Chapter 10 - Intelligence & Aptitude

MS.
SAKSHI MALHOTRA
DIRECTOR – PSYCHCENTRAL
PAPER I: FOUNDATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY

INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE
INTELLIGENCE:
Defining intelligence remains a challenge due to its diverse manifestations and the subjective nature
of the term. However, a widely accepted definition comes from the American Psychological
Association (APA). Intelligence is defined as the ability to understand complex ideas, adapt
effectively to the environment, learn from experience, engage in reasoning, and overcome challenges.
One of the classical definitions of intelligence, rooted in the psychometric tradition, views it as the
ability to reason, learn, and problem-solve. This definition often forms the basis for intelligence tests,
where individuals are assessed on tasks that tap into their cognitive abilities, such as verbal
comprehension, mathematical reasoning, and spatial reasoning. Alfred Binet, a pioneer in intelligence
testing, conceptualized intelligence as the ability to adapt to one's environment effectively.
APTITUDE:
Aptitude is an individual's innate capacity or potential to acquire specific skills, knowledge, or talents
in a particular domain. Aptitude tests are instruments designed to assess these inherent abilities, aiding
in predicting an individual's suitability and potential success in various fields. These tests cover a
spectrum of cognitive domains, each focusing on distinct facets of aptitude.
❖ Verbal aptitude tests aim to evaluate language-related skills, encompassing vocabulary,

grammar, and language usage. These assessments typically involve tasks such as completing
sentences, analogies, or comprehending written passages.
❖ Numerical aptitude tests gauge an individual's mathematical and quantitative reasoning
abilities. Tasks may involve solving mathematical problems, interpreting data, and applying
numerical concepts to assess proficiency in mathematical reasoning.
❖ Spatial aptitude tests assess an individual's capacity to visualize and manipulate spatial
relationships. These tests often include tasks that require mental rotation of objects,
understanding spatial orientations, and visualizing three-dimensional shapes.
❖ Mechanical aptitude tests focus on understanding mechanical concepts and tools. Questions
in these tests assess an individual's comprehension of machinery, tools, and engineering
principles, making them particularly relevant for technical and engineering roles.
UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
❖ Abstract reasoning tests measure general problem-solving and critical thinking skills. They
typically involve non-verbal tasks, such as identifying patterns, completing sequences, and
solving abstract problems without relying on specific knowledge.
❖ Technical aptitude tests evaluate knowledge and understanding in specific technical domains.
These tests are common in fields like information technology, engineering, and other
technical professions, assessing an individual's familiarity with industry-specific concepts and
procedures.
❖ Musical aptitude tests aim to measure an individual's musical abilities, including pitch
recognition, rhythm perception, and musical memory. Tasks may involve identifying musical
notes, rhythms, and completing musical sequences.
❖ Artistic aptitude tests assess creative and visual skills. These tests often include tasks related
to drawing, designing, or creating visual compositions, providing insights into an individual's
artistic abilities.
❖ Managerial aptitude tests are tailored for assessing qualities essential for managerial roles,
such as decision-making skills, leadership abilities, and problem-solving capabilities. These
tests often present scenarios that require individuals to make managerial decisions or solve
organizational problems.
❖ Language aptitude tests evaluate the ability to learn and use foreign languages. Tasks may
involve language learning exercises, grammar comprehension, and vocabulary acquisition,
helping assess an individual's potential for language acquisition and communication skills.
In conclusion, aptitude tests offer a comprehensive means of understanding an individual's natural

talents and potential success in specific areas. The variety of aptitude tests available caters to the
diverse skill sets required in various fields, allowing for tailored assessments that match specific
aptitudes with corresponding academic disciplines or professions.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APTITUDE & INTEREST:
Aptitude Interest
Aptitude refers to an individual's inherent or Interest reflects an individual's preferences, likes,
innate capacity to acquire specific skills or or attractions towards specific activities, subjects,
perform certain tasks effectively. It is often or fields. It is driven by personal inclinations,
considered a natural talent or potential for experiences, and values, indicating what
learning in particular areas, indicating an individuals find personally rewarding or
individual's ability to excel in certain domains. enjoyable.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Aptitude is more objective and rooted in an Interest is subjective and can be influenced by
individual's inherent capabilities. It is less various external and internal factors, including
influenced by prior experiences and is often personal experiences, exposure, and changing
considered a more stable indicator of an priorities. It is dynamic and can evolve over time.
individual's potential.
Aptitude assessments focus on measuring an Interest assessments concentrate on identifying
individual's potential to excel in specific domains the activities or domains that individuals find
such as numerical reasoning, spatial abilities, or personally enjoyable or rewarding. They help in
cognitive skills. They predict future success aligning personal choices with individual
based on inherent abilities. satisfaction.
Aptitude assessments are commonly used in Interest assessments are widely used in career
educational and vocational settings to guide counselling and personal development, helping
individuals toward fields where they are likely to individuals align their choices with activities that
excel based on their inherent capabilities. resonate with their personal preferences and
values.
SIMILARITIES BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE, APTITUDE & ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
Intelligence tests, aptitude tests, and achievement tests, despite their distinct purposes, share several
key similarities, reflecting their common foundation in the assessment of cognitive abilities. At their
core, all three tests are designed to assess cognitive abilities. Whether measuring general intellectual
functioning (as in intelligence tests), predicting potential for specific skills acquisition (as in aptitude
tests), or evaluating acquired knowledge and skills in a particular domain (as in achievement tests),
they collectively provide insights into an individual's cognitive capacity.
Intelligence, aptitude, and achievement tests undergo a rigorous standardization process. This
involves administering the tests to a representative sample to establish norms and benchmarks for
comparison. Standardization ensures consistency and reliability in the interpretation of scores, making
the assessments more robust and applicable across diverse populations. These tests adhere to
psychometric principles, including reliability and validity. Reliability ensures consistency in scores
over time, indicating the stability of the assessment, while validity ensures that the test accurately
measures what it intends to measure. These properties collectively enhance the credibility and utility
of the tests.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Intelligence, aptitude, and achievement tests are typically norm-referenced, meaning that an
individual's performance is compared to a standard or average performance within a specified
population. This comparative aspect allows for a contextual understanding of an individual's standing
in relation to their peers. These tests often involve statistical analysis to interpret results. Measures
such as percentiles, standard scores, and z-scores are commonly used to convey an individual's
performance relative to the normative group. This statistical framework provides a quantitative basis
for understanding and comparing test scores.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE, APTITUDE & ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
Intelligence Tests Aptitude Tests Achievement Tests

Purpose and Primarily measure general Assess specific innate Measure knowledge and
Scope cognitive abilities across a abilities or potential for proficiency acquired
broad spectrum, providing acquiring certain skills, through education or
an overall assessment of often predicting future training in specific
intellectual functioning, performance in a particular subjects or domains,
often expressed as an area or field. reflecting the outcomes
Intelligence Quotient of learning experiences.
(IQ).
Timing of Typically measure Often administered before Assess knowledge or
Assessment cognitive abilities across specific training or skills acquired within a
the lifespan and are not educational programs to specific timeframe,
tied to a specific predict an individual's usually associated with
educational or training suitability for success in educational achievements
context. those endeavours. or training outcomes.
Context of Focus on innate, general Primarily predict an Evaluate the extent of
Assessment cognitive abilities and are individual's potential knowledge or skills
not directly linked to success in specific areas or acquired in a particular
academic or vocational professions, emphasizing academic or training
contexts. natural talents. setting, reflecting the
outcomes of learning
experiences.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Emphasis on Emphasize a broad range Focus on an individual's Assess the actual

Learning vs. of cognitive abilities that potential to acquire specific knowledge or skills
Potential may or may not be skills or knowledge, often learned in a particular
directly related to formal associated with formal educational context,
learning. education or vocational emphasizing the
training. outcomes of educational
experiences.
Feedback and Generally provide a Offer insights into areas Highlight specific areas
Intervention global measure without where an individual may of strength or weakness,
specific guidance for excel, guiding educational informing educators
interventions or or career decisions. about the effectiveness of
improvements. instructional methods
and guiding further
learning interventions.
Predictive Provide a general Specifically designed to Reflect past learning and
Value indication of an predict an individual's provide insights into an
individual's cognitive potential for success in individual's academic
abilities but may not certain areas or professions, achievements within a
predict specific offering valuable guidance particular subject or skill
performance in academic for career planning. domain.
or vocational settings.
INTELLIGENCE IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:
Historically, two scientists with entirely different agendas played seminal roles in the study and
measurement of mental skills. The contributions of Sir Francis Galton and Alfred Binet set the stage
for later attempts to measure intelligence and discover its causes.
Sir Francis Galton: Quantifying Mental Ability
Sir Francis Galton was a cousin of Charles Darwin and was strongly influenced by Darwin’s theory
of evolution. In his book Hereditary Genius (1869), Galton showed through the study of family trees
that eminence and genius seemed to occur within certain families. Galton’s research convinced him
that eminent people had “inherited mental constitutions” that made them more fit for thinking than

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
their less successful counterparts. Exhibiting his own belief bias, Galton dismissed the fact that the
more successful people he studied almost invariably came from privileged environments.
Galton then attempted to demonstrate a biological basis for eminence by showing that people who
were more socially and occupationally successful would also perform better on a variety of laboratory
tasks thought to measure the “efficiency of the nervous system.” He developed measures of reaction
speed, hand strength, and sensory acuity. He even measured the size of people’s skulls, believing that
skull size reflected brain volume and hence intelligence.
In time, Galton’s approach to mental-skills measurement fell into disfavour because his measures of
nervous system efficiency proved unrelated to socially relevant measures of mental ability, such as
academic and occupational success. Nonetheless, Galton’s work created an interest in the
measurement of mental abilities, setting the stage for the pioneering work of Alfred Binet.
Alfred Binet’s Mental Tests
The modern intelligence-testing movement began at the turn of the 20th century, when the French
psychologist Alfred Binet was commissioned by France’s Ministry of Public Education to develop
the test that was to become the forerunner of all modern intelligence tests. Unlike Galton, with whom
he had trained, Binet was interested in solving a practical problem rather than supporting a theory.
Certain children seemed unable to benefit from normal public schooling. Educators wanted an
objective way to identify these children as early as possible so that some form of special education
could be arranged for them. In developing his tests, Binet made two assumptions about intelligence:
First, mental abilities develop with age. Second, the rate at which people gain mental competence is a
characteristic of the person and is fairly constant over time.
To develop a measure of mental skills, Binet asked experienced teachers what sorts of problems
children could solve at ages 3, 4, 5, and so on, up through the school years. He then used their answers
to develop a standardized interview in which an adult examiner posed a series of questions to a child
to determine whether the child was performing at the correct mental level for his or her age. The result
of the testing was a score called the mental age. For instance, if an 8-year-old child could solve
problems at the level of the average 10-year-old, the child would be said to have a mental age of 10.
An 8-year-old child with a mental age of 6 could hardly be expected to cope with the academic
demands of a normal classroom for 8-year-olds.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
The concept of mental age was subsequently expanded by the German psychologist William Stern to
provide a relative score—a common yardstick of intellectual attainment—for people of different
chronological ages. Stern’s intelligence quotient (IQ) was the ratio of mental age to chronological
age, multiplied by 100. Today’s tests no longer use the concept of mental age. Although the concept
works pretty well for children, many of the basic skills measured by intelligence tests are acquired by
about age 16 through normal life experiences and schooling, so that Stern’s quotient is less useful for
adults. Moreover, some intellectual skills show an actual decline at advanced ages. If we applied
Stern’s definition of IQ to a 20-year-old who performed at the typical level of an 80-yearold, we
would have to say that the 20-year-old’s IQ was 400! To deal with these problems, today’s intelligence
tests provide an “IQ” score that is not a quotient at all. Instead, it is based on a person’s performance
relative to the scores of other people the same age, with a score of 100 corresponding to the average
performance of that age group.
Binet’s Legacy: An Intelligence-Testing Industry Emerges
Lewis Terman, a professor at Stanford University, was intrigued by Binet’s work. He revised Binet’s
test for use in the United States, translating it into English and rewriting some of its items to improve
their relevance to American culture. Terman’s revised test became known as the Stanford-Binet. By
the mid-1920s, it had become widely accepted in North America as the gold standard for measuring
mental aptitude. The Stanford-Binet contained mostly verbal items, and it yielded a single IQ score.
At about the time that the Stanford-Binet test was introduced in 1916, the United States entered World
War I. One of Terman’s students at Stanford, Arthur Otis, had been working on a group-administered
test of intellectual ability. This test became the prototype for the Army Alpha, a verbally oriented test
that was used to screen large numbers of U.S. Army recruits for intellectual fitness. Because some
recruits were unable to read, a nonverbal instrument using mazes, picture-completion problems, and
digit-symbol tasks was also developed and given the name Army Beta. Before the war’s end, more
than 1.7 million men had been screened for intelligence using these tests. Inspired by the success of
the Army Alpha and Beta for measuring the intelligence of large numbers of people in a group setting,
educators clamoured for similar instruments to test groups of children. New group tests of
intelligence, such as the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test and the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test,
soon appeared and became an important part of educational reform and policy.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Two decades after Terman introduced the American version of Binet’s test, psychologist David
Wechsler developed a major competitor to the Stanford-Binet. Wechsler believed that the
Stanford-Binet relied too much on verbal skills. He thought that intelligence should be measured as a
group of distinct but related verbal and nonverbal abilities. He therefore developed intelligence tests
for adults and for children that measured both verbal and nonverbal intellectual skills. In 1939 the
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) appeared, followed by the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
Children (WISC) in 1955 and the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI) in
1967. The Wechsler scales have undergone several revisions. Today, the Wechsler tests (WAIS-IV and
WISC-IV) are the most popular individually administered intelligence tests in the United States.
Following Wechsler’s lead, the Stanford-Binet has also been revised to measure a wider range of
mental abilities.
THE NATURE OF INTELLIGENCE:
Psychologists have used two major approaches in the study of intelligence. The psychometric
approach attempts to map the structure of intellect and to discover the kinds of mental competencies
that underlie test performance. The cognitive processes approach studies the specific thought
processes that underlie those mental competencies.
The Psychometric Approach:
Psychometrics is the statistical study of psychological tests. The psychometric approach to

intelligence tries to identify and measure the abilities that underlie individual differences in
performance. In essence, it tries to provide a measurement-based map of the mind.
Spearman’s Two-Factor Theory
The psychometric argument for intelligence as a general ability was first advanced by the British
psychologist Charles Spearman (1923). He observed that school grades in different subjects, such as
English and mathematics, were almost always positively correlated but not perfectly. Spearman found
the same to be true for different types of Stanford-Binet intelligence test items, such as vocabulary
questions, arithmetic reasoning problems, and the ability to solve puzzles.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Spearman concluded that intellectual performance is determined partly by a g factor, or general

intelligence, and partly by whatever special abilities might be required to perform that particular task.
Spearman contended that because the general factor—the g factor—cuts across virtually all tasks, it
constitutes the core of intelligence. Thus Spearman would argue that your performance in a
mathematics course would depend mainly on your general intelligence but also on your specific
ability to learn mathematics.
Thurstone’s Model of Primary Mental Abilities
Spearman’s conclusion about the centrality of the g factor was soon challenged by L. L. Thurstone of
the University of Chicago. While Spearman had been impressed by the fact that scores on different
mental tasks are correlated, Thurstone was impressed by the fact that the correlations are far from
perfect. Thurstone therefore concluded that human mental performance depends not on a general
factor but rather on seven distinct abilities, which he called primary mental abilities. Following
Thurstone’s lead, other investigators claimed to have found many more specific cognitive factors. One
prominent theorist maintained that there are more than 100 distinct and measurable mental abilities
(Guilford, 1967). Other theorists suggest fewer abilities but maintain that intelligence is more
complex than a single g factor.
Thurstone identified seven primary mental abilities, each representing a unique facet of intelligence:
❖ Verbal Comprehension: The ability to understand and use verbal information effectively.
❖ Numerical Ability: Proficiency in working with numerical concepts and solving mathematical
problems.
❖ Spatial Visualization: Capacity to visualize and manipulate spatial relationships.
❖ Memory: The ability to recall and remember information.
❖ Inductive Reasoning: Drawing general conclusions from specific observations or instances.
❖ Perceptual Speed: Quick and accurate visual scanning and identification of symbols or
patterns.
❖ Word Fluency: The capacity to generate a large number of words in a short time, showcasing
verbal proficiency.
Thurstone employed factor analysis to identify these primary mental abilities, demonstrating that
they were relatively independent of each other. This independence challenged the idea of a single
overarching 'g' factor influencing all cognitive tasks. According to Thurstone, individuals could
possess varying degrees of proficiency in each of these distinct abilities, leading to a more nuanced
understanding of intelligence.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
For practical reasons, educators tend to find the specific-abilities notion of intelligence more attractive
and useful than the general mental ability model (Mayer, 2000). They are more interested in
identifying the specific mental skills involved in learning subjects such as reading, mathematics, and
science. They are also interested in helping children increase the specific mental abilities that are
needed for success in various subjects. For such purposes, general mental ability measures such as an
overall IQ are less useful than are measures of specific cognitive abilities that can point to a student’s
areas of strength and weakness. Additionally, it may appear more feasible to enhance specific mental
skills than to raise general intelligence.
Guilford's Structure of Intellect Model
J.P. Guilford, an eminent American psychologist, introduced the Structure of Intellect (SOI) model in
the mid-20th century as an attempt to provide a comprehensive and multifaceted understanding of
human intelligence. Unlike earlier models, Guilford's approach extended beyond the dichotomy of
general and specific factors, offering a more detailed and expansive framework.
Guilford's SOI model is characterized by three main dimensions:
❖ Operations: This dimension refers to the mental processes involved in thinking, including
cognition, memory, and divergent and convergent thinking.
❖ Content: Content represents the material on which intellectual operations operate. It includes
visual, auditory, and symbolic aspects of stimuli.
❖ Products: Products are the outcomes or end results of intellectual operations and can take the
form of units, classes, relations, systems, transformations, or implications.
Each dimension is further subdivided into categories and specific factors, resulting in a rich and
intricate model that captures the diverse aspects of cognitive functioning. Guilford emphasized that
intelligence arises from the interaction among these three dimensions. Cognitive abilities, according to
Guilford, result from the dynamic interplay between operations, contents, and products. This
interactional perspective allowed for a more sophisticated understanding of how different aspects of
intelligence manifest in various cognitive tasks.
Crystallized and Fluid Intelligence

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Raymond Cattell (1971) and John Horn (1985) proposed a new model of intelligence. They broke
down Spearman’s general intelligence into two distinct but related subtypes of g (with a correlation of
about .50). Crystallized intelligence (g c) is the ability to apply previously acquired knowledge to
current problems. Vocabulary and information tests are good measures of crystallized intelligence.
Crystallized intelligence, which is the basis for expertise, depends on the ability to retrieve previously
learned information and problem-solving schemas from long-term memory. It is dependent on
previous learning and practice.
Cattell and Horn’s second general factor is fluid intelligence (g f), defined as the ability to deal with
novel problem-solving situations for which personal experience does not provide a solution. It
involves inductive reasoning and creative problem-solving skills. Fluid intelligence is dependent
primarily on the efficient functioning of the central nervous system rather than on prior experience
and cultural context. People high in fluid intelligence can perceive relations among stimulus patterns
and draw inferences from relationships.
Fluid intelligence requires the abilities to reason abstractly, think logically, and manage information in
working (short-term) memory so that new problems can be solved on “the blackboard of the mind”
(Hunt, 1997). Thus long-term memory contributes strongly to crystallized intelligence, whereas fluid
intelligence is particularly dependent on efficient working memory. The g c -g f model is based in part
on what has been learned about intellectual development in adulthood (Horn & Blankston, 2005).
Cattell and Horn concluded that over our life span, we progress from using fluid intelligence to
depending more on crystallized intelligence. Early in life, we encounter many problems for the first
time, so we need fluid intelligence to figure out solutions. As experience makes us more
knowledgeable, we have less need to approach each situation as a new problem. Instead, we simply
call up appropriate information and schemas from long-term memory, thereby utilizing our
crystallized intelligence. Because long-term memory remains strong even as we age, performance on
tests of crystallized intelligence improves during adulthood and remains stable well into late
adulthood. In contrast, performance on tests of fluid intelligence begins to decline as people enter late
adulthood.
Cognitive Process Approaches:

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Psychometric theories of intelligence are statistically sophisticated ways of providing a map of the
mind and describing how people differ from one another. What psychometric theories don’t explain is
why people vary in these mental skills. Cognitive process theories explore the specific
information-processing and cognitive processes that underlie intellectual ability.
Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
Robert Sternberg (1988, 2004) is a leading proponent of the cognitive processes approach to
intelligence. His triarchic theory of intelligence addresses both the psychological processes involved
in intelligent behaviour and the diverse forms that intelligence can take. Sternberg’s theory divides the
cognitive processes that underlie intelligent behaviour into three specific components.
Metacomponents are the higher-order processes used to plan and regulate task performance. They
include problem-solving skills such as identifying problems, formulating hypotheses and strategies,
testing them logically, and evaluating performance feedback. Sternberg believes that metacomponents
are the fundamental sources of individual differences in fluid intelligence. He finds that intelligent
people spend more time framing problems and developing strategies than do less intelligent people,
who have a tendency to plunge right in without sufficient forethought.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Performance components are the actual mental processes used to perform the task. They include
perceptual processing, retrieving appropriate memories and schemas from long-term memory, and
generating responses. Finally, knowledge-acquisition components allow us to learn from our
experiences, store information in memory, and combine new insights with previously acquired
information. These abilities underlie individual differences in crystallized intelligence. Thus
Sternberg’s theory addresses the processes that underlie the distinction made by Cattell and Horn
between fluid and crystallized intelligences.
Sternberg believes that there is more than one kind of intelligence. He suggests that environmental
demands may call for three different classes of adaptive problem solving and that people differ in their
intellectual strengths in these areas:
❖ Analytical intelligence involves the kinds of academically oriented problem-solving skills
measured by traditional intelligence tests.
❖ Practical intelligence refers to the skills needed to cope with everyday demands and to
manage
❖ oneself and other people effectively.
❖ Creative intelligence comprises the mental skills needed to deal adaptively with novel
problems.
Sternberg has shown that these forms of intelligence, while having a modest underlying g factor, are
also distinct from one another. Sternberg believes that educational programs should teach all three
classes of skills, not just analytical-academic skills. In studies with elementary school children, he and
his colleagues have shown that a curriculum that also teaches practical and creative skills results in
greater mastery of course material than does a traditional analytic, memory-based approach to
learning course content.
Broader Conceptions of Intelligence:

Traditionally, intelligence has been viewed as mental competence. Some psychologists think this is
too limited a definition to capture the range of human adaptations. They believe that intelligence may
be more broadly conceived as relatively independent intelligences that relate to different adaptive
demands.
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Harvard psychologist Howard Gardner (2003) is one of the strongest proponents of this view. Inspired
by his observations of how specific human abilities are affected by brain damage, Gardner advanced a
theory of multiple intelligences. The number of intelligences has varied as Gardner’s work has
progressed; he currently defines eight distinct varieties of adaptive abilities and a possible ninth
variety (Gardner, 2000):
❖ Linguistic intelligence: Linguistic intelligence involves a mastery of language-related skills.

Individuals with high linguistic intelligence excel in verbal communication, writing, and
understanding complex linguistic structures. This type of intelligence is evident in poets,
authors, and skilled orators.
❖ Logical-mathematical intelligence: Logical-mathematical intelligence focuses on analytical
and problem-solving abilities. Individuals with strong logical-mathematical intelligence are
adept at reasoning, mathematical operations, and scientific thinking. This type of intelligence
is commonly observed in mathematicians, scientists, and logicians.
❖ Visuospatial intelligence: Spatial intelligence relates to the ability to visualize and manipulate
spatial information. Those with high spatial intelligence excel in tasks such as map reading,
navigation, and visual arts. Architects, artists, and navigators often exhibit strong spatial
intelligence.
❖ Musical intelligence: Musical intelligence involves sensitivity to rhythm, melody, and pitch.
Individuals with high musical intelligence demonstrate excellence in music composition,
performance, and appreciation. This type of intelligence is prominent in musicians and
composers.
❖ Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence: Bodily-kinesthetic intelligence is associated with the ability
to control body movements and handle objects skilfully. Athletes, dancers, and surgeons often
possess high bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, showcasing expertise in physical activities.
❖ Interpersonal intelligence: Interpersonal intelligence involves the ability to understand and
interact effectively with others. Individuals with strong interpersonal intelligence excel in
social situations, demonstrating empathy, communication skills, and effective leadership. This
intelligence is often found in counsellors, teachers, and politicians.
❖ Intrapersonal intelligence: Intrapersonal intelligence refers to self-awareness and an
understanding of one's own emotions, motivations, and goals. Individuals with high
intrapersonal intelligence are reflective and self-aware, excelling in roles such as counsellors,
psychologists, and philosophers.
❖ Naturalistic intelligence: Naturalistic intelligence involves an affinity for understanding and

categorizing elements in the natural world. Individuals with high naturalistic intelligence have

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
a keen awareness of nature, ecosystems, and environmental patterns. This intelligence is often
seen in biologists, environmentalists, and botanists.
In recent writings, Gardner (2000) has also speculated about a ninth possible intelligence, which he
calls existential intelligence, a philosophically oriented ability to ponder questions about the meaning
of one’s existence, life, and death.
Gardner’s first three intelligences are measured by existing intelligence tests, but the others are not.
Indeed, some of Gardner’s critics insist that these other abilities are not really part of the traditional
concept of intelligence at all and that some of them are better regarded as talents. However, Gardner
replies that the form of intelligence that is most highly valued within a given culture depends on the
adaptive requirements of that culture. Gardner further suggests that these different classes of abilities
require the functioning of separate but interacting modules in the brain. Gardner’s approach, though
provocative, remains controversial because it goes far beyond traditional conceptions of intelligence
as mental skills.
Pass Model Of Intelligence
The PASS Model of Intelligence, developed by J.P. Das and colleagues, is a comprehensive
framework that breaks down cognitive processes into four distinct components: Planning, Attention,
Simultaneous, and Successive. This model offers a nuanced understanding of how individuals engage
with and process information, shedding light on the multifaceted nature of intelligence.
Planning, as the first component of the PASS model, encapsulates the cognitive processes involved in
goal-setting, organization, and initiation of tasks. This component of intelligence is closely tied to
executive functions. Individuals with strong planning abilities exhibit a high degree of strategic
thinking, enabling them to break down complex problems into manageable steps. This aspect of
intelligence is particularly crucial in real-world scenarios where individuals must navigate intricate
tasks, demonstrating foresight and effective decision-making.
Attention, the second element in the PASS model, is a core cognitive process responsible for
selectively focusing on relevant information while filtering out distractions. The ability to sustain,
shift, and divide attention is integral to cognitive performance. Individuals with effective attentional

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
control demonstrate heightened learning capabilities and increased resilience against cognitive
interference. This aspect of the model plays a pivotal role in various cognitive activities, influencing
how individuals absorb and process information in both academic and real-world settings.
Simultaneous processing, the third component, deals with the integration and interpretation of
information presented simultaneously. This involves recognizing patterns, understanding spatial
relationships, and making sense of complex visual stimuli. Proficiency in simultaneous processing is
particularly evident in tasks that require quick analysis and synthesis of information, such as solving
puzzles, spatial reasoning, and grasping the overall structure of visual scenes. This component
showcases how intelligence extends beyond sequential processing, emphasizing holistic
comprehension and problem-solving abilities.
Successive processing, the final element in the PASS model, involves the sequential organization and
comprehension of information. This aspect is crucial for tasks that demand step-by-step
problem-solving, logical reasoning, and understanding the temporal order of events. Proficient
successive processors excel in tasks related to language comprehension, mathematical reasoning, and
other activities that rely on accurate sequencing and ordered information processing.
The PASS model of intelligence stands as a robust framework that dissects the cognitive processes
underlying human intelligence. By breaking down intelligence into Planning, Attention,
Simultaneous, and Successive components, this model not only facilitates a more precise assessment
of cognitive abilities but also informs interventions and educational strategies tailored to enhance
specific aspects of intelligence. The PASS model, therefore, emerges as a valuable tool for both
understanding the intricacies of human intelligence and guiding educational practices to optimize
cognitive development.
Personal and Emotional Intelligence
Building in part on Gardner’s notions of interpersonal and intrapersonal intelligence, John Mayer
(2008) has proposed that personal intelligence, the ability to understand who one is and who one
wants to be, is a legitimate form of intelligence because, like other cognitive forms of intelligence, it
involves the ability to carry out abstract reasoning in a valid and accurate manner. Mayer suggests that
personal intelligence involves four key abilities:
❖ The ability to process and reason about personally relevant information through introspection
(looking within) and by observing yourself, other people, and the way others react to you.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
❖ The ability to incorporate the information gained through introspection and observation into
an accurate self-knowledge of your traits, abilities, and values, as well as accurate models of
others’ personalities. This sort of knowledge helps enhance interpersonal relationships.
❖ The ability to use personally relevant knowledge to guide your choices, such as a choice of
occupation or marriage partner, when (or whether) to begin a family, and where to reside.
Accurate compatibility choices enhance occupational success and personal well-being.
❖ The ability to select goals that are consistent (rather than in conflict) with one another and that
are realistic given your talents and resources. This may involve accurately deciding which
competencies you need to increase to pursue your goals and how to increase them. The person
high in personal intelligence also can draw on his or her personal memories and “life story”
for self-direction and to recognize changes in goals and values as they occur over the life
span.
Considerable evidence suggests that each of these abilities contributes to personal success and
well-being. Like many cognitive competencies, these skills involve the executive functions of the
frontal lobe, and proponents can make a strong case that they reflect intelligent thought.
Another form of adaptive ability, considered by some theorists to be a facet of personal intelligence,
involves competence in the emotional domain (Mayer, 2008). Emotional intelligence involves the
abilities to read others’ emotions accurately, to respond to them appropriately, to motivate oneself, to
be aware of one’s own emotions, and to regulate and control one’s own emotional responses (Mayer,
2008).
Emotional intelligence includes four components, or branches as shown above. The

Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test (MSCEIT) includes specific tasks to measure

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
each branch. Perceiving emotions is measured by people’s accuracy in judging emotional expressions
in facial photographs, as well as the emotional tones conveyed by different landscapes and designs.
Using emotions to facilitate thought is measured by asking people to identify the emotions that would
best enhance a particular type of thinking, such as how to deal with a distressed coworker or plan a
birthday party. To measure understanding emotions, people are asked to specify the conditions under
which their emotions change in intensity or type; another task measures people’s understanding of
which basic emotions blend together to create subtle emotions, such as envy or jealousy. Finally,
managing emotions is measured by asking respondents to indicate how they can change their own or
others’ emotions to facilitate success or increase interpersonal harmony.
Proponents of emotional intelligence point to the important adaptive advantages of emotional skills in
meeting the challenges of daily life, and they believe that the ability to read, respond to, and manage
emotions has evolutionary roots. Emotionally intelligent people, they suggest, form stronger
emotional bonds with others; enjoy greater success in careers, marriage, and child rearing; modulate
their own emotions so as to avoid strong depression, anger, or anxiety; and work more effectively
toward long-term goals by being able to control impulses for immediate gratification. In the end, some
people who are high in emotional intelligence may enjoy more success in life than do others who
surpass them in mental intelligence. They also tend to use more effective coping strategies.
The concept of emotional intelligence has its roots in the work of psychologists such as Howard
Gardner, Peter Salovey, and John Mayer. However, it was popularized by Daniel Goleman in his 1995
book, “Emotional Intelligence.” Goleman’s work led to a surge of interest in the field, and numerous
studies have since been conducted to explore the nature and importance of emotional intelligence.
Social Intelligence
Social intelligence is a multifaceted construct that encompasses a range of interpersonal and

intrapersonal abilities crucial for navigating complex social environments. At its core, social
intelligence involves the capacity to understand, interpret, and respond effectively to the emotions,
behaviours, and intentions of oneself and others.
One fundamental aspect of social intelligence is empathy. Empathy involves the ability to perceive
and share the feelings of others, fostering a deeper understanding of their emotional states. Socially
intelligent individuals can connect with others on an emotional level, demonstrating compassion and
creating a foundation for positive social interactions.
Active listening is another pivotal component of social intelligence. This skill goes beyond mere
hearing; it involves fully concentrating, understanding, and responding to verbal and nonverbal cues

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
during communication. Active listening enhances comprehension, demonstrates respect for others'
perspectives, and fosters more meaningful and constructive conversations.
A crucial skill within social intelligence is the ability to decode and utilize nonverbal
communication effectively. Proficient individuals can interpret body language, facial expressions,
and gestures, enabling them to gain insights into the emotional states and intentions of those around
them. Likewise, they can use nonverbal cues to convey their own emotions and messages accurately.
Emotional regulation is integral to social intelligence, involving the management of one's emotions
in social interactions. Socially intelligent individuals can maintain composure, control impulsive
reactions, and express emotions appropriately, contributing to a positive social environment and
effective communication.
Interpersonal skills are a cornerstone of social intelligence, encompassing various abilities related to
building and maintaining positive relationships. Effective communication, conflict resolution, and
teamwork fall under the umbrella of interpersonal skills. Individuals with strong interpersonal skills
can navigate social dynamics successfully and contribute positively to group interactions.
Social intelligence also involves a heightened social awareness, which entails being attuned to the
social environment, understanding group dynamics, and recognizing social norms. Socially intelligent
individuals can adapt their behaviour to different social contexts, demonstrating cultural sensitivity
and an understanding of diverse social expectations.
In addition, the ability to persuade and influence positively is a key facet of social intelligence. This
involves not only effective communication but also the skill to navigate social situations to garner
support, cooperation, or alignment of goals. Socially intelligent individuals can articulate ideas
persuasively and motivate others toward shared objectives.
Navigating conflicts successfully is a crucial aspect of social intelligence, and the skill of conflict
resolution is vital. Socially intelligent individuals can identify the root causes of conflicts,
communicate diplomatically, and find constructive solutions that preserve relationships and contribute
to positive outcomes.
INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is a numerical measure used to assess an individual's cognitive abilities and
intellectual potential in relation to their peers. The concept of IQ originated from the field of
psychometrics, particularly the work of Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon in the early 20th century.
The objective was to create a standardized tool to identify students who might need additional
educational support.
The calculation of IQ is typically derived from standardized intelligence tests, with the average IQ set
at 100. The distribution of scores follows a bell curve, where the majority of individuals cluster
around the average, and deviations are measured in terms of standard deviations from the mean. The
standard deviation is usually set at 15 points.
IQ tests are designed to measure a range of cognitive abilities, including logical reasoning,
problem-solving, memory, and verbal comprehension. These tests are often divided into subtests that
assess specific domains of intelligence. Importantly, IQ tests are continually updated and revised to
ensure cultural and gender fairness and to account for changes in society's understanding of
intelligence.
The concept of IQ has been a subject of extensive debate and criticism. Critics argue that it offers a
narrow and limited view of intelligence, as it may not capture the full spectrum of human cognitive
abilities, creativity, emotional intelligence, or practical problem-solving skills. Additionally, concerns
have been raised about the potential for cultural bias in some IQ tests, which may disadvantage
individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds.
It is essential to recognize that IQ is not a fixed or absolute measure of intelligence but rather a
snapshot of an individual's performance on a specific set of tasks at a particular point in time.
Moreover, IQ scores are not indicative of an individual's potential for growth, learning, or success in
various life domains.
TRADITIONAL IQ & DEVIATION IQ
Deviation IQ and traditional IQ represent two distinct paradigms in intelligence testing, each with its
unique method of assessing cognitive abilities. The distinctions between these approaches lie in their
calculation methods, reliance on population norms, adaptability to demographic variations, and
implications for understanding and interpreting individual intelligence scores.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Traditional IQ, a widely-used method, calculates an individual's intelligence by dividing their mental
age by their chronological age and then multiplying the result by 100. This process results in an IQ
score that is compared to the average performance within a specific population. Traditional IQ relies
on fixed population norms, where the average IQ is set at 100, with a standard deviation of 15 points.
The distribution of traditional IQ scores follows a bell curve, allowing for the categorization of
intelligence levels based on standard deviations from the mean.
In contrast, deviation IQ breaks away from the traditional approach by abandoning the concept of
mental age. Instead, it employs a statistical method that calculates an individual's IQ score based on
how far their performance deviates from the average in a standardized sample, expressed in standard
deviation units. Deviation IQ is adaptable and sensitive to changes in population characteristics,
anchoring intelligence scores to the statistical distribution of a specific reference group. This
adaptability allows for a more accurate representation of an individual's standing within their own
peer group.
A crucial point of departure between deviation IQ and traditional IQ lies in the use of
population-specific norms. While traditional IQ adheres to a fixed mean and standard deviation across
various age groups, deviation IQ adjusts these parameters based on the characteristics of the reference
group. This acknowledgment of demographic variations enhances the cultural fairness of intelligence
testing, addressing concerns about biases embedded in traditional IQ measures.
Deviation IQ's flexibility regarding the mean and standard deviation makes it increasingly relevant in
modern intelligence testing. This adaptability allows for variations tailored to different populations,
reflecting a departure from the rigid framework of traditional IQ. The contemporary usage of
deviation IQ underscores its value in recognizing and accommodating diverse intelligence profiles,
aligning more closely with the evolving understanding of intelligence within a culturally diverse
context.
CONSTANCY OF IQ
Constancy of IQ refers to the relative stability or consistency of an individual's Intelligence Quotient

over time. The concept is grounded in the notion that, to a significant extent, an individual's cognitive
abilities remain relatively constant throughout their life, particularly when measured using
standardized IQ tests. However, it's crucial to note that this constancy is a general trend and doesn't
imply absolute stability.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
One key aspect of the constancy of IQ is the idea of rank-order stability, which suggests that
individuals tend to maintain their relative positions within a group or population over time. For
example, if an individual scores above average on an IQ test during childhood, they are likely to score
similarly relative to their peers in adulthood. This stability is observed despite the potential for
changes in the absolute IQ score.
Studies examining the constancy of IQ have shown that while there is a reasonable degree of stability
in IQ scores over the long term, there can still be variations. Factors such as environmental
influences, life experiences, education, and socio-economic conditions can contribute to changes in
IQ scores over time. Additionally, individual differences in cognitive development and the plasticity
of the brain mean that some degree of change in IQ scores is not uncommon.
The constancy of IQ has practical implications, particularly in educational and clinical settings. It
suggests that IQ assessments conducted during early stages of life can provide meaningful
information about an individual's cognitive potential that remains relevant over the years. This
information can guide educational interventions and support services for those who may benefit from
additional resources.
However, it's important to approach the constancy of IQ with a nuanced understanding. IQ scores are
not rigid and unalterable indicators of intelligence. They provide a snapshot of an individual's
cognitive abilities at a specific point in time and may not capture the full spectrum of intellectual
capacities, creativity, or practical problem-solving skills. Moreover, the influence of various
environmental and personal factors should be considered when interpreting IQ scores and their
constancy over time.
HERIDITY, ENVIRONMENT & INTELLIGENCE
Genes and environment both influence intelligence, but they rarely operate independently of one
another. The environment can influence how genes express themselves, as when prenatal factors or
malnutrition retard gene-directed brain development. Likewise, genetic factors can influence the
effects produced by the environment. For example, genetic factors influence which environments
people select for themselves, how they respond to the environment, and how the environment
responds to them.
Intelligence clearly has a strong genetic component, with heritability coefficients between .50 and .70
being reported consistently in both twin and adoption studies (Plomin et al., 2007). This indicates that
more than half, and perhaps more than two thirds, of the within-group variation in IQ is attributable to
genetic factors. Overall, the pattern is quite clear: The more genes people have in common, the more

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
similar they tend to be in IQ. In identical twins, the IQ correlation remains at about .80 from age 4
through adulthood. In adulthood, correlations for fraternal twins drop to around .40. Doubling this
difference in correlations yields a heritability coefficient of .80 in adulthood, indicating that genetic
factors become even more important as we age (Plomin & Spinath, 2004). One reason may be that
new genes come on line to affect intelligence as more-advanced cognitive processes emerge during
development. Another is that genetic influences snowball during development as people create and
select environments that are compatible with their genetic characteristics.
Although genes are important foundations of the g factor, there clearly is not a single “intelligence
gene.” The diverse abilities measured by intelligence tests are undoubtedly influenced by large
numbers of interacting genes, and different combinations seem to underlie specific abilities. The
newly acquired ability to measure the genome directly has led to a search for specific genes and gene
combinations that underlie intelligence. This brings us ever closer to an understanding of the
neurological basis for human cognition, and a handful of candidate genes associated with intelligence
have already been identified.
Genes are not the whole story, however. IQ correlations for identical twins raised together are slightly
higher than those for identical twins raised apart. The same is true for other types of siblings raised
together and raised apart. This rules out an entirely genetic explanation. Although one’s genotype is
an important factor in determining intelligence test scores, environment seems to account for 30 to 50
percent of the IQ variation among people. Both shared and unshared environmental factors are
involved. Behaviour-genetic studies indicate that between a quarter and a third of the population
variability in intelligence can be attributed to shared environmental factors, particularly the family
environment. The importance of the home environment is also shown in studies of children who are
removed from deprived environments and placed in middle- or upper-class adoptive homes. Typically,
such children show a gradual increase in IQ on the order of 10 to 12 points. Conversely, when
deprived children remain in their impoverished environments, either they show no improvement in IQ
or they actually deteriorate intellectually over time (Serpell, 2000). Scores on general intelligence
correlate around .40 with the socioeconomic status of the family in which a child is reared (Lubinski,
2004).

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
EXTREMES OF INTELLIGENCE
Because of the many genetic and environmental influences on intelligence, there are individuals at
both ends of the intelligence distribution who have unusual mental abilities. At the upper end are the
“intellectually gifted”; at the low end are those labelled “mentally retarded” or “cognitively disabled.”
The Intellectually Gifted
At the top end of the intelligence bell curve are the intellectually gifted, whose IQs of 130 or higher
place them in the top 10 percent of the population. Their high IQs do not mean that they are good at
everything, however. As we might expect from the theories of multiple intelligences, many are
enormously talented in one area of mental competence but quite average in other domains. Even with
IQs over 150, large discrepancies are often found between verbal and spatial-mathematical skills.
Thus a mathematical prodigy who figures out rules of algebra on his own at age 3 may have relatively
unexceptional verbal skills.
What distinguishes the thought processes of the gifted? Some theorists believe that gifted children
think in the same way as average children but simply do it much more efficiently (Jackson &
Butterfield, 1986). Others disagree. When they see a child capable of memorizing an entire musical
score after hearing it once, they conclude that this ability is based on a different quality of thinking
that involves great intuition and a passion for the specific domain in which the child excels (Winner,
2000).
Only a small percentage of gifted children attain true eminence in later life. Eminence seems to be a
special variety of giftedness. Joseph Renzulli (2002) has studied this rare group, and he believes that
their success is a product of three interacting factors. The first is highly developed mental
abilities—not only general intelligence but also specific mental abilities related to one’s chosen fi eld.
Thus Einstein was blessed with unusual mathematical and spatial abilities (but not exceptional verbal
skills). The second factor is the ability to engage in creative problem solving—that is, to come up
with novel and unconventional ideas, to judge their potential value, and to apply them to challenging
problems. The third factor is motivation and dedication. Eminence involves a great deal of elbow
grease and a determination to attain the highest levels of performance. Studies of eminent scientists,
artists, musicians, writers, and athletes reveal that they tend to work much harder and to dedicate
themselves more strongly to excellence than do their less eminent counterparts.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Like children at the low end of the competence continuum, intellectually gifted children often need
special educational opportunities. They may become bored in regular classrooms and even drop out of
school if they are not sufficiently challenged. Yet many school systems have de-emphasized programs
for the gifted in the same spirit of egalitarianism that places cognitively challenged children in regular
classrooms. Increasingly, parents of gifted children are enrolling their children in special camps and
extracurricular programs to provide the needed intellectual stimulation and exposure to peer groups
with common interests and abilities.
Spotting & Nurturing Gifted Children
❖ Identification and Screening: The first step in spotting gifted children is identification, often
initiated through screening processes. Standardized tests measuring intelligence, creativity,
and specific talents may be employed, alongside teacher recommendations, observations, and
checklists. Recognizing that giftedness can manifest in various ways, educators increasingly
consider a broader range of indicators, including artistic, musical, and interpersonal talents.
❖ Comprehensive Assessment: A comprehensive assessment involves a thorough understanding
of a child's strengths and areas of giftedness. This includes cognitive abilities, creativity,
leadership qualities, and specific talents. A holistic approach ensures that various facets of
giftedness are acknowledged, avoiding a narrow focus on traditional measures of intelligence.
❖ Involvement of Educators and Parents: Educators play a pivotal role in the identification
process. Training teachers to recognize and appreciate diverse expressions of giftedness is
crucial. Additionally, involving parents in the assessment process enhances the overall
understanding of a child's potential. Parental insights are valuable and contribute to a more
comprehensive identification process.
❖ Individualized Education Plans (IEPs): Once identified, gifted children benefit from the
development of Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). These plans outline specific
educational strategies tailored to the child's unique needs. Differentiated instruction, flexible
pacing, and opportunities for in-depth exploration of topics aligning with the child's interests
are key components of effective IEPs.
❖ Enrichment Programs and Acceleration: Enrichment programs and acceleration strategies
are essential for nurturing gifted children. Enrichment involves providing additional,
challenging learning experiences, while acceleration allows students to progress through the
curriculum at an accelerated pace. Both approaches aim to prevent boredom and ensure that
gifted children remain intellectually engaged.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
❖ Counselling and Social-Emotional Support: Gifted children may experience unique social
and emotional challenges, such as perfectionism, asynchronous development, and potential
feelings of isolation. Providing counselling and creating a supportive peer environment
addresses these issues. Social-emotional support is integral to the overall well-being of gifted
students.
❖ Extracurricular and Specialized Activities: Nurturing giftedness extends beyond the
classroom. Involvement in extracurricular activities, mentorship programs, and specialized
workshops allows gifted children to explore and develop their talents further. Exposure to
diverse experiences contributes to their holistic development.
Mental Retardation
The American Psychiatric Association has devised a four-level system that classifies mental
retardation as mild, moderate, severe, or profound on the basis of IQ scores. Vast majority of people
have mild mental retardation, obtaining IQs between about 50 and 70. Most members of this largest
group, given appropriate social and educational support, are capable of functioning adequately in
mainstream society, holding jobs, and raising families. Progressively greater environmental support is
needed as we move toward the profoundly disabled range, where institutional care is usually required.
Children with mild mental retardation can attend school, but they have difficulties in reading, writing,
memory, and mathematical computation. Many of these difficulties result from poorly developed
problem-solving strategies. They often have deficiencies in the executive functions such as reasoning,
planning, and evaluating feedback from their efforts.
Cognitive disability has a variety of causes: some genetic, some due to other biological factors, and
some due to environmental causes. Genetic abnormalities account for about 28 percent of all mental
retardation cases. More than 100 different genetic causes of retardation have been identified. For
example, Down syndrome, which is characterized by mild to severe mental disability, is caused by an
abnormal division of the twenty-first chromosome pair.
Heritability plays a different role in mild retardation than it does in profound retardation. Cases of
profound retardation are more likely to be caused by genetic accidents instead of an inherited
genotype. Therefore, profound retardation does not run in families. In one study of 17,000 children,
about one half of 1 percent were profoundly retarded. None of these children’s siblings had an IQ
below 85, and their mean IQ was 103. In contrast, the siblings of the 1.2 percent who were mildly
retarded had mean IQs of 85, and a third of the siblings had IQs below 75 (Nichols, 1984).

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Mental disability can also be caused by accidents at birth, such as severe oxygen deprivation (anoxia);
and by diseases experienced by the mother during pregnancy, such as rubella or syphilis. Likewise,
drugs and alcohol taken by the mother—especially in the first weeks of pregnancy when a woman is
often unaware that she is pregnant— can cause neural damage and mental retardation. Despite this
range of potential causes, in a significant majority (75 to 80 percent) of people with mental
retardation, no clear biological cause can be found. Experts theorize that these cases may be due to
undetectable brain damage, extreme environmental deprivation, or a combination of the two.
Problems In The Assessment Of Intelligence Of Children With Special Needs
❖ Standardized Testing Limitations: Traditional intelligence tests, often standardized on

typically developing populations, may lack sensitivity to the diverse cognitive profiles of
children with special needs. These tests may not adequately capture the unique strengths and
challenges associated with various disabilities, leading to an underestimation or
overestimation of their true cognitive abilities.
❖ Language and Communication Barriers: Children with special needs, particularly those with
language or communication impairments, may face challenges in expressing their cognitive
abilities through traditional verbal or written responses. Standardized tests heavily reliant on
linguistic skills may not effectively assess the intelligence of these individuals, leading to a
potential underrepresentation of their true capabilities.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
❖ Motor and Sensory Limitations: Children with motor or sensory impairments may encounter
difficulties in traditional test-taking scenarios that involve fine motor skills or visual
processing. The physical challenges they experience can compromise their performance on
tasks, creating a potential mismatch between their actual cognitive abilities and the
assessment outcomes.
❖ Lack of Cultural Sensitivity: Assessment tools may lack cultural sensitivity, particularly for
children from diverse backgrounds. The cultural context can significantly impact the
expression of intelligence, and tests that do not consider cultural diversity may yield biased
results, misinterpreting the cognitive strengths of children with special needs from different
cultural backgrounds.
❖ Overemphasis on Normative Comparisons: Traditional assessments often rely on normative
comparisons, comparing a child's performance to that of their typically developing peers. This
approach may not consider the individual progress and potential of children with special
needs, as their developmental trajectories may differ significantly from the norm.
❖ Difficulty in Differentiating Cognitive and Adaptive Functioning: Assessing intelligence in
children with special needs requires careful differentiation between cognitive and adaptive
functioning. Some standardized tests may not effectively capture the adaptive skills necessary
for daily living, potentially overlooking important aspects of a child's overall cognitive
profile.
❖ Emotional and Behavioural Factors: Emotional and behavioural factors can significantly
influence the assessment process. Children with special needs may experience anxiety,
frustration, or difficulty focusing during testing, impacting their performance. Traditional
assessments may not adequately account for these emotional and behavioural considerations,
affecting the accuracy of the intelligence assessment.
❖ Limited Flexibility in Testing Formats: The rigid structure of many intelligence tests may not
accommodate the diverse needs of children with special needs. Lack of flexibility in testing
formats and accommodations, such as extended time or alternative response modes, can
hinder accurate evaluations and fail to provide a comprehensive understanding of their
cognitive abilities.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Spotting & Nurturing Cognitively Disabled Children:
❖ Early Detection and Screening: Early detection is crucial in spotting cognitive disabilities.
Screening tools are often used in schools and healthcare settings to identify potential signs of
developmental delays. These tools may include standardized tests, teacher observations, and
developmental milestones checklists. Early detection allows for timely intervention,
enhancing the child's overall development.
❖ Comprehensive Assessment: A comprehensive assessment follows early detection, aiming to

identify the specific nature and extent of cognitive disabilities. This assessment involves
collaboration among professionals such as psychologists, special educators, and healthcare
professionals. Intellectual assessments, behavioural observations, and medical evaluations
contribute to a holistic understanding of the child's cognitive functioning.
❖ Collaboration among Professionals: Collaboration among professionals is essential in the

identification and support process. Psychologists, special educators, speech therapists, and
medical professionals work together to assess various aspects of cognitive functioning,
language development, and behavioural patterns. Interdisciplinary collaboration ensures a
comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the child's needs.
❖ Family Involvement: Involving the family is a critical component of the process. Parents
often provide valuable insights into the child's developmental history and can contribute to the
assessment process. Collaborative efforts between professionals and parents foster a
supportive environment for the child's overall well-being and development.
❖ Individualized Education Plans (IEPs): Once a cognitive disability is identified, the

development of an Individualized Education Plan (IEP) becomes paramount. An IEP outlines
specific goals, accommodations, and support services tailored to the child's unique needs.
Special educators and other professionals work collaboratively to design and implement
effective interventions to address cognitive challenges.
❖ Inclusive Classroom Strategies: Inclusive classroom strategies involve modifying teaching

methods and classroom environments to accommodate cognitive disabilities. Special
educators work with classroom teachers to implement differentiated instruction, adaptive
materials, and assistive technologies. Creating an inclusive and supportive classroom
atmosphere ensures that cognitively disabled children can actively participate in the learning
process.

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE:
Today, the Wechsler tests (WAIS-IV and WISC-IV) are the most popular individually administered
intelligence tests in the United States. They provide a good illustration of how intelligence is assessed.
Wechsler believed that intelligence tests should measure a wide array of mental abilities. The
WAIS-IV consists of a series of subtests that fall into four “index scales”: Verbal Comprehension,
Perceptual Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed. A psychologist can therefore plot a
profile based on the scores on each of the subtests to assess a person’s pattern of intellectual strengths
and weaknesses. The test yields five summary scores: one for each of the index scales and a
Full-Scale Composite IQ based on all of the scales. For some purposes, it is useful to examine scoring
differences between the index scales. For example, individuals from an impoverished environment
with little formal schooling might score lower on the verbal subtests than on the others, suggesting
that their overall IQ might be an underestimate of their intellectual potential. Sometimes, too, various
types of brain damage are reflected in large discrepancies between certain subtest scores.
Revisions of both the Stanford-Binet and the Wechsler scales have been responsive to advances in the
understanding of the mental processes that underlie intelligence. The original Stanford-Binet yielded a
single IQ score based mainly on verbal items, but today’s test samples a wider range of abilities and
provides, in addition to a composite IQ score, separate scores for Verbal Reasoning, Abstract/Visual
Reasoning, Quantitative Reasoning, and Short-Term Memory. The WISC-IV, used to assess children
between ages 6 and 11, provides, in addition to its Full-Scale IQ, separate scores for Verbal
Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Freedom from Distractibility, and Processing Speed. These

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
scores make the tests more useful for understanding test takers’ intellectual strengths and weaknesses
and possibly planning educational interventions for them. Measurement of specific abilities is also
supported by the finding that as children mature, their general intelligence remains stable, but specific
abilities become increasingly more differentiated.
Using written tests for selection purposes highlights an issue that Binet faced and that continues to
plague test developers today: should we test a person’s abstract “aptitude for learning,” or should we
test what a person already knows? Consider an example. In selecting applicants for college, we could
give students either an achievement test designed to find out how much they have learned so far in
their lives, or we could present them with an aptitude test containing novel puzzlelike problems that
presumably go beyond prior learning and are thought to measure applicants’ potential for future
learning and performance.
The argument for aptitude testing is that it is fairer because it supposedly depends less on prior
knowledge than on a person’s ability to react to the problems presented on the test. The argument
against aptitude testing is that it is difficult to construct a test that is independent of prior learning.
Further, such a test may require an ability to deal with puzzles that is not relevant to success in
situations other than the test itself. In fact, most intelligence tests measure a combination of aptitude
and achievement, reflecting both native ability and previous learning (Lubinski, 2004).
Psychometric Standards for Intelligence Tests
A psychological test is a method for measuring individual differences related to some psychological
concept, or construct, based on a sample of relevant behaviour in a scientifically designed and
controlled situation. In the case of intelligence testing, intelligence is the construct and scores obtained
on the test are its operational definition. To design a test, we need to decide which specific behaviours
serve as indicators of intellectual abilities. Then we need to devise test items that allow us to assess
individual differences in those behaviours. We will, of course, need evidence that our sample of items
actually measures the abilities we are assessing. As in designing an experiment, want to collect a
sample of relevant behaviour under standardized conditions, attempting to control for other factors
that could influence responses to the items. To understand how psychologists meet these
requirements, we must examine three key measurement concepts: reliability, validity, and
standardization.
Reliability refers to consistency of measurement. Reliability can take several forms when applied to
psychological tests. It can refer to consistency of measurement over time, consistency of measurement
by the items within the test itself, or consistency in scores assigned by different examiners. One of the

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
most important is consistency over time. This type of measurement stability over time is defined as
test-retest reliability, which is assessed by administering the measure to the same group of
participants on two (or more) separate occasions and correlating the two (or more) sets of scores.
Another form of reliability, internal consistency, has to do with consistency of measurement within
the test itself. For example, if a Wechsler subtest is internally consistent, all of its items are measuring
the same skill, as evidenced by high correlations among the items. Finally, interjudge reliability refers
to consistency of measurement when different people observe the same event or score the same test.
Ideally, two psychologists who independently score the same test will assign exactly the same scores.
As a general concept, validity refers to how well a test actually measures what it is designed to
measure. Construct validity exists when a test successfully measures the psychological construct it is
designed to measure, as indicated by relations between test scores and other behaviours that it should
be related to. Two other kinds of validity contribute to construct validity. Content validity refers to
whether the items on a test measure all the knowledge or skills that are assumed to underlie the
construct of interest. For example, if we want the Arithmetic subtest of the WAIS-IV to measure
general mathematical reasoning skills, we would not want to have only addition problems; we would
want the items to sample other relevant mathematical abilities as well, such as subtraction, division,
and fractions. If an intelligence test is measuring what it is assumed to measure, the IQ it yields should
allow us to predict other behaviours that are assumed to be influenced by intelligence, such as school
grades or job performance. These outcome measures are called criterion measures, and
criterion-related validity refers to the ability of test scores to correlate with meaningful criterion
measures.
The third measurement requirement, standardization, has two meanings: (1) the development of
norms and (2) rigorously controlled testing procedures. The first meaning of standardization is
especially important in providing a meaningful IQ score. It involves the collection of norms, test
scores derived from a large sample that represents particular age segments of the population. These
normative scores provide a basis for interpreting a given individual’s score, just as the distribution of
scores in a course exam allows you to determine how well you did relative to your classmates.
Normative data also allow us to recalibrate the distribution of test scores so that an IQ of 100 will
remain the “average” score even if the general population’s test performance changes over time.
When norms are collected for mental skills (and for many other human characteristics), the scores
usually form a normal distribution, a bell-shaped curve with most scores clustering around the
center of the curve. On intelligence tests, the center of the distribution for each age group from
childhood to late adulthood is assigned an IQ score of 100.
Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Assessment

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences has provided a framework for developing specific
assessments that target each intelligence. The Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence Assessment offers a
more nuanced approach to measuring multiple intelligence. The assessment is designed to identify an
individual’s strengths and preferences across the eight intelligences proposed by Gardner. It involves a
series of tasks and questions that assess different abilities within each intelligence. By engaging in
these activities, individuals can demonstrate their proficiency and inclinations in various domains of
intelligence.
The assessment includes a variety of tasks tailored to each intelligence. For linguistic intelligence,
individuals may be asked to write a persuasive essay or engage in a debate. Spatial intelligence tasks
might involve solving puzzles or mentally rotating objects. Musical intelligence may be assessed
through tasks such as composing melodies or identifying musical patterns. The assessment offers
specific activities and exercises that tap into each intelligence, providing a more comprehensive
understanding of an individual’s strengths and preferences.
Recognizing the limitations of standardized tests and specific assessments, alternative approaches
have been developed to measure multiple intelligence. These approaches emphasize a broader
perspective and take into account various aspects of an individual’s abilities. Here are some
noteworthy alternatives:
❖ Observation and anecdotal evidence: Observing an individual’s behaviours, skills, and

talents in real-life situations can provide valuable insights into their multiple intelligences.
Anecdotal evidence, including narratives and personal accounts, can also contribute to
understanding an individual’s strengths and areas of expertise.
❖ Self-assessment and self-reflection: Individuals themselves can reflect on their own abilities
and preferences through self-assessment exercises. Questionnaires, checklists, and reflective
activities can help individuals identify their strengths and areas for growth across different
intelligences. Self-assessment encourages self-awareness and personal insight.
❖ Performance-based assessments: Performance-based assessments focus on practical
demonstrations of skills and abilities within specific intelligences. These assessments often
involve real-world scenarios and tasks that require individuals to apply their intelligence in
meaningful contexts. Performance-based assessments can provide a more authentic
representation of an individual’s abilities in action.
By employing a combination of traditional tests, specialized assessments, and alternative approaches,

researchers and practitioners can gain a more comprehensive understanding of an individual’s

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
multiple intelligences. These varied methods offer flexibility and cater to the diverse range of abilities
that constitute human intelligence.
Multiple intelligence measurement has practical applications in various domains, including

education, career development, and personal growth.
Educational settings
❖ Tailoring instruction to individual strengths: By identifying students’ strengths in different
intelligences, educators can customize instruction to align with their unique learning styles
and preferences.
❖ Promoting diverse learning opportunities: Multiple intelligence assessment encourages
educators to provide a wide range of learning experiences that cater to different intelligences.
This promotes inclusivity and allows students to explore and develop their less dominant
intelligences.
Career development and counselling

❖ Matching individuals’ intelligences with suitable occupations: Understanding an
individual’s multiple intelligences can guide career development and occupational choices.
Matching an individual’s strengths and interests in specific intelligences with job
requirements can lead to better career fit and satisfaction.
❖ Enhancing career satisfaction and success: By aligning career choices with an individual’s
multiple intelligences, one can experience increased job satisfaction and success. When
individuals can utilize their strengths in their professional roles, they are more likely to feel
fulfilled and motivated.
Personal development and self-awareness

❖ Recognizing and harnessing one’s strengths: Multiple intelligence measurement promotes
self-awareness by helping individuals recognize and appreciate their unique strengths and
talents. Understanding their intelligences allows individuals to identify areas where they excel
and feel confident.
❖ Fostering holistic growth and self-acceptance: Embracing the concept of multiple
intelligence encourages individuals to appreciate diverse forms of intelligence within

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
themselves and others. It fosters a more inclusive and accepting perspective of human
abilities.
Measurement of Fluid & Crystalized Intelligence
Fluid intelligence can be assessed using various tests, such as the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Cognitive
Abilities, Raven’s Progressive Matrices, and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Each test
focuses on different aspects of fluid intelligence but shares the common goal of gauging an
individual's cognitive abilities. The Woodcock-Johnson Test examines categorical thinking and
sequential reasoning through progressively challenging puzzles. Using non-verbal multiple-choice
tasks, Raven’s Progressive Matrices evaluates the understanding of relationships between mental
representations. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children is a visual-based test comprising matrix
reasoning and picture concept assessment. Generally, fluid intelligence is believed to peak in the late
20s, after which it may gradually decline. As we rely more on accumulated knowledge and
experience, fluid intelligence becomes less crucial for daily functioning. Some studies suggest that the
decline in fluid intelligence may only occur around the 40s.
The C-Test measures crystallized intelligence. It does so through a text completion task. Researchers
initially created the C-Test as a foreign language proficiency exam. Scores on the C-Test correspond
to abilities underlying the language aspect of crystallized intelligence. However, research shows that
carefully selected texts from relevant domains can enable the C-Test to assess factual knowledge. This
also relates to crystallized intelligence. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale similarly measures
crystallized intelligence. It has verbal and nonverbal subtests. Six verbal subtests potentially gauge
crystallized intelligence. These include:
❖ Comprehension - Measuring practical knowledge
❖ Information - Assessing acquired facts
❖ Digit Span - Testing working memory capacity
❖ Vocabulary - Evaluating word knowledge
❖ Similarities - Assessing conceptual reasoning skills
❖ Arithmetic - Evaluating mathematical abilities
Most verbal subtests reflect crystallized intelligence. They evaluate knowledge, skills and expertise
gained over time. Nonverbal subtests tend to correlate more with fluid intelligence.
MEASUREMENT OF APTITUDE

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
Aptitude refers to learned or innate abilities predicting future performance in a specific domain.
Unlike intelligence tests, aptitude tests focus on measuring competence applicable to
education/occupations. Common aptitude tests include:
❖ SAT/ACT: Evaluates critical thinking, problem-solving, and standard high school-level skills
to predict college preparedness.
❖ Graduate Record Examinations (GRE): Assesses analytical writing, verbal reasoning, and
quantitative reasoning aptitudes for graduate programs.
❖ Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB): Evaluates aptitudes important for
military technical training and jobs.
❖ Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Test: Measures reasoning and judgment abilities through
problems assessing inference, recognition of assumptions, etc.
Aptitude tests aim to predict potential through standardized evaluations simulating relevant tasks.
However, like intelligence, aptitudes are multi-dimensional, and test scores alone may not capture all
predictive facets. Non-cognitive variables also influence performance and potential.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE & CREATIVITY:
The relationship between intelligence and creativity has been a subject of considerable interest and
debate in the field of psychology. While both concepts involve cognitive processes, they exhibit
distinct characteristics, and understanding their interplay is crucial for a comprehensive assessment.
Intelligence is traditionally defined as the ability to learn, reason, solve problems, and adapt to one's
environment effectively. This definition often emphasizes cognitive abilities assessed through
standardized tests. On the other hand, creativity is the capacity to generate novel and valuable ideas,
solutions, or products. It involves thinking divergently, breaking from conventional patterns, and
producing something original.
There is a degree of overlap between intelligence and creativity, particularly in aspects of

problem-solving and cognitive flexibility. Intelligent individuals may possess the cognitive resources
to engage in creative thinking. However, the two constructs are not synonymous. Intelligence is often
associated with convergent thinking, finding the single best solution to a problem, whereas creativity
involves divergent thinking, generating multiple solutions or ideas.
The threshold hypothesis suggests that there is a minimum level of intelligence required for creativity
to manifest. Beyond this threshold, the correlation between intelligence and creativity weakens. This

MS. SAKSHI MALHOTRA
implies that a basic level of cognitive ability is necessary for creative thinking, but high intelligence
alone does not guarantee high creativity. Both intelligence and creativity involve complex cognitive
processes, but they differ in their cognitive styles. Intelligence often relies on efficient information
processing, logical reasoning, and pattern recognition. Creativity, on the other hand, thrives on
associative thinking, making remote connections between seemingly unrelated concepts, and
embracing unconventional perspectives.
While intelligence tends to function well within established rules and structures, creativity often
emerges in situations with fewer constraints. Creative individuals may challenge or transcend existing
norms, pushing the boundaries of conventional thinking. This capacity to break from established
patterns distinguishes creativity from more rule-bound aspects of intelligence. In practical terms,
intelligence is often associated with academic and professional success, while creativity is crucial in
innovation and problem-solving in various domains. The combination of high intelligence and high
creativity is often sought after in fields that demand both analytical thinking and innovative
problem-solving.
To conclude, the relationship between intelligence and creativity is nuanced. While there is some
overlap in cognitive processes, the two constructs maintain their distinct characteristics. The threshold
hypothesis suggests a foundational role for intelligence in facilitating creative thinking, but creativity
also involves unique cognitive styles and flourishes in less constrained environments. Recognizing
and understanding the interplay between intelligence and creativity contributes to a more holistic
understanding of cognitive abilities and their diverse expressions in human thought and behaviour.

Chapter 10 - Intelligence & Aptitude

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 10 - Intelligence & Aptitude

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MS.

PAPER I: FOUNDATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGY

❖ Verbal aptitude tests aim to evaluate language-related skills, encompassing vocabulary,

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

In conclusion, aptitude tests offer a comprehensive means of understanding an individual's natural

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APTITUDE & INTEREST:

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

SIMILARITIES BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE, APTITUDE & ACHIEVEMENT TESTS

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN INTELLIGENCE, APTITUDE & ACHIEVEMENT TESTS

Intelligence Tests Aptitude Tests Achievement Tests

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Emphasis on Emphasize a broad range Focus on an individual's Assess the actual

INTELLIGENCE IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE:

Sir Francis Galton: Quantifying Mental Ability

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Alfred Binet’s Mental Tests

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Binet’s Legacy: An Intelligence-Testing Industry Emerges

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

THE NATURE OF INTELLIGENCE:

The Psychometric Approach:

Psychometrics is the statistical study of psychological tests. The psychometric approach to

Spearman’s Two-Factor Theory

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Spearman concluded that intellectual performance is determined partly by a g factor, or general

Thurstone’s Model of Primary Mental Abilities

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Guilford's Structure of Intellect Model

Guilford's SOI model is characterized by three main dimensions:

Crystallized and Fluid Intelligence

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Cognitive Process Approaches:

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Broader Conceptions of Intelligence:

Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

❖ Linguistic intelligence: Linguistic intelligence involves a mastery of language-related skills.

❖ Naturalistic intelligence: Naturalistic intelligence involves an affinity for understanding and

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Pass Model Of Intelligence

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Personal and Emotional Intelligence

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Emotional intelligence includes four components, or branches as shown above. The

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Social intelligence is a multifaceted construct that encompasses a range of interpersonal and

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

TRADITIONAL IQ & DEVIATION IQ

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Constancy of IQ refers to the relative stability or consistency of an individual's Intelligence Quotient

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

HERIDITY, ENVIRONMENT & INTELLIGENCE

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

The Intellectually Gifted

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

Spotting & Nurturing Gifted Children

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE

UNIT 10 INTELLIGENCE AND APTITUDE