Psychology Canadian 2nd Edition Feist

Solutions Manual
Full download at link:

Solution Manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-for-

psychology-canadian-2nd-edition-feist-rosenberg-stamp-poole-
1259024601-9781259024603/

Test Bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-psychology-

canadian-2nd-edition-feist-rosenberg-stamp-poole-1259024601-
9781259024603/

Chapter 9: Intelligence, Problem Solving, & Creativity

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
LO1 Define intelligence and summarize the various theoretical perspectives.
LO2 Describe how intelligence is measured, the characteristics of a good test, and problems with
test bias.
LO3 Describe the extremes of intelligence.
LO4 Explain how nature and nurture affect intelligence.
LO5 Summarize the controversy surrounding group differences in intelligence scores.
LO6 Describe how culture affects intelligence.
LO7 Discuss the primary types of problems, strategies for forming solutions, and obstacles to
reaching effective solutions.
LO8 Define creativity, describe factors that contribute to creativity, and explain the role of
creativity in problem solving and critical thinking.
LO9 Explain what is meant by genius and describe its relationship to intelligence and creativity.

BRIEF CHAPTER OUTLINE

Intelligence
Defining Intelligence
Theories of Intelligence

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-1
 Intelligence as One General Ability
Intelligence as Multiple Abilities
Psychology in the Real World: Bringing Multiple Intelligences to School
Measures of Intelligence
Reliability and Validity of IQ Tests
Groundbreaking Research: Changing Intelligence Tests
Are IQ Tests Biased?
Extremes of Intelligence
Intellectual Disability
Giftedness
Prodigies
Savants
The Nature and Nurture of Human Intelligence
Group Differences in Intelligence Scores
Non-Western Views of Intelligence
Problem Solving
Types of Problems
Solution Strategies
Obstacles to Solutions
Creativity
What Is Creativity?
Creativity and the Brain
Creative Insight Results in Increased Frontal Lobe Activity
Creative Insight and the Right Hemisphere
Creativity and Balanced Activity between the Hemispheres
Cognitive Processes in Creative Thinking
Evaluating Connections in Intelligence, Problem Solving, and Creativity: Genius,
Intelligence, and Creativity
Chapter Review

EXTENDED CHAPTER OUTLINE

INTELLIGENCE

• Much research starts with questions like: Is intelligence due to nature or nurture? Is
intelligence a single general skill or many different skills? What does it mean when we
say someone is intelligent?
• Psychologists agree that there are three capacities that shape how smart people are, and
they constitute the central topics of this chapter: intelligence, problem solving, and
creativity.
• Many people consider intelligence the primary trait that sets humans apart from other
animals.
• Although some apes can solve simple problems, the human capacity for abstract
reasoning is unparalleled in the animal kingdom.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-2
Defining Intelligence
• Intelligence: a set of cognitive skills that include abstract thinking, reasoning, problem
solving, and the ability to acquire knowledge. Other less agreed-upon qualities of
intelligence include mathematical ability, general knowledge, and creativity.

Theories of Intelligence
• There are two views in understanding intelligence: (1) intelligence is a single, general
ability, and (2) intelligence consists of multiple abilities.

Intelligence as One General Ability

• Charles Spearman was the first theorist in the area of intelligence. He proposed that
human intelligence is best thought of as a single general capacity or ability. Spearman
came to this conclusion after research consistently showed that specific dimensions or
factors of intelligence—namely, spatial, verbal, perceptual, and quantitative factors—
correlated strongly with one another, suggesting that they were all measuring much the
same thing.
• g-factor theory: describes intelligence as a single general factor made up of specific
components. This theory strongly influenced intelligence test construction for most of the
20th century.
Intelligence as Multiple Abilities
• This camp didn’t dispute that moderately high correlations among subtests of intelligence
exist, but they disagree on how they should be interpreted. They insisted that IQ test
scores by themselves ignore important aspects of intelligence that are not measured by
traditional IQ tests.
• Multiple-factor theory of intelligence: the different aspects of intelligence are distinct
enough that multiple abilities must be considered, not just one. That is, “How are you
intelligent?”
• Early on you have Cattell with his notion of fluid and crystallized intelligence.
• Fluid intelligence: How one reasons and problem solves. This involves raw mental
ability, pattern recognition, abstract reasoning, and is applied to a problem that a person
has never confronted before. Fluid intelligence measures are culture-free because they do
not depend on culturally acquired experience to solve.
• Crystallized intelligence: Knowledge that we have gained from experience and learning,
education, and practice. This involves book smarts and cultural knowledge.
• Carroll extended this model, arguing that intelligence actually consists of three levels,
arranged in a hierarchy. At the top of the hierarchy is general intelligence, at the middle is
broad intelligence, and at the bottom is narrow intelligence.
• General intelligence: very similar to Spearman’s concept of “g.”
• Broad intelligence: abilities such as crystallized and fluid intelligence, as well as
memory, learning, and processing speed.
• Narrow intelligence consists of nearly 70 distinct abilities, such as speed of reasoning
and general sequential reasoning for fluid intelligence and reading, spelling, and language
comprehension for crystallized intelligence.
• Because this model includes Cattell and Horn’s crystallized and fluid intelligences, it has
become known as the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) model of intelligence.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-3
 • Sternberg argues for a broader view of intelligence than is found in traditional g-factor
theories.
• Successful intelligence: this is an individually defined set of abilities viewed within a
sociocultural context that allows for success.
• Triarchic theory of intelligence: Sternberg argues that three interrelated but distinct
abilities make up successful intelligence: analytic, creative, and practical skill.
1. Analytic intelligence: involves judging, evaluating, or comparing and contrasting
information, as on an IQ test.
2. Creative intelligence: involves solving novel problems and coming up with novel
and useful ideas for solving them.
3. Practical intelligence: the ability to solve problems of everyday life efficiently.
• Conversely, Gardner argues that intelligence comprises at least eight distinct capacities:
linguistic, mathematical-logical, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, spatial, intrapersonal,
interpersonal, and naturalist.
• Scholars are rather strongly divided, however, over Gardner’s theory. Those who have
the most problems with it tend to be psychologists. They see little value in calling skills
like music, movement, and social skills “intelligence” and argue that Gardner has not
provided tests of these intelligences. Further, there have been few direct empirical tests
on Gardner’s theory and therefore some argue his ideas are more theory than science.
• Educators, however, like Gardner’s theory because it addresses two real problems:
1. Different students learn in different ways.
2. Some students who have demonstrated ability in some areas fail academic
subjects and do poorly on traditional intelligence tests.

Psychology in the Real World: Bringing Multiple Intelligences to School

• An educational principle based on MI theory is that children should have some freedom to
choose activities on their own. If they ignore certain kinds of activities, their teachers
provide encouragement and “bridges” to try the neglected activities.
• Entire schools have been designed to put into practice the development of all of Gardner’s
forms of intelligences. There are more than 40 such schools in the United States.
• Students in these schools still must take the local school district’s standardized tests; the
students do at least as well as students from other schools. Also, most of the schools
reported direct effects of the MI approach on decreasing disciplinary problems and
increasing parent participation, and the performance of students with learning disabilities
improved markedly when they attended MI schools.

Measures of Intelligence
• The development and history of IQ testing has been marked by three distinct periods. For
the first period of 70 years or so, from about 1910 to about 1980, people constructed tests
around practical and clinical concerns rather than theory.
• That began to change during the second period in the 1980s, when the first theory-driven
IQ tests were developed.
• Then, during the third period in 1990s, a major shift and integration of theory and
measurement occurred when IQ tests shifted from assessing two or three aspects of
intelligence to measuring four to seven aspects.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-4
 • The first test was developed in 1905 by the French scholar Alfred Binet and was based on
a child’s mental age: the equivalent chronological age a child has reached based on his
or her performance on an IQ test. Mental age is a norm or average because it is based on
what most children at a particular age level can do.
• A German psychologist, William Stern, introduced the now famous intelligence ratio, in
which mental age (MA) is divided by chronological age (CA) (times 100) to determine an
IQ score. Today IQ scores are calculated based on how well a child does on tests relative
to norms established by testing children of the same age.
• Terman, an American psychologist, translated the test for American students and coined
the term IQ for “intelligence quotient.” Because Terman taught at Stanford University, he
named the test the Stanford-Binet test. The most significant changes Terman made were
to establish national norms and to apply the ratio score of MA ÷ CA to IQ.
• In the 1930s, David Wechsler created new intelligence tests in response to the need for a
test that measured adult intelligence. Wechsler’s test became known as the Wechsler
Adult Intelligence Scales (WAIS). Later he developed a test for children, the Wechsler
Intelligence Scales for Children (WISC). At present, these two tests are the ones that are
most frequently administered in the Canada and the United States.

Groundbreaking Research: Changing Intelligence Tests

• Because IQ tests were first created in the early part of the 20th century for practical
reasons, these tests were not based on a clear understanding of the nature of human
intelligence. In the 1980s, however, there was a shift in the way intelligence tests were
developed.

Old Assumptions About the Nature of Intelligence

• For the first 50 years in which IQ tests were used, they were based on the assumption that
intelligence is a single quality. IQ test makers ignored most new theories of how the brain
worked or developed. They also ignored much of Piaget’s work on cognitive development
and how kids don’t think like adults – even smart ones.

Intelligence Tests Based on Modern Psychological Theory

• The first shift was the “Kaufman shift,” anchored in theories in psychology and
neuroscience about how the brain worked and developed. Their test, known as the
Kaufman-Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), has become one of the more widely
used IQ tests.
• It differed from other IQ tests in four ways in that it:
o Was guided by theories of intelligence
o Included fundamentally different kinds of problems for children of different ages
o Measured several distinct aspects of intelligence
o Assessed different learning styles
• John Carroll applied the Cattell-Horn theory to the IQ test and developed a measure that
looked at both fluid and crystallized intelligences (the “CHC shift”).

The Aftermath of the Shift in Intelligence Tests

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-5
 • Both the Kaufman and CHC shifts led to fundamental changes, first in the minds of
creators of intelligence tests and then in the tests themselves, including the Stanford-Binet
and the Wechsler scales. In the 1990s, intelligence test builders began incorporating the
CHC theory into their tests.
• The newest versions of the Weschlers, the WAIS-III and the WISC-IV, include scores on
four factors: Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and
Processing Speed.
• In addition to assessing fluid and crystallized intelligence, the new version of the Stanford-
Binet assesses quantitative reasoning, visual-spatial processing, and working memory.
• CONNECTION: How much information can most people keep in mind while working on
a problem? Is working memory the same as short-term memory? (See Chapter 6.)

Reliability and Validity of IQ Tests

• Reliability: how consistent test results are.
• Test-retest reliability: the extent to which scores on a test are similar over time.
• IQ tests tend to be extremely reliable. Questions on a given subtest also tend to correlate
very highly with other items on the subtest, meaning that the test’s internal consistency
is very high.
• Validity: does the test measure what it says it’s measuring and is there predictability
associated with the test? It involves:
1. That the tests really measure intelligence and not something else, and
2. That IQ scores can predict real-world outcomes.
• Two distinct forms of validity:
1. Construct validity: does a test measures the term or construct it claims to
measure?
o In terms of IQ, most agree that yes, there is high construct validity. However,
Sternberg and Gardner have argued that they measure only verbal, spatial, and
mathematical forms of intelligence.
2. Predictive validity: does the construct predict real-world outcomes?
o IQ tests do, in fact, predict certain real-world outcomes, first and foremost
being academic performance. IQ scores predict students’ grades, school
performance, and class rank in high school quite well. Scores on the WAIS
predict both one’s academic class rank in high school and one’s college grade
point average.
• Example: Students often have difficulty here. Try using the example of a scale: if you
have a scale that is off by 10 pounds consistently, it would be reliable (that is, test retest
would be high) but not valid – it isn’t accurately measuring your weight. This is also a
good time to point out that reliability is thought to be more important. So if my scale is
off (low validity), does it still have utility (usefulness)? Yes, it can still measure change
and I know that it is reliable so that provides utility.
• CONNECTION: The strength of the relationship between two variables can be
measured using a correlation coefficient. The closer it is to +1.00 or -1.00, the stronger
the relationship between variables (see Chapter 2).

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-6
Are IQ Tests Biased?
• Cultural test bias hypothesis: the notion that group differences in IQ scores are caused
by different cultural and educational backgrounds, not by real differences in intelligence.
• Scientists, however, distinguish between test bias and test fairness.
• Test bias: whether a test predicts outcomes equally well for different groups. A test is
biased if it is a more valid measure for one group than for another. Researchers have
found, however, very little evidence for the existence of this kind of bias in IQ tests.
• Intelligence tests are developed using norms that reflect the makeup of the general
population – a process called standardization. Just because different groups score
differently on a given test does not automatically mean that it is biased. If the test is
equally valid for different groups and they still score differently on it, the test is not
biased. It may be unfair, but it’s not biased.
• Test fairness: reflects values, philosophical differences, and the ways in which test
results are applied. IQ test results are designed for application – remember, their job is to
predict school success. However, they are now used by people in business and to get jobs.
Problems arise when people use IQ test results unfairly to deny certain groups access to
universities or jobs.

Extremes of Intelligence
• IQ follows a normal distribution – that is, a bell-shaped distribution with a mean and a
standard deviation. Intelligence varies in a very predictable way, which is most easily
seen in the frequency of different IQ scores in the population. When one plots the scores
on a graph, one sees a very clear bell curve, with most people falling in the middle and a
few people at the high and low ends of the curve. This shape is referred to as a bell curve
because it is shaped like a bell.
• 68% of test-takers will score between 85 and 115 – that is, within one standard deviation
of the mean.
• 99.7% will score between 55 and 145.
• It is at the two ends of the curve, or distribution, that we find “extremes of intelligence” –
specifically, mental retardation and giftedness.

Intellectual Disability
• Intellectual disability (formerly known as mental retardation): individual must show
significant limitations in intellectual functioning as well as in everyday adaptive
behaviour, and these deficits must start before age 18.
• Adaptive behaviour: how well a person adjusts to and copes with everyday life.
• Down syndrome: a form of mental retardation; a disorder that results from a condition
known as Trisomy-21, in which a person has three rather than two number 21
chromosomes. Down syndrome occurs in one in 730 births, but the odds become one in
300 for a 35-year-old mother and one in 30 for a 45-year-old mother.
Giftedness
• In most schools, children are admitted to gifted programs if they score 130-140 or above
on a standardized IQ test like the WISC or Stanford-Binet. Extreme giftedness takes
various forms, two of which are prodigies and savants.
• Prodigy: a young person who is extremely gifted and precocious in one area, such as
math, music, art, or chess, and is at least average in intelligence.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-7
 • Savant syndrome: a very rare condition characterized by serious mental handicaps and
isolated areas of ability or remarkable giftedness. Savants have low overall intelligence,
typically with an IQ below 70, and an incredible ability in one area, such as calculating
numbers, recalling events, playing music, or drawing. By some estimates, there are only
about 100 savants in the world today, about 50% of whom suffer from autism, and the
other 50% from some other kind of psychological disorder, such as brain injury, epilepsy,
or mental retardation. Some savants have no corpus callosum and little cerebellum.
• CONNECTION: Daniel Tammet used mnemonic devices, a memory tool, to help him
remember the value of pi (the circumference of any circle divided by its diameter). How
do mnemonic devices aid memory? (See Chapter 6.)

The Nature and Nurture of Human Intelligence

• The region most often involved in various IQ tasks is the prefrontal cortex. When a
person is working on verbal tasks, only the left prefrontal region of the brain is activated.
When an individual is working on spatial tasks, however, the prefrontal cortexes of both
the left and right hemispheres, as well as the occipital cortex, are activated.
• Moreover, the frontal lobe is more involved when an individual is performing fluid
intelligence tasks, such as pattern recognition, than when the person is performing tasks
that involve crystallized and learned experiences.
• There is a positive relationship (a correlation between .30 and .40, on average) between
brain size and intelligence.

• Identical twins reared apart are more similar in their levels of intelligence than fraternal
twins reared together.
• Similarly, dozens of studies have shown that adopted children’s overall intelligence is
more similar to that of their biological parents than to that of their adoptive parents. Yet
adoption (environment) can also enhance a child’s IQ. Compared to peers who were not
adopted, adopted children tend to have higher IQs.
• Reaction range: the genetically determined range within which a given trait, such as
intelligence, may fall; that trait’s exact value, however, depends on the quality of the
individual’s environment. For most people in most environments, the reaction range for
IQ is about 25 points – meaning that a given person may end up scoring anywhere in a
25-point range on an IQ test, depending on the kind of environment in which he or she is
raised.
• Environment, however, is a complex thing. Environment is divided into shared (being in
the same household and sharing experiences), and nonshared (the individual’s unique
environmental experiences).
• One example of nonshared is the prenatal environment. For example, teratogenic effects
like alcohol, drugs, and viral infections can lower a child’s overall intelligence.
o CONNECTION: Teratogens are harmful environmental agents that can interact
with fetal growth to produce negative outcomes (see Chapter 10).
• Birth order: Recent research has reported that first-born children have a slight advantage
over second-born children, who have an even slighter advantage over third-born children.
• In the 1980’s, James Flynn observed that IQ scores in the Western world had increased
over the last century. This phenomenon has been labelled the Flynn Effect. These gains
have occurred too rapidly to result from genetics, so are more likely the result of

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-8
 environmental influences such as higher motivation to do well on tests, greater exposure
to technology and more complex toys, and spending more time in school.

Group Differences in Intelligence Scores

• In the 1960s and 1970s Arthur Jensen received death threats for publishing research that
reported not only differences in IQ between racial groups, but also argued that because
IQ is under genetic influence, racial differences in IQ must be at least partly genetic in
origin.
• In the mid-1990s, a book called The Bell Curve was published. Authors argued that a
study of ethnic group differences, social class, and intelligence with 12 000 subjects
indicated that racial groups differ on IQ scores; and differences in IQ are a large
contributor to differences in education and income.
• Some experts argue that racial differences in IQ result from biases in IQ tests that favour
people from certain cultural backgrounds over others. Steele (1997) demonstrated that
culturally held stereotypes of intellectual ability can adversely impact the performance of
the members of some groups. Stereotype threat is the process whereby anxiety about
culturally held group stereotypes impacts negatively on individual test performance.
• Others argue that it is genetic, and others yet argue they may have misinterpreted the
data.
• Finally, the conclusion that genetics influence intelligence is often misinterpreted as
implying that IQ levels are determined at birth or conception. If this were so, then trying
to change IQ levels with intervention programs is not likely to succeed.
• But remember, epigenetics and reaction range makes clear how genes and environment
are connected. Second, interventions have, in fact, been successful at changing IQ levels.

Non-Western Views of Intelligence

• Sternberg and his colleagues have examined practical intelligence in cultures where
academic intelligence is not valued as highly as it is in Western cultures. Children in
Kenya and Tanzania, for example, may not do well at solving “bookish” analytic
problems but do very well at solving everyday, practical problems.

PROBLEM SOLVING

Types of Problems
• Convergent thinking problems: these have known solutions, which can be reached by
narrowing down a set of possible answers.
• Divergent thinking problems: there are many possible solutions, some of which work
better than others.

Solution Strategies
• Algorithms: formulas that guarantee correct solutions to particular problems.
• Algorithms also help to create mental sets – a tendency to continue to use problem-
solving strategies that have worked in the past, even if better solutions are available.
• Eureka insights or insight solutions: sudden solutions that come to mind in a flash.
• Thinking outside the box: requires that you break free of self-imposed conceptual
constraints and think about a problem differently in order to solve it.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-9
Obstacles to Solutions
• Fixation: the inability to break out of a particular mindset in order to think about a
problem from a fresh perspective.
• Mental sets are a kind of fixation. A mental set provides solutions to problems but can
also stand in the way of new ideas and novel solutions.
• CONNECTION: Heuristics are mental short cuts or methods we use in making decisions
and judgments (see Chapter 8).
• Functional fixedness: the tendency to be blind to unusual uses of common everyday
things or procedures.

CREATIVITY

• Creative thinking is related to, yet distinct from, both intelligence and problem solving.

What Is Creativity?
• Creativity is thought or behaviour that is both novel-original and useful-adaptive.
• The usefulness criterion requires that someone at some time see real value and usefulness
in the creative accomplishment.
o CONNECTION: Psychologists sometimes use a psychobiography to examine
the lives of historically important people (see Chapter 2).

Creativity and the Brain

• Research has revealed three consistent findings: (1) creative insights increase frontal lobe
activity, (2) insights occur in the right hemisphere, and (3) creative problem solving
shows more balanced activity between right and left frontal lobes in creative people.

Creative Insight Results in Increased Frontal Lobe Activity

• Research has revealed the frontal lobes are active in abstract reasoning, planning, focused
working memory, and integrating sensory input. Creativity involves integrating ideas in
novel and valuable ways. It is not surprising, therefore, that modern neuroscience
supports the conclusion that creative problem solving and insights involve frontal lobe
activity.

Creative Insight and the Right Hemisphere

• Remote associates word problem: display three words at one time to the participant, who
must then come up with a single word that could be used with all three of the words.
Research shows that people often solve these kinds of problems with Eureka insights.
• Brain imaging studies have found that sudden insights consistently activated the right
hemisphere more than the left and that patients with damage to the frontal region of their
right hemisphere are less able to solve problems requiring insight than people without
damage to their right hemisphere.
• CONNECTION: People who have had their corpus callosum severed cannot say what
they see if the information is presented to their left visual field but can verbally label it if
it is presented to their right visual field. Why? (See Chapter 3.)

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-10
 Creativity and Balanced Activity Between the Hemispheres
• When solving problems, creative people have more balanced brain activity between the
hemispheres than less creative people. Research indicates that more left than right frontal
lobe activity is seen in less creative participants. Highly creative individuals show a
balance in right and left frontal lobe activity.

Cognitive Processes in Creative Thinking

• Psychologists who study the cognitive aspects of creative thought have focused on visual
thinking, fluency, flexibility, and originality.
• Visual imagery: occurs when we see a solution in our “mind’s eye.”
• Ideational fluency: the ability to produce many ideas. Highly creative people usually
come up with more ideas for a given problem than less creative people do.
• Flexibility of thought: the ability to generate many different categories of ideas and
think of other responses besides the obvious one.
• Originality: thinking of unusual and novel ideas.
• Creative thinking occurs when a person combines all of the cognitive processes at once.

EVALUATING CONNECTIONS IN INTELLIGENCE, PROBLEM SOLVING, AND

CREATIVITY: GENIUS, INTELLIGENCE, AND CREATIVITY

What Is Genius?
• Genius is high intelligence combined with creative accomplishments that have a
tremendous impact on a given field.

Is Intelligence Necessary and Sufficient for Creativity?

• Genius, by this definition, and creativity are closely related. As it turns out, however, the
relationship between intelligence and creativity is not as simple as it seems. Considerable
research has focused on the relationship between intelligence and creativity and found that
IQ and creativity are not very strongly related.
• Higher intelligence predicts original ideas more than quantity or number of ideas.

EVALUATING THE CONNECTIONS

Modern Intelligence Tests Based on Psychological Theory

• CONNECTION: How much information can most people keep in mind while working
on a problem? Is working memory the same as short-term memory? (See Chapter 6.)
o Video: The Today Show discusses how competitors train for the USA Memoriad
Competition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNr_MiqCahE
• CONNECTION: How much information can most people keep in mind while working
on a problem? Is working memory the same as short-term memory? (See Chapter 6.)
o Discussion: You may want to point out that Sternberg’s theory is an information-
processing approach. It incorporates speed of processing and automaticity;
automatic thinking is faster than slow, purposeful thought.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-11
Reliability and Validity of IQ Tests

• CONNECTION: The strength of the relationship between two variables can be

measured using a correlation coefficient. The closer it is to +1.00 or -1.00, the stronger
the relationship between variables.
o Discussion: Have students guess the size and direction of correlations between
different variables e.g., height and weight; temperature and amount of clothing
people wear; cookie sales and temperature vs ice cream sales and temperature.

The Nature and Nurture of Human Intelligence

• CONNECTION: Teratogens are harmful environmental agents that can interact with
fetal growth to produce negative outcomes (see Chapter 10).
o Video: The Mind 12 Teratogens and their Effects on the Brain and Mind:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTh2-eWfcXI
o Discussion: Talk about some of the teratogens and their influence on the
developing fetus.

Giftedness

• CONNECTION: Daniel Tammet used mnemonic devices, a memory tool, to help him
remember pi (the circumference of any circle divided by its diameter). How do
mnemonic devices aid memory? (Chapter 6)
o Discussion: Students are fascinated with mnemonic devices. Ask students to
share what devices they have used in the past and for what class.

Obstacles to Solutions

• CONNECTION: Heuristics are mental short cuts or methods we use in making decisions
and judgments. Looking for yogurt in the dairy aisle in an unfamiliar supermarket rather
than walking up and down every aisle to find it is an example of a heuristic (see Chapter
9).
o Discussion: You may want to remind students that heuristics are a cognitive
short cut that allows us to make quick judgments, though not necessarily
always accurate ones.
o Discussion: You may also want to talk about the problem-solving research on
children learning to plan. That is, talk about the development of problem
solving.

Creativity

• CONNECTION: Psychologists sometimes use a psychobiography to examine the lives

of historically important people.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-12
 o Discussion: Have students offer their suggestions of who they consider to have
been creative geniuses in history. How did the make their decision? Was it on
output alone? Or was it the process?

Creative Insight and the Right Hemisphere

• CONNECTION: People who have had their corpus callosum severed cannot say what
they see if the information is presented to their left visual field but can verbally label it if
it is presented to their right visual field. Why? (See Chapter 3.)
o Discussion: This is a great time to discuss Gazzaniga’s work on split brain and
the problems folks have solving problems.
o Video: You may want to show a clip of Gazzaniga with his patient talking about
split brain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMLzP1VCANo.
o Video: Here is a clip of Gazzaniga discussing his early research:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lmfxQ-HK7Y.
o Video: A video on split brain:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZnyQewsB_Y.

The Creative Personality

• CONNECTION: Is there a connection between mental illness and creativity? The

incidence of mental illness is higher in artists, writers, painters, and poets than in the
normal population. The same is not true for creative scientists (Chapter 15).
o Activity: Have students read Biological Basis for Creativity Linked to Mental
Illness in Science Daily
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/10/031001061055.htm and then
find a scholarly article on this topic and write a brief review of the research.

INNOVATIVE INSTRUCTION
Additional Discussion Topics

1. G vs. S: This is a great time to ask students what they implicitly think about intelligence.
I generally start off this section of the class by asking students what they think makes
someone intelligent. Students are usually happy to share their implicit views and it gives
you a good start to get the G S discussion going.
Generally, students like the idea of S theories but many bristle at the possible outcome of
MI theories. You may want to use the bodily kinetic in your discussion, as that is one of
the most controversial aspects of the theory. Yes, it involves spatial cognition, but is that
intelligence? Should schools be gearing curriculum based to the few rather than the
many? Also, should colleges start on this path?

2. Bell Curve: Show part or the entire “Booknotes” interview with Charles Murray:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMCjkfp_9JQ. Discuss with students what the

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-13
 authors were suggesting. What other factors could explain the data? Of course the answer
here is SES. Remind students that whether or not they agree with the authors, it was a
catalyst for Head Start programs, early neonatal interventions, WIC programs, etc.
Discuss with students the kinds of specific things that being poor could have on IQ.

3. Culture Fair: This is also a great time to reiterate to students that IQ tests were designed
to do one thing – predict school performance. This, of course, makes the SAT an IQ test.
This also will lay the ground for when discussing culturally fair versions of tests and
nonverbal tests – if you do poorly on a standardized test of intellect, we would expect you
to do poorly in most school-type settings. Why? Because the same thing (say, not
speaking English, a short attention span, etc.) that makes you test low will also most
likely make it difficult for you in school.

4. Reliability and Validity: Students often have difficulty here. Try using the example of a
scale: if you have a scale that is off by 10 pounds consistently, it would be reliable (that
is, test retest would be high) but not valid – it isn’t accurately measuring your weight.
This is also a good time to point out that reliability is thought to be more important. So if
my scale is off (low validity), does it still have utility (usefulness)? Yes, it can still
measure change and I know that it is reliable so that provides utility.

5. Distribution in IQ scores: You may want to show an overhead of the distribution and
discuss how 95% fall within 2 standard deviations of the mean. So you have 2.5% of the
population in the two tails. The R tail being “gifted” and the L tail being “mentally
retarded.” Remind students that any significant developmental delay will result in testing
at a lower IQ because you are being compared to others of the same age. You also may
want to stress that because of the distribution, schools are only looking for the top 2.5%
and bottom 2.5%, as 95% are within “normal” range. Thus, there is no need to give a
long, full IQ test to most folks, as they will be within “normal” range. They only need to
give full tests to kids who might fall out of the 2 standard deviations.
6. Piaget’s Role in IQ tests: You may want to point out to students that Piaget was
instrumental in early IQ test development. Many argue that much of Piaget’s theory
comes from the early observation that children about the same age were consistently
making similar errors. This not only explains Piaget’s work but also ties in with why he is
a G theorist. Ask students how they think this work affected Piaget’s theory.

7. Heritability and IQ: When you talk about IQ heritability and the adoptee data, ask
students what they think. Is there any third factor or confounding variables? SES!
Remind students that adoption takes money. It also takes motivation. Thus, folks who
adopt have money and really want kids. Can we say the same for everyone who has a
kid?

8. Intelligence Testing: You may want to talk with students about how they feel about
standardized testing in general, as well as how they feel about taking portions of IQ tests.
This is also a good time to remind them that regardless of the theories, IQ tests should
really only be used to do what they were designed for, which is to predict school
performance.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-14
 9. Nature and Nurture and Intelligence: Ask students what things they think can help or
harm a fetus. Remind students that most social programs are based on conception
services. Good prenatal care decreases the risk of problems after birth. Avoiding alcohol,
for example, reduces the risk of fetal alcohol syndrome, which often leads to low IQ. It is
also important not to smoke. Smoking correlates with low birth weight, which correlates
with lower levels of cognitive functioning.

10. Nature and Nurture and Intelligence: Early intervention with abused, neglected, and
disadvantaged children raises IQ scores. Changes in environment can change brain
structures that affect intellectual functioning. Point out to students that Women, Infants,
and Children (WIC) programs, Head Start programs, etc., are all based on the idea that IQ
can be affected by environmental changes. This is the root of most social intervention
programs. One example is prenatal care. Even poor women are now encouraged to take
prenatal supplements, as some ingredients have been shown to reduce neural tube defects
in babies.

Activities

1. Assign students to interview 10 people on what they think makes someone intelligent.
Have them write a 3-4 page APA-format paper on their “study.”
2. Have students watch Rain Man. Have them write a 3-paragraph paper on the movie,
savants, and if they think Gardner is right using that as evidence for his theory.
3. Have students watch this clip on Gardner’s MI:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2QtSbP4FRg Ask students what they think about
MI. Do they think that schools should be gearing curriculum based to the few rather than
the many? Also, should colleges start on this path? Have them write a 2-paragraph essay,
with the first paragraph being “pro” MI curriculums and the second being “con” on the
issue.
4. You may want to show students an example of a nonverbal IQ test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sThCoWH03HU&feature=related. Ask them what
they think. It’s measuring spatial cognition, but is that intelligence?
5. The concept of reaction range describes how biology and environment work together to
produce a person’s overall level of intelligence. Does the concept of reaction range really
apply to a broad range of ability or behavior? Ask students to think about a wide range of
capabilities and ask if it would apply? Ask them to describe their thoughts.
6. Ask students to think about MI. Which two areas do they believe are their strengths and
weaknesses? Ask them to defend their answer.

Suggested Media

1. A short clip with Gardner talking about MI:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEFpaY3GI-I&feature=related
2. An interview with Stephen Murdoch on why the traditional approach dismisses Gardner’s
work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=II9Y1mOKDhY

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-15
 3. An example of a nonverbal IQ test:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sThCoWH03HU&feature=related
4. Daniel Goleman talking about emotional and social intelligence:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZskNGdP_zM&feature=related
5. A one-hour interview with Daniel Goleman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
hoo_dIOP8k&feature=related
6. Nature vs Nurture Debate of IQ: A video of James Flynn talking about the Flynn Effect,
the Bell Curve, contraception and Education:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p3mqevjeO8
7. Rain Man, released in 1988. This is a movie that shows Dustin Hoffman as a savant.
8. The Search for Intelligence (Insight Media)
9. Discovering Psychology: Intelligence and Testing (Annenberg):
http://www.learner.org/series/discoveringpsychology/16/e16expand.html
10. Battle of the Brains: A Case for Multiple Intelligence (Films for Humanities and Social
Science)
11. Good Will Hunting (giftedness)

Suggested Websites

1. A thorough overview of all the theories:

http://www.personalityresearch.org/intelligence.html
2. A good overview of the historical and current controversies on intelligence:
http://www.intelltheory.com/
3. An article on the controversy in intelligence tests:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-controversy-of-intelligence-theories-
397044.html
4. An overview of intelligence theories:
http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/intelligence.htm
5. Wall Street Journal article on The Bell Curve:
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB117736979316179649
6. A brief discussion on the integrated theory of intelligence:
http://www.supraconsciousnessnetwork.org/
7. An article on savants: http://rarediseases.about.com/cs/neurodisorders/a/052502.htm

Suggested Readings

Bouchard, T. J. (1998). Genetic and environmental influences on adult intelligence and

special mental abilities. Human Biology, 70, 257-279.
Duncan, J., Rüdiger, J. S., Kolodny, J., Bor, D., Herzog, H., Ahmed, A., Newell, F. N., &
Emslie, H. (2000). A neural basis for general intelligence. Science, 289, 457-460.
Fletcher, R. B. (2011). Intelligence and intelligence testing. Routledge.
Flynn, J. R. (2012). Are we getting smarter? Rising IQ in the twenty-first century. Cambridge
University Press.
Galton, F. (1865). Hereditary talent and character. Macmillan’s Magazine, 23, 157-166, 318-
327.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-16
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic
Books.
Geary, D.C. (1996). Sexual selection and sex differences in mathematical abilities.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19, 229-284.
Jensen, A. R. (1999). The g factor: The science of mental ability. Psycholoqy, 10(023).
McClearn, G. E., Johansson, B., Berg, S., Pedersen, N. L., Ahern, F., Petrill, S. A., & Plomin,
R. (1997). Substantial genetic influence on cognitive abilities in twins 80 or more
years old. Science, 276, 1560-1563.
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T. J., Jr., Boykin, A. W., Brody, N., Ceci, S. J., Halpern,
D. F., Loehlin, J. C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R. J., & Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence:
Knowns and unknowns. American Psychologist, 51, 77-101.
Plomin, R. & Daniels, D. (1987). Why are children in the same family so different from one
another? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1-60.
Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured.
American Journal of Psychology 15, 201-293.
Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.) (1999). Handbook of creativity. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Sternberg, R. J. & Wagner, R. K. (1993). The g-ocentric view of intelligence and job
performance is wrong. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2, 1-4.
Sternberg, R.J. (1977). Intelligence, Information Processing, and Analogical Reasoning.
Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Instructor’s Manual to accompany Feist/Rosenberg/Stamp/Poole, Psychology: Evaluating Connections, 2ce

9-17