verbal and
mathematical items towards non-verbal represented problems in pictures.

Advantages of group tests:

 can be administered to very large numbers simultaneously

 simplified examiner role
 scoring typically more objective
 large, representative samples often used leading to better established norms

Disadvantages of group tests:

 examiner has less opportunity to obtain cooperation and maintain interest

 not readily detected if examinee tired, anxious, unwell
 evidence that emotionally disturbed children do better on individual than group
tests *examinee’s responses are more restricted
 normally an individual is tested on all items in a group test and may become
boredom over easy items and frustrated or anxious over difficult items
 individual tests typically provide for the examiner to choose items based on the
test takers prior responses - moving onto quite difficult items or back to easier
items. So individual tests offer more flexibility.

3
The first tests that were prepared were individual. The ideal of preparing group test was
motivated by economy and mass-scale testing work. Binet’s test was individual, and so
was Terman-Merril Stanford Revision. Individual tests are most reliable but these
consume more time and energy. These are, however, useful in making case-studies or
individual studies of behaviour problems or backwardness. The tests prepared in the
beginning were individual verbal i.e., where some sort of language (the mother-tongue of
the child) was used. Each question in Simon-Binet or Stanford Revision test is in verbal
form. The child has to read the question or listen to the question and answer in language.
But suppose the child is not fully conversant with the language of the examiner, or he is
illiterate. In that case verbal tests do not serve the purpose. Hence non-verbal or
performance tests have been prepared. Here the tasks set up require the child to do
‘something’ rather than reply a question. The child may, for instance, fit in a wooden
board with depressions in some geometrical forms, some wooden shapes like triangles or
rectangles or circles. He may put some cubes in descending or ascending order of size.
He may assemble certain disintegrated parts to form full designs or pictures. No language
is used here. Instructions also can be had through demonstration or action. A number of
performance tests have been prepared. The most important are:

1. Alexander’s Pass-a-long test.

2. Koh’s Block Design test.

3. Collin and Drever’s Performance Tests.

4. Weschlers Performance Test.

5. Terman and Merill’s Performance Test.

6. Kent’s Performance Test.

Kent’s test is used for clinical purposes. It consists of five oral tests and seven written
tests, each requiring one minute. Individual performance tests have the disadvantage that
these take a lot of time. Their reliability is also questioned on the ground that temporary
response sets or work habits may play a major role in determining score. The habits
rewarded in one test may lead to a low score or more scores on another. Again, the
intelligence measured by performance tests is not quite the same as tested by Binet and
others. Some psychologists have even questioned whether performance test batteries
measure general intelligence at all. Further details about performance tests are given
below elsewhere.

Group tests are more helpful as these deal with large masses of subjects such as in
schools, industry, army and public. Under favourable administering conditions these are
reliable and have high predictive validity, and can be compared favourably with
individual tests. The Army Alpha and Beta were the most prominent tests in the
beginning, Spearman constructed group tests in which questions were read out to the

4
candidates. Cyril, Burt prepared group test comprising of large number of sections each
section being a large number of problems of one particular kind. Most of the group-tests
have been standardized, and these are commonly used in educational institutions in the
western countries. The directions and manuals for examiners have been worked out, so
that even a layman can administer these. Most of the test items in group verbal tests are
linguistic in character. Some of the test items include problems requiring reasoning about
numbers, or geometrical forms. Some group verbal tests have been used in measuring
scholastic aptitude also. These are convenient in administration and scoring.

There are also have limitation of both intelligence test. Some test items do not have
connection with life situations. Some call for speed rather the solution of problems. Slight
differences in speed affect the scores. Enough of emphasis is not given to item difficulty.
Performance tests do not measure exactly what Binet’s tests measure- reasoning,
judgment and imagination. Most of these tests do not require above-average thinking, so
these are not suitable for higher levels. There are variations in the utility of different tests.
Picture completion tests may suffer from poor material. Maze tests require continual
adaptation and planning. Form-board tests tend to depend upon speed. Most of these tests
need to be administered individually, in small groups, which entails expense. Again
single performance tests are not so reliable. A battery of tests is needed, which makes the
task mere complex. On the whole performance tests have to stay for measuring general
ability. But these can simply supplement verbal tests rather than give independent results.
These can, however, be used independently when some special practical ability is to be
measured. Another limitation of IQ tests is that they attempt to represent a person's
overall intellectual abilities with a single score. According to psychologist Howard
Gardner in his book "Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences," people can
use as many as seven distinct forms of intelligence, including musical, kinesthetic, and
interpersonal intelligence. IQ tests may assess your logical thinking skills and memory,
but fail to assess your interpersonal skills or creativity. So, someone who scores below
average on an IQ test may still have exceptional creative abilities that IQ tests overlook.
An often-mentioned limitation of IQ tests is that they do not produce consistent scores
across cultural groups. An IQ test may include questions that emphasize skills that are
important to one cultural group, and neglect skills that are important to another cultural
group. For example, according to Professor Judith Kearins, in the journal "Cognitive
Psychology," Australian Aboriginal children who grew up in the desert scored above
average on a test that measured visual memory, despite scoring below average on IQ
tests. Professor Kearins suggested that visual memory is particularly important for the
Aboriginal children as a means of way-finding in the desert.

There are two specific practical ways of the usage of intelligence test in your everyday
lives. First, for Determining the optimum level of work. The primary aim of education is
to assist each child to make the best possible use of all his capacities. It is a general
measure of a pupil’s capacity to succeed in his school work. The mental age gives the
mental level at which a child can be expected to work most efficiently in academic
subjects. Second, identification of intellectual deviations. It is a problem to find who is
bright and who is dull. This is to be found, otherwise a teacher may force adult child to
do what is beyond his capacity, or fail to assist the gifted to make use of his exceptionally

5
great capacity. So the extreme cases are to be discovered. The very dull child is likely to
be recognised sooner or later as also the gifted. One of the most important problems is
giving education coping with mentally defective and identifying and cultivating the
potential capacity for leadership which gifted children have. The fact that intelligence is
positively related to vocational competence and to attainments in college work has
definite practical implications. The educational or vocational counsellor can use the score
on the intelligence test along with other data to predict a pupil’s success in college or in
many vocations. Though vocational success depends upon other factors as well: health,
persistence, interest and aptitudes, but intelligence is a potent factor. The teacher can note
the range of ability in the class. A group may contain neither very bright, nor very dull. In
others the range may be very large. This gives teacher a difficult task in adjusting
assignments, methods of instruction. Achievements tests are, therefore, supplemented by
intelligence tests to find the range. In a class or school, the abilities of different teachers
can be appraised in terms of the average attainments of their respective classes when
these are made equal in the level of intelligence. Similarly, comparisons of schools can be
made only when the levels of ability of the students of the two schools are also
determined. Aptitude tests can predict the ability to achieve in music, art and various
mechanical and social lines.

In conclusion, the most important thing to remember is that intelligence tests are not an
accurate measure of how smart someone is. Intelligence tests are tasked with measuring
intellectual potential, which, as you have seen, can grow, change and develop. The goal
in all intelligence tests is to get an overall sense of the capacity of the individual in
question for critical thought, other strengths and weaknesses. Although many posit that
hereditary genetics are a greater predictor of intelligence than anything in a young
person's natural environment, it is still believed to be the case that a child's surroundings
and exposure can alter potential. Aside from things like exposure to books and learning, a
family environment that supports and encourages intellectual pursuits, access to good
education, and a number of other factors may affect your score on an intelligence test.
Proper nutrition during the formative years is critical for developing cognitive skills.
Children who seem to struggle with communication or are nonverbal may also need
special attention or administration when taking an intelligence test.

[2515 words]

6
Question 2:

Based on latest literature review, discuss THREE current issues related to intelligence
tests as highlighted in the journals. Then, give your comments on that issue.

[Total: 20 marks]

Intelligence has been defined and studied under a number of different rubrics, among
them individual differences, cognitive abilities, and aptitudes. Probably the most
influential developments in our recent understanding of these concepts have come from
educational and psychological researchers associated with cognitive psychology. Three of
those individuals, Robert Sternberg, Howard Gardner, and John Horn serve as a
representative sample of researchers who have made significant gains in our current
conceptions of intelligence. In the following paragraphs I briefly summarize each one’s
conceptualization of intellectual abilities. Robert Sternberg. Sternberg’s (1985) theory of
intelligence contains three sub theories, one about context, one about experience, and one
about the cognitive components of information processing. The contextual subtheory
attempts to specify what would be considered "intelligent" in a given culture or context.
According to Sternberg, culturally intelligent behavior involves either adapting to one's
present environment, selecting a more optimal environment, or reshaping one's current
environment. The experiential subtheory claims that the expression of any intelligent
behavior will be a function of the amount of experience one has with the particular class
of tasks being tested. According to Sternberg, intelligence is best demonstrated when the
task is relatively novel or unfamiliar. The componential subtheory describes the cognitive
structures and processes that together produce intelligent behavior. Sternberg proposes
three general types of processes: metacomponents(which control and monitor
processing), performance components(processes that execute plans), and knowledge
acquisition components(which encode and assemble new knowledge). As a whole, the
triarchic theory claims different aspects or kinds of intelligence (e.g., academic,
practical). Howard Gardner. One of the most popular recent views of intelligence, at least
among practitioners, has come from Gardner (e.g., Gardner & Hatch, 1989).He proposes
a theory of multiple intelligences in which he claims there are seven relatively
independent intelligences. Those intelligences are logical-mathematical, linguistic,

7
musical, spatial, bodily kinesthetic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal. Additionally,
Gardner recognizes that one's experiences will influence the degree to which each of the
intelligences can be expressed. Thus, rather than characterizing an individual’s
intelligence by a single test score, Gardner argues for determining the profile of one’s
intelligences, taking into account culturally valued activities that can be expressed in a
familiar context. Accordingly, this view suggests the need for new forms of assessment.
Gardner and his colleagues have been working on versions of new, more authentic
assessment tools for the past 8 years. The results have been mixed. For a critique, the
interested reader should see Sternberg (1991). John Horn. Along with his advisor,
Raymond B. Cattell, John Horn has developed a theory of intelligence that specifies two
broad factors, fluid abilities and crystallized abilities, along with numerous specific
factors that support the general ones. Fluid intelligence represents one's ability to reason
and solve problems in novel or unfamiliar situations. Crystallized intelligence, on the
other hand, indicates the extent to which an individual has attained the knowledge of a
culture. According to Horn (1989), the Gf - Gc theory can also be thought of as a theory
of multiple intelligences because of the relative independence of fluid and crystallized
abilities (characterized by distinctly separate patterns of covariation). Horn also argues
that the expressions of these abilities"... are outcroppings of distinct influences operating
through development, brain function, genetic determination, and the adjustments,
adaptations, and achievements of school and work." (Horn, 1989, p. 76)
An important development in our understanding of intelligence, is the near universal
agreement among researchers that at least some aspects of our intellectual abilities
depend heavily on our experiential histories. This acknowledgement should be clear in
the three theories summarized above. Each one recognizes the inseparability of
experience from intellectual ability. This position stands in stark contrast to the one that
holds that intelligence tests measure - or ought to measure - one's innate capacity.
Admitting that experience influences one's performance on an intelligence test severely
undermines the innate capacity notion, unless one adopts the weaker position that
intelligence is a measure of one's innate capacity to learn. In either case, the logical
position to assume is that any theory that attempts to explain individual differences in
intellectual abilities must include a learning subtheory as part of it. A recent volume

8
edited by Ackerman, Sternberg, and Glaser (1989) presents several current approaches
that integrate information processing theories of learning with theories of individual
differences in abilities. Two widely acknowledged views have come from Ackerman
(e.g., 1993) and Lohman (1989; 1993). The next two paragraphs briefly summarize these
researchers' views. Phillip Ackerman. Ackerman (1993) has adapted aspects of John R.
Anderson's theory of cognitive skill acquisition (e.g., Anderson, 1983) and coupled it
with a theory of intellectual abilities proposed by Marshalek, Lohman, and Snow (1983).
The integration has produced a hybrid theory which claims that as learning occurs,
intellectual differences are reduced for tasks that have a consistent problem-solving
structure. In contrast, intellectual differences become magnified for tasks that have
variable (novel?) problem-solving structures. In other words, with practice peoples'
intellectual abilities will be either similar or different, depending on the nature of the
mental processes required to solve different types of problems. David Lohman. Lohman
(1989; 1993) has coupled information processing theories of learning (e.g., Anderson,
1983) with the Gf - Gc theory (e.g.,Horn, 1989) in order to characterize the relation
between learning and intelligence. It has been known for some time that crystallized
intelligence was the product of the acquisition of knowledge (i.e., experience). However,
recently Lohman (1993) has argued persuasively that fluid intelligence (i.e., the ability to
reason in novel situations) may also be amenable to learning. In fact, he espouses that
schools would benefit from direct instruction and testing of fluid abilities.
The state of affairs with respect to testing intelligence is interesting. Basically, current
practice doesn't match the recommendations being offered by educational and
psychological researchers. One question to be answered is, "Given our understanding of
the nature of intellectual abilities, why do current intelligence tests remain so popular and
the standard form of interpretation so pervasive?" In a provocative reply, Sternberg
(1992) argues that market forces (i.e., the demands of test consumers) have retarded the
development of new, more appropriate measures of intellectual abilities. He points out
that signs of change are appearing, but until they gain more momentum, current
instruments, no matter how inadequate, will continue to be the standard. A second
question to be answered is, "How can current research inform the development of new
instruments to assess intellectual abilities?" There are two parts to this answer, each with

9
its own potential contribution. First, while intelligence tests were originally devised to
classify individuals according to their academic potential, our education system is now
faced with an admittedly diverse set of students who possess a wide range of expressible
abilities. One answer that is emerging from the cognitive analysis of intellectual abilities
is that tests are likely better used for diagnostic purposes (i.e., as assessments of current
functioning so as to inform instructional needs) rather than for classification. Thus,
several researchers (e.g., Gardner & Hacht, 1989) propose the development of new
assessment tools designed for a new purpose. A second and related answer that is
surfacing is that fine-grained cognitive analyses can be used beneficially to uncover
individual differences in the information processing profiles of students (e.g., Carpenter,
Just, & Shell, 1990). A clear and important implication of this work is that such analyses
will eventually lead to dramatic improvement in our ability to assess an individual's
current level of intellectual functioning and to prescribe instructional interventions that
will maximize each individual's potential.
Following from the above, look at intelligence and its testing from the sociohistorical
synthesis founded on Vygotsky. Continuing with the sentiments expressed above,
fairness of intelligence testing must factor in learning and culture. To the old question, of
whether intellectual deficiencies accumulate, Humphreys (1988) a psychometrician of
prestige and authority, writes about the context within which learning deficiencies
accumulate among poor black American students, contributing to their inadequate
learning syndrome (ILS)'.
A summary of the main points in this chapter that will be of interest to both theorists and
practitioners in the field of intelligence is given below:
1. Intelligence is discernment and judgment, not merely quickness in thinking. The
Western and the Eastern philosophers agree on this.
2. A total shift from qualitative to a quantitative estimate of intelligence is regretted.
Intelligence includes not only reasoning, but also will, and emotion which may require
qualitative analysis (Das, 1994).
3. Recent theories of intelligence comprise a mixture of the old factor-analytically
derived ones and those derived from information processing. Among the latter are the
Theory of Multiple Intelligence, the PASS theory and the Triarchic Theory; each one

10
may make IQ obsolete. A revival of g as speed, specially, measured by reaction-time
straddles the border between the old and the new. However, its interpretation as a
phenotypic measure aspiring as it does to measure synaptic speed (correlation between IQ
& nervous conduction speed is around r=0.05; see Wahlsten (in press) is questionable.
When reaction time and IQ correlate, RT is a surrogate for complex information
processing.
4. Any theory of intelligence should specify how to measure intelligence, what processes
underlie test performance and how to prescribe instructional and remedial procedures.
5. Does intelligence contain some cognitive modules? Probably not in a strict sense if
modules are characterized as innate, fast and autonomous of general cognitive
activities. But the mind becomes modularized as development proceeds (Karmiloff-
Smith, 1992). By assuming that the 4 PASS processes, for example, develop as such, it
will be useful to discover how any one of them works rather than drowning their
activities in general intelligence.
6. Lastly a paradigm shift of sorts seems to have emerged in regarding the attribution of
intelligence to heredity and environment. Genetic expression that occurs in the brain is
distinctly led by environmental influences; the heredity-environment interactions are bi-
directional. Added to this new knowledge is the accepted interaction between genes and
the cultural context in which intelligence operates for an individual during and after the
developmental period. Inadequate learning accumulates to cause intellectual deficiency.
The world has changed since Galton suggested the inheritance of general intelligence
based on inheritance, as we know that the vast majority of the world's children lack
schooling and health care and have disrupted childhood due to wars and other disasters
much of which can be prevented by privileged nations. Should we still look for the true
score in intelligence testing or promote the human values of compassion and a lack
of greed for an equitable distribution of intelligence?
[1747 words]

11
Following from the above, look at
intelligence and its testing from the
sociohistorical synthesis founded
on
Vygotsky. Continuing with the
sentiments expressed above,
fairness of intelligence testing must
factor in
learning and culture. To the old
question, of whether intellectual
deficiencies accumulate,
Humphreys
(1988) a psychometrician of
prestige and authority, writes
about the context within which
learning
deficiencies accumulate among
poor black American students,
12
contributing to their 'inadequate
learning
syndrome (ILS)'.
A summary of the main points
in this chapter that will be of
interest to both theorists and
practitioners in the field of
intelligence is given below:
1. Intelligence is discernment and
judgment, not merely quickness in
thinking. The Western and the
Eastern
philosophers agree on this.
2. A total shift from qualitative to a
quantitative estimate of intelligence
is regretted. Intelligence includes

13
not only reasoning, but also will,
and emotion which may require
qualitative analysis (Das, 1994).
3. Recent theories of intelligence
comprise a mixture of the old
factor-analytically derived ones and
those
derived from information
processing. Among the latter are
the Theory of Multiple Intelligence,
the PASS
theory and the Triarchic Theory;
each one may make IQ obsolete.
A revival of g as speed, specially,
measured by reaction-time
straddles the border between the
old and the new. However its
interpretation as a
14
phenotypic measure aspiring as it
does to measure synaptic speed
(correlation between IQ & nervous
conduction speed is around
r=0.05; see Wahlsten (in press) is
questionable. When reaction time
and IQ
correlate, RT is a surrogate for
complex information processing.
4. Any theory of intelligence
should specify how to measure
intelligence, what processes
underlie test
performance and how to prescribe
instructional and remedial
procedures.
5. Does intelligence contain
some cognitive modules?
15
Probably not in a strict sense if
modules are
characterized as innate, fast and
autonomous of general cognitive
activities. But the mind
becomes
modularized as development
proceeds (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992).
By assuming that the 4 PASS
processes,
for example, develop as such, it
will be useful to discover how any
one of them works rather than
drowning
their activities in general
intelligence.
6. Lastly a paradigm shift of sorts
seems to have emerged in
16
regarding the attribution of
intelligence to
heredity and environment. Genetic
expression that occurs in the brain
is distinctly led by environmental
influences; the heredity-
environment interactions are bi-
directional. Added to this new
knowledge is the
accepted interaction between genes
and the cultural context in which
intelligence operates for an
individual
during and after the developmental
period. Inadequate learning
accumulates to cause intellectual
deficiency.

17
The world has changed since
Galton suggested the inheritance of
general intelligence based on
inheritance,
as we know that the vast majority
of the world's children lack
schooling and health care and have
disrupted
childhood due to wars and other
disasters much of which can be
prevented by privileged nations.
Should
we still look for the true score in
intelligence testing or promote the
human values of compassion and a
lack
of greed for an equitable
distribution of intelligence?
18
Following from the above, look at
intelligence and its testing from the
sociohistorical synthesis founded
on
Vygotsky. Continuing with the
sentiments expressed above,
fairness of intelligence testing must
factor in
learning and culture. To the old
question, of whether intellectual
deficiencies accumulate,
Humphreys
(1988) a psychometrician of
prestige and authority, writes
about the context within which
learning
deficiencies accumulate among
poor black American students,
19
contributing to their 'inadequate
learning
syndrome (ILS)'.
A summary of the main points
in this chapter that will be of
interest to both theorists and
practitioners in the field of
intelligence is given below:
1. Intelligence is discernment and
judgment, not merely quickness in
thinking. The Western and the
Eastern
philosophers agree on this.
2. A total shift from qualitative to a
quantitative estimate of intelligence
is regretted. Intelligence includes

20
not only reasoning, but also will,
and emotion which may require
qualitative analysis (Das, 1994).
3. Recent theories of intelligence
comprise a mixture of the old
factor-analytically derived ones and
those
derived from information
processing. Among the latter are
the Theory of Multiple Intelligence,
the PASS
theory and the Triarchic Theory;
each one may make IQ obsolete.
A revival of g as speed, specially,
measured by reaction-time
straddles the border between the
old and the new. However its
interpretation as a
21
phenotypic measure aspiring as it
does to measure synaptic speed
(correlation between IQ & nervous
conduction speed is around
r=0.05; see Wahlsten (in press) is
questionable. When reaction time
and IQ
correlate, RT is a surrogate for
complex information processing.
4. Any theory of intelligence
should specify how to measure
intelligence, what processes
underlie test
performance and how to prescribe
instructional and remedial
procedures.
5. Does intelligence contain
some cognitive modules?
22
Probably not in a strict sense if
modules are
characterized as innate, fast and
autonomous of general cognitive
activities. But the mind
becomes
modularized as development
proceeds (Karmiloff-Smith, 1992).
By assuming that the 4 PASS
processes,
for example, develop as such, it
will be useful to discover how any
one of them works rather than
drowning
their activities in general
intelligence.
6. Lastly a paradigm shift of sorts
seems to have emerged in
23
regarding the attribution of
intelligence to
heredity and environment. Genetic
expression that occurs in the brain
is distinctly led by environmental
influences; the heredity-
environment interactions are bi-
directional. Added to this new
knowledge is the
accepted interaction between genes
and the cultural context in which
intelligence operates for an
individual
during and after the developmental
period. Inadequate learning
accumulates to cause intellectual
deficiency.

24
The world has changed since
Galton suggested the inheritance of
general intelligence based on
inheritance,
as we know that the vast majority
of the world's children lack
schooling and health care and have
disrupted
childhood due to wars and other
disasters much of which can be
prevented by privileged nations.
Should
we still look for the true score in
intelligence testing or promote the
human values of compassion and a
lack
of greed for an equitable
distribution of intelligence?
25
 ATTACHMENT

REFERENCES

J.P. Das (2004). Theories of Intelligence: Issues and Applications. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312984495_Theories_of_intelligence_Issues_a
nd_applications
F. R. Yekovich (1994). Current Issues on Research of Intelligence. Retrieved from
https://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=4&n=4
Shivangi (2018). Intelligence Test: Types and Uses | Individual. Retrieved from
http://www.psychologydiscussion.net/psychology/intelligence-psychology/intelligence-
test-types-and-uses-individual/2583

26