13.2: Cognitive Theories of Intelligence

Cognitive psychologists have long been interested in defining and measuring intelligence. Piaget came up with the theory of how thinking develops. In Western psychological theory, there has been much debate about how to conceptualize intelligence and Sternberg and Gardner’s theories are two ways of doing so.

Figure \(\PageIndex{1}\): Jean Piaget standing in the upper right quadrant.[1]

General Intelligence

Spearman was a British psychologist who first coined the idea that all cognitive abilities come from one latent ability. He was a statistician (and in fact one of the main proponents of factor analysis methods). He found that children who did well in one subject in school often did well in other subjects as well. He theorized that the high correlation in performance between different tasks comes from some underlying pool of latent potential. He thought of this latent potential as some kind of mental energy. He called that latent potential G. (Spearman, 1927)

Today when we talk about IQ, one number that tells us how smart someone is, we are buying into Spearman's G. But the controversy over whether intelligence is one basic potential or many specific ones has continued in a variety of different ways. For example, there is research looking at intelligence and cognitive abilities in other animals as well as cognitive neuroscience findings about which areas of the brain are responsible for what cognitive skill (Serpico & Frasnelli, 2018).

Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

An alternative view of intelligence is presented by Sternberg (1997; 1999). Sternberg offers three types of intelligences. Sternberg provided background information about his view of intelligence in a conference, where he described his frustration as a committee member charged with selecting graduate students for a program in psychology. He was concerned that there was too much emphasis placed on aptitude test scores (we will discuss this later in the chapter) and believed that there were other, less easily measured, qualities necessary for success in a graduate program and in the world of work. Aptitude test scores indicate the first type of intelligence, which is mainly academic in nature.

1. Analytical (componential) sometimes described as academic: includes the ability to solve problems of logic, verbal comprehension, vocabulary, and spatial abilities.
2. Creative (experiential): the ability to apply newly found skills to novel situations
3. Practical (contextual): the ability to use common sense and to know what is called for in a situation. [2]

Figure \(\PageIndex{2}\): Reading supports analytical intelligence[3]

Figure \(\PageIndex{3}\):- Building with shows creative intelligence [4]

Figure

Figure \(\PageIndex{4}\): Navigating social settings is practical intelligence[5]

Yet more recently, Sternberg has come up with the concept of Adaptive intelligence - "the intelligence one needs
to adapt to current problems and anticipate future problems of real-world environments". He suggested that adaptive intelligence is a better composite of the triarchic intelligences and wisdom based knowledge and skills than G is. The following table compares those two composite ideas of intelligence.

Table \(\PageIndex{1}\): Sixteen Key Differences between General Intelligence (Standardized Test) Problems and Adaptive Intelligence Problems.

Difference	Issue	General Intelligence	Adaptive Intelligence
1	Type of Answer Required	Right vs. Wrong (sometimes with partial credit)	More Adaptive vs. Less Adaptive to the Environment
2	Structure of Problem	Well-structured: Clear, Well-defined Path to Unique Solution	Ill-structured: Multiple Ill-defined Paths to Solutions that Are Differentially Adaptive
3	Emotional Arousal	Low Emotional Arousal, Encouraging Clear Thinking	High Emotional Arousal, Discouraging Clear Thinking
4	Stakes for Adaptation in Life	Usually Low; Thus, Low Stakes if a Solution is Wrong	Often High; Thus High Stakes if a Solution is Wrong
5	Contextualization with Regard to Everyday Life	Largely Decontextualized Problems; Weakly Related or Unrelated to Everyday Life Events	Highly Contextualized Problems; Often Strongly Related to Everyday Life Events
6	Need for Recognition of the Existence of the Problem	None: Problems are Given by Standardized Test	Great: One Has to Figure Out for Oneself that the Problem Even Exists
7	Need for Definition of the Problem, Once Recognized	Low: Problems are Usually Partially or Completely Defined by Test	High: Problems are Poorly Defined or Not Seriously Defined at All
8	Time Allowed for Solution	Low: Problems Generally Must be Solved in a Few Seconds to, at Most, a Few Minutes	High: Problems Are Addressed Over Time and Often Unfold Over Time Rather than All at Once
9	Need to Search for Information	Low: Much or Most Information Needed for Solution is Presented in the Test Problem	High: Information Needed for Problem Solution Has to be Located in Available Reference Material
10	Need to Evaluate Information for Relevance and Validity	Information Given in Test Problem is Generally Viewed as Relevant and Valid	Information Sources Are Often Low in Relevance and Validity; Often They Are Mutually Contradictory
11	Role of Individual vs.Collective	Individual	Both Individual and Necessarily Collective
12	Motivation for Solution	Motivation (for Some) is to Receive aHigh Score on a Test	Motivation (for almost All) is to Resolve an Important Life Problem
13	Structural Complexity of Problems	Problems Tend to Be Structurally Rather Simple	Problems Tend to Be Structurally Quite Complex
14	Number of Steps to Solution	Problems Tend to Have Relatively Few Steps to Solution	Problems Tend to Have Many Steps to Solution
15	Intrinsic Interest of Problems	Tend to Be Relatively Boring	Tend to Be Relatively Engaging
16	Knowledge Needed to Solve Problems	Tends to Be Formal Knowledge of the Type Learned Inside of School	Tends to be Informal Knowledge of the Type Learned Outside of School

Table from Sternberg (2021)

In this more recent conceptualization, Sternberg suggests that the idea of adaptive intelligence can and should be operationalized in schools.

Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences

Another champion of the idea of specific types of intelligences rather than one overall intelligence is the psychologist Howard Gardner (1983, 1999). Gardner argued that it would be evolutionarily functional for different people to have different talents and skills, and proposed that there are nine intelligences that can be differentiated from each other.

Figure \(\PageIndex{5}\): Howard Gardner who talked about specific intelligences.[6]

Gardner contends that a high IQ does not always ensure success in life or necessarily indicate that a person has common sense, good interpersonal skills, or other abilities important for success. Gardner investigated intelligences by focusing on children who were talented in one or more areas. He identified these 9 intelligences based on other criteria including a set developmental history and psychometric findings.[7]

Howard Gardner (1983, 1998, 1999) suggests that there are not one, but nine domains of intelligence. The first three are skills that are measured by IQ tests:

Table - Howard Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences[8]

Table \(\PageIndex{2}\): Descriptions of Gardner's Multiple intelligences

Intelligence	Description
Linguistic	The ability to speak and write well
Logical- mathematical	The ability to use logic and mathematical skills to solve problems
Spatial	The ability to think and reason about objects in three dimensions
Musical	The ability to perform and enjoy music
Kinesthetic (body)	The ability to move the body in sports, dance, or other physical activities
Interpersonal	The ability to understand and interact effectively with others
Intrapersonal	The ability to have insight into the self
Naturalistic	The ability to recognize, identify, and understand animals, plants, and other living things
Existential	The ability to understand and have concern from life’s larger questions, the meaning of life, and other spiritual matters

The concept of multiple intelligences has been influential in the field of education, and teachers have used these ideas to try to teach differently for individual students. For instance, to teach math problems to students who have particularly good kinesthetic intelligence, a teacher might encourage the students to move their bodies or hands according to the numbers. On the other hand, some have argued that these “intelligences” sometimes seem more like “abilities” or “talents” rather than real intelligence. There is no clear conclusion about how many intelligences there are. Are a sense of humor, artistic skills, dramatic skills, and so forth also separate intelligences?[9]

References:

Serpico, D. & Frasnelli, E. (2018). Where the standard approach in comparative neuroscience fails and where it works: general intelligence and brain asymmetries. Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews, 13, 95-98. doi: 10.3819/CCBR.2018.130010

Spearman, C. (1927). The Nature of Intelligence and the Principles of Cognition; Macmillan: London, UK.

Attributions:

Child Growth and Development by Jennifer Paris, Antoinette Ricardo, and Dawn Rymond, 2019, is licensed under CC BY 4.0

[1] Image is in the public domain

[2] Lifespan Development – Module 6: Middle Childhood by Lumen Learning references Psyc 200 Lifespan Psychology by Laura Overstreet, which is licensed under CC BY 3.0 (modified by Dawn Rymond)

[3] Image licensed under CC0

[4] Image licensed under CC0

[5] Image by Steven Depolo is licensed under CC BY 2.0

[6] Image by Interaction-Design.org is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

[7] Lifespan Development: A Psychological Perspective by Martha Lally and Suzanne Valentine-French is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

[8] Lifespan Development: A Psychological Perspective by Martha Lally and Suzanne Valentine-French is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0; Table adapted from Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York, NY: Basic Books.

[9] Lifespan Development: A Psychological Perspective by Martha Lally and Suzanne Valentine-French is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

Adaptive Intelligence: Its Nature and Implications for Education by Robert J. Sternberg, 2021 in Education Sciences is licensed under CC-BY 4.0