INTRODUCTION. History of Intelligence

Transcription

1 INTRODUCTION Intelligence is a set of cognitive abilities. Although many different definitions of intelligence have been proposed over the years (see, e.g., Intelligence and its Measurement, 1921; Sternberg & Detterman, 1986), the conventional notion of intelligence is built around a loosely consensual definition of intelligence in terms of generalized adaptation to the environment (Sternberg, 1999b). Intelligence is defined as the ability to adapt flexibility and effectively to the environment (Sternberg & Detterman, 1986). Although theorists of intelligence might disagree as to the exact details of this definition, most would accept the general idea that intelligence serves the purpose of adaptation (Sternberg, 2000a). Two common themes that run through the definitions of intelligence proposed by many experts are the capacity to learn from experience and the ability to adapt to the environment (Sternberg, 2006a). Twenty-four cognitive psychologists with expertise in intelligence research were asked the question-what is intelligence? (Sternberg & Detterman, 1986). These psychologists emphasized the importance of learning from experience and adapting to the environment. They also broadened the definition to emphasize the importance of metacognition - people s understanding and control of their own thinking processes (Sternberg, 2006a). Contemporary experts have strongly emphasized the role of culture. They pointed out that what is considered intelligent in one culture may be considered stupid in another culture (Serpell, 2000). To summarize, intelligence is the capacity to learn from experience using metacognition processes to enhance learning, and the ability to adapt to the surrounding environment. It may require different adaptations within different social and cultural contexts (Sternberg, 2006a). History of Intelligence The measurements of intelligence are usually outlined to one of two very different historical traditions. One tradition concentrated on lower-level, psychophysical abilities. These include sensory acuity, physical strength and motor coordination. The other focused on higher-level and judgmental abilities (Necka & Orzechowski, 2005). Galton believed that intelligence is a function of psychophysical abilities. Psycho-physical tests 1

2 measured a broad range of psychophysical skills and sensitivities. For example, pitch sensitivity, the ability to hear small differences between musical notes, physical strength and reaction time (Galton, 1883). One of the many enthusiastic followers of Galton attempted to detect links among the assorted tests (Wissler, 1901). But he detected no unifying associations. Thus, the psychophysical approach to assess intelligence soon faded (Sternberg, 2003a). But, it came back many years later in somewhat different appearance. An alternative to the psychophysical approach was developed by Binet. He and his collaborator, Simon, also attempted to assess intelligence and Binet had been asked to devise a procedure for distinguishing normal from mentally retarded learners (Binet & Simon, 1916). So Binet and Simon get started to measure intelligence as a function of the ability to learn within an academic setting. In Binet s view judgment is the key to intelligence; the key is not psychophysical acuity, and strength or skill. Initially when Binet and Simon developed their intelligence test, they were interested in some means of comparing the intelligence of a given child with that of other children of the same chronological (physical) age (Sternberg, 2006a). For this purpose, they sought to determine each child s mental age - the average level of intelligence for a person of a given age. Stern (1912) suggested instead that we evaluate people s intelligence by using an intelligence quotient (IQ): a ratio of mental age (MA) divided by chronological age (CA), multiplied by 100 (Sternberg, 2006a). This ratio is expressed mathematically as follows: (IQ) = MA/CA (100). Intelligence scores that are expressed in terms of a ratio of mental age to chronological age are termed ratio IQs. For various reasons ratio IQs, too confirmed insufficient. For example, increases in mental age slow down almost at the age of sixteen years. Today psychologists rarely use IQs based on mental ages. Instead, researches have turned to measurement comparisons based on assumed normal distributions of test scores within large populations. Scores based on deviations from the middle scores in a normal distribution of scores on a test of intelligence are termed deviation IQs (Sternberg, 2006a). Many cognitive theorists believed that IQs provide only incomplete measurement of intelligence (Sternberg, 2006a). Terman constructed the 2

3 earlier version of what has come to be called the Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale (Terman & Merrill, 1937, 1973; Thorndike et al., 1986). The competitive Wechsler Scales, named after their author, Wechsler are probably even more widely used (Sternberg, 2006a). Wechsler did not limit his conception of intelligence to test scores. Wechsler believed that intelligence is vital in everyday lives. Intelligence is used not just in taking tests and in the homework but also use in relating to people, in effective jobs performance, and in management of life in general. A focus on the measurement of intelligence is only one of several approaches to theory and researches on intelligence. Psychologists interested in the structure of intelligence have relied on factor analysis as the crucial tool for their research. Factor analysis is a statistical method which is based on studies of correlation (Sternberg, 2006a). In research on intelligence, a factor analysis might involve these steps. First, gives a large number of people several different tests of ability. Second, determines the correlations among all those tests. Third, statistically analyzes those correlations to simplify them into a relatively small number of factors that summarize people s performance on the tests (Sternberg, 2006a). Yet the resulting factorial structures of intelligence have differed among different theorists. Among the many factorial theories, the main ones probably have been those of Spearman, Thurstone, Guilford, Cattell, Vernon and Carroll. Spearman is credited with inventing factor analysis (Spearman, 1927) using factor analytic studies. Spearman concluded that intelligence can be understood in terms of two kinds of factors-general factor and specific factors. A single general factor pervades performance on all tests of mental ability. A set of specific factors is involved in performance on only a single type of mental ability test (e.g., arithmetic computation) (Sternberg, 2003a). The general factor, which he labeled g provides the key to understand intelligence. Spearman believed g to be the result of mental energy (Sternberg, 2006a). Many psychologists still believe Spearman s theory to be essentially correct (e.g. Brand, 1996; Jensen, 1998, 2002, 2005). In contrast to Spearman, Thurstone concluded that intelligence is not located in one single factor but in seven such factors (Thurstone, 1938). He referred to them as 3

4 primary mental abilities. According to Thurstone, the primary mental abilities are: verbal comprehension, verbal fluency, inductive reasoning, spatial visualization, number ability, memory and perceptual speed. At the opposite extreme from Spearman s single g factor model, is the structure of intellect (SOI) model (Guilford, 1967, 1982, 1988). It includes up to 150 factors of the mind in one version of the theory. According to Guilford, intelligence can be understood in terms of a cube that represents the intersection of three dimensions. The dimensions are operations, contents and products. According to Guilford, operations are simply mental processes, contents are the kinds of terms that appear in problem, and products are the kind of responses required. A more economical approach of handling a number of factors of the mind is through a hierarchical model of intelligence. One such model proposed that general intelligence comprises two major sub factors. They are fluid ability and crystallized ability (Cattell, 1971). A similar view is a general division between practical - mechanical and verbal- education abilities (Vernon, 1971). One more model is hierarchy comprising three strata (Carroll, 1993). Stratum I includes many narrow, specific abilities (e.g., spelling ability & speed of reasoning). Stratum II includes various broad abilities (e.g., fluid intelligence & crystallized intelligence). And stratum III is just a single general intelligence, much like Spearman s g factor. Interestingly the middle stratum is neither too narrow nor too all encompassing. Carroll s model is one of the most widely accepted of the psychometric models. Whereas the factor-analytic approach has tended to emphasize the structures of intelligence, the information-processing approach has tended to emphasize the operations of intelligence. Information- processing theorists explain intelligence in terms of a number of constructs and tasks. They include inspection time, choice reaction time, speed of neuronal conduction (Jensen, 1979, 1998), and the ability to divide attention successfully (Hunt & Lansman, 1982). A related approach is the biological model suggesting that the base of intelligence is in the brain (Luria, 1973, 1980; Das et al., 1979; Das et al., 1994). Gardner (1983, 1993, 1999) has proposed a theory of multiple intelligences in which intelligence consist of multiple independent constructs, not just a single, unitary 4

5 construct. According to this theory, there are eight or possibly even ten intelligenceslinguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalist, and possibly existential and spiritual (Sternberg, 2003a). The concept of emotional intelligence, introduced by Salovey and Mayer (Salovey & Mayer, 1990; Mayer & Salovey, 1993), popularized and expanded by Goleman (1995) also tried to define intelligence in terms of success in life. Emotional intelligence is the ability to understand emotion and emotional knowledge; and the ability to regulate emotions to promote emotional and intellectual growth (Mayer et al., 2000a, 2000b). But this approach has also some theoretical and methodological limitations. All the conventional theories of intelligence have their own explanations with the advantages and limitations. But the main restriction of all these theories is that they are not helpful in predicting success of a person in life. Recently, another comprehensive and sound attempt was made by Sternberg who concentrated on the theory of successful intelligence which tries to depict different processes and components of intelligence leading to the success in life. The Triarchic Theory of Successful Intelligence The triarchic theory of intelligence (Sternberg, 1985, 1988) is a prominent figure in the research of human intelligence. The theory of triarchic intelligence comprises three sub theories-a componential sub theory relates intelligence to the internal world of the individual and deal with the components of intelligence, an experiential sub theory relates intelligence to the experience of the individual with tasks and situations by dealing with the importance of coping with relative novelty and of automatization of information processing, and a contextual sub theory relates intelligence to the external world of the individual by dealing with processes of adaptation, shaping, and selection- the theory has been referred to from time to time as triarchic. The componential sub theory the componential sub theory seeks to elucidate the mental processes that underlie intelligent behavior by identifying three basic kinds of information processing components, which are referred to as metacomponents, performance components, and knowledge acquisition components. These common set of 5

6 processes underlies all aspects of intelligence (Sternberg, 1980a, 1984, 1985, 1990, 1997a, 1999a, 2003a, 2004), which are hypothesized to be universal. Metacomponents or executive processes are higher order processes which are used to plan what to do, monitor things as they are being done, and evaluate things after they are done. Examples of metacomponents are recognizing the existence of a problem, defining the nature of the problem, deciding on a strategy for solving the problem, monitoring the solution of the problem, and evaluating the solution after the problem is solved. Performance components are lower order processes which execute the instructions of the metacomponents. For example, inference is used to decide how two stimuli are related and application is used to apply what one has inferred (Sternberg, 1977). Other examples of performance components are comparison of stimuli, justification of a given response as adequate although not ideal, and actually making the response. Knowledge-acquisition components are used to learn how to do what the metacomponents and performance components eventually do. Three knowledge acquisition components seem to be central in intellectual functioning: selective encoding, selective comparison and selective combination. Selective encoding is used to decide what information is relevant in the context of one s learning. Selective comparison is used to bring old information to bear on new problems. And selective combination is used to put together the selectively encoded and compared information into a single and sometimes insightful solution to a problem. The experiential sub theory according to the experiential sub theory, intelligence is best measured at those regions of the experiential continuum that involve tasks or situations that are either relatively novel, on the one hand, or in the process of becoming automatized, on the other. The contextual sub theory according to the contextual sub theory, intelligent thought is directed toward one or more of three behavioral goals: adaptation, shaping, and selection. These three goals may be viewed as the functions toward which intelligence is directed. The triarchic theory of intelligence was extended with the triarchic theory of successful intelligence (Sternberg, 1997a, 1998a, 1999b) which involves some key 6

7 elements (Sternberg, 1999b). On the basis of these elements successful intelligence is defined as: (1) the use of an integrated set of abilities needed to attain success in life, however an individual defines it, within his or her socio cultural context. People are successfully intelligent by virtue of (2) recognizing their strength and making the most of them, at the same time that they recognize their weaknesses and find ways to correct or compensate for them. Successfully intelligent people (3) adapt to, shape, and select environments through (4) finding a balance in their use of analytical, creative, and practical abilities (Sternberg, 1997a, 1999b). The first element making sense that there is no one definition of success that works for each and everyone. For some person, success is brilliance as teacher; for others, it is originality as novelists; for others it is caring for their children. For many persons it can be some combination of things. Because people have different life goals, education needs to move away from single targeted measures of success, such as grade points average (Sternberg, 2005a). The second element states that different paths can lead to success, no matter what goal one chooses. Some persons achieve success in large part through personal charm; others through brilliance of academic intellect; others through stunning originality; and yet others through working extremely hard (Sternberg, 2005a). For us, there are at least a few things we do well, and our successful intelligence is dependent in large part upon making these things. At the same time, we need to acknowledge our weaknesses and find ways either to improve upon them or to compensate for them. For that we can work hard to get better our skills in an area of weaknesses. Or work as part of a team so that other people compensate for the kinds of things we do not do particularly well (Sternberg, 2005a). The third element claims that success is achieved through some balance of adapting to existing environments, shaping those environments, and selecting new environments (Sternberg, 2005a). Sometimes we try to modify ourselves to fit that environment accordingly. In other words, we adapt but sometimes it is not enough to adapt, rather we want to change the environment to fit us. Sometimes the environment is shaped in order to make it a better fit for us and possibly for others as well. It may be that our attempts to adapt and to shape the environment give no results- when we simply cannot find a way to make the environment work for us. Then we leave the old environment and select a new environment. Finally, we balance 7

8 three kinds of abilities (analytical, creative and practical) whether a given problem requires analytical abilities, creative abilities, and practical abilities, or a combination of these kinds of thinking in order to achieve success (Sternberg, 2005a). Analytical intelligence (earlier the componential sub theory) is involved when the information processing components of intelligence are applied to analyze, evaluate, judge or compare and contrast. Persons high on this dimension usually excel on standard tests of academic potential and make excellent students. It is typically used when processing components are applied to relatively familiar kinds of problems that require abstract judgments (Sternberg & the Rainbow Collaborators, 2006). The kind of analytical intelligence measured by conventional kinds of intelligence tests predicts performance, at least to some degree, in a variety of situations (see Barrett & Depinet, 1991; Carroll, 1993; Gottfredson, 1997; Herrnstein & Murray, 1994; Hunt, 1995; Hunter & Hunter, 1984; Jensen, 1998; Neisser et al., 1996; Schmidt & Hunter, 1981, 1998; Wigdor & Garner, 1982). Creative intelligence (earlier the experiential sub theory) involves skills used to create, invent, discover, imagine, suppose, or hypothesize (Sternberg & the Rainbow Collaborators, 2006). Tests of creative intelligence go beyond tests of analytical intelligence in measuring performance on tasks that require individuals to deal with relatively novel situations. Sternberg has shown that assessing a range of abilities beyond that assessed by conventional tests of intelligence allows one to tap sources of individual differences measured little or not at all by these tests (Sternberg, 1985). Success in life requires one not only to analyze one s own ideas as well as the ideas of others, but also to generate ideas (Sternberg, 2006a). Thus, it is important to include problems that are relatively novel in nature. These problems can call for either convergent or divergent thinking. According to theory of successful intelligence creative intelligence is particularly well measured by problems assessing how well an individual can cope with relative novelty (Sternberg, 2006a). Practical intelligence (earlier the contextual sub theory) involves individuals applying their abilities to the kinds of problems that confront them in daily life, such as on the job or in the home. Persons high on this dimension are intelligent in practical, 8

9 adaptive sense-they have what many would term street smart and are adept at solving the problems of everyday life (Sternberg, 2006a). Social intelligence is viewed in the theory of successful intelligence as a part of practical intelligence (Sternberg, 1999b; Sternberg, 2002a, 2005a). Practical intelligence involves applying the components of intelligence, of experience so as to: a) adapt to b) shape and c) select environments. Adaptation is involved when one changes oneself to suit the environment. Shaping is involved when one changes the environment to suit oneself. And selection is involved when one decides to seek out another environment that is a better match to one s needs, abilities and desire. People differ in their balance of adaptation, shaping, selection and in the competence with which they balance among the three possible course of action (Sternberg, 2005a). Work on practical intelligence has centered on the concept of tacit knowledge (Sternberg & the Rainbow Collaborators, 2006). It is defined as what one needs to know in order to work effectively in an environment that one has not explicitly thought and that often is not even verbalized (Sternberg et. al., 2000; Sternberg & Wagner, 1993; Sternberg et al., 1993; Stemberg et al. 1995; Wagner 1987; Wagner & Sternberg, 1986). Tacit knowledge is represented in the form of production system or sequences of ifthen statements that describe procedures one follows in various kinds of everyday situations. Tacit knowledge is measured by using work-related problems that present problems one might encounter on the job. Sternberg talked about sub-theories and the processes underlies all aspects of intelligence in his triarchic theory of intelligence but later on in his theory of successful intelligence (modification over the triarchic theory of intelligence) he concentrated only on the factors or components (analytical, creative and practical) which determine the success in life. Intelligence in the theory of successful intelligence is viewed not as fixed, but as flexible and modifiable. It can be modified by developing it (Sternberg, 2006a). Development of Successful Intelligence The theory of successful intelligence proposes that success is attained through a balance of three aspects or factors; analytical, creative and practical intelligence. The 9

10 different components (analytical, creative and practical) of successful intelligence are developed by genetics as well as with environmental factors. There is lack of evidences regarding role of genetics in the development of practical intelligence. Most early pioneers of intelligence testing have maintained that analytical and creative intelligence are inherited. However, it has become clear that both heredity and environment influence analytical and creative intelligence. Theorists who believe that intelligence is largely inherited downplay the value of special educational programs for underprivileged groups (Jensen, 1980). Theorists who believe that intelligence is shaped by experience are highly critical of this view. A great deal of evidences indicates that environmental variables have association in the development of different components (analytical, creative and practical) of successful intelligence. The environmental factors start with family because parents are their children s first and primary teachers, and are essential partners in the learning of their children. The family provides the most significant attachments as well as the care and stimulation required for children s growth and development. Especially mother s role in the early child development is considered very crucial in Indian setting as child feels more attached and protected with mother. The factors related to family environment can be divided in to two categoriesphysical family environment and psychological family environment. Physical family environment includes family size, SES, birth order, family structure (joint or nuclear) and single parent family etc. There are evidences which associate physical family environment (number of siblings or family size, SES, and birth order etc.) with the development of different components (analytical, creative and practical) of successful intelligence. Many social scientists argue that minority student s IQ scores are depressed because these children tend to grow up in deprived environments that create a disadvantage-both in school and on IQ tests. Most minority groups have endured a long history of economic discrimination and are greatly over represented in the lower social classes. A lower class upbringing tends to carry a number of disadvantages that work against the development of a youngster s full intellectual. Another category of family environment is psychological family environment which also plays a significant role in the development of successful intelligence. Psychological family environment includes family climate and environment, upbringing of child, child rearing practices, father- 10

11 mother relationship, mother-child relationship, father-child relationships, sibling s relationship, and overall family relationships etc. Other than the family, some other factors related to development of successful intelligence can be counted as prenatal environment, immediate social environment, school and broad socio-cultural environment etc. Immediate social environment which includes the role of locality, neighborhood, and relationship with neighbors etc. may be related to the development of successful intelligence. School environment, the environmental variable may also contribute in the development of successful intelligence. It can also be divided in to two categories, physical as well as psychological school environment. Physical school environment includes status of the school, number of teachers in the school, number of school play grounds, infrastructure of the school and medium of course contents etc. Psychological school environment includes teacher student relationship, teacher s strictness, teacher s personality, teaching methods, discipline, evaluation method, freedom to express thoughts, involvement or participation in school activities, and parental expectations for educational attainment etc. The theory of successful intelligence provides successful intervention in classrooms (Sternberg et al., 2000) also. Some students who do not do well in conventional courses may, in fact, have the ability to succeed if they are taught in a way that better fits their patterns of ability (Sternberg, 2003a). It involves teaching students for memory, as well as analytically, creatively and practically. Another category of environmental variable associated with the development of successful intelligence is the role of broad socio-cultural environment which includes cultural values, homogeneous or heterogeneous population, community effects, fear of war, terror, natural and manmade calamity etc. Hence there are a number of environmental factors related to the development of successful intelligence, out of which, family is the most important factor which play a central role in the development of successful intelligence. Evidences also support this association and this research is an attempt to integrate all these evidences. Many researchers have studied gender differences regarding different components (analytical, creative, and practical) of successful intelligence. Although a number of the studies are refuting but few are 11

12 supporting this. In the present study we have controlled this variable by taking only a male sample. So, present study is designed to see the role of family by taking family environment, family characteristics and practices of child rearing in the development of successful intelligence. Thus the exact title of the research work is: ROLE OF FAMILY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCCESSFUL INTELLIGENCE OBJECTIVES: The main objectives of the study are: 1. To study the role of maternal child rearing practices in the development of successful intelligence. 2. To study the role of family environment in the development of successful intelligence. 3. To study the role of socio-economic status (SES) and parents education in the development of successful intelligence. 4. To study the role of family size and birth order in the development of successful intelligence. HYPOTHESES: Depending on the available empirical evidences, the following directional and null hypotheses are formulated: 1. Authoritarian child rearing practices will be negatively related to the development of successful intelligence. 2. Democratic child rearing practices will have no relation in the development of successful intelligence. 3. Hostile child rearing practices will have no relation in the development of successful intelligence. 4. Relationship dimension of family environment as expressiveness and cohesion will have positive relation in the development of successful intelligence. 12

13 5. Personal growth dimension of family environment as independence, achievement orientation, intellectual-cultural orientation, active recreational orientation and moral religious emphasis will have positive relation in the development of successful intelligence. 6. System maintenance dimension of family environment as organization and control will have positive relation in the development of successful intelligence. 7. Family characteristics as SES will relate positively to the development of successful intelligence. 8. Family characteristics as family size will relate positively to the development of successful intelligence. 9. Family characteristics as order of birth will relate positively to the development of successful intelligence. 10. Family characteristics as parent s education will relate positively to the development of successful intelligence. 13