Intelligence Current Literature on Testing

Intelligence

Current Literature on Testing for Intelligence: Theories, Problems, and Practices

The concept of intelligence has been controversial ever since it was first identified, or at least proposed, as a quantifiable and measurable aspect of cognition and learning. Debates have not only revolved around the exact nature of intelligence -- its neural and/or psychological mechanisms, origins, and influences -- but the question of whether intelligence is even a valid or practical measure has also been raised. Due to this controversy, contemporary intelligence tests and studies that use intelligence measures directly or peripherally are generally designed to be as inclusive as possible, either using previously established broad-based theories and tests of intelligence, or specifically and narrowly defining the aspect of intelligence they are utilizing in conjunction with a larger study. Both proponents and detractors of intelligence use these established means in a pursuit for greater truth, accuracy, and validity in intelligence testing, which is clearly observable in current studies.

Two of the most commonly used intelligence testing tools are the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, developed according to a broad definition of intelligence that emphasizes the ability to interact rationally and effectively with one's an environment. In a recent study, these instruments were examined for possible predictive issues at low intelligences; it was believed that the test lost accuracy at lower levels due to its scaling mechanisms (Whitaker & Wood 2007). Though this study found that such worries were not statistically upheld, this outlines some of the concerns regarding accuracy and therefore validity in intelligence testing, especially when these results are used to make life-altering decisions for school children -- especially at low levels.

This is one reason that many researchers have attempted to find more measurable and objective measures of academic success than intelligence testing. The claim that intelligence is heavily influenced by culture and upbringing, as is intelligence testing, is an attempt to deflate the basic premise of most intelligence theories. Instead, some researchers claim, more concrete and neurologically-based mechanisms such as memory are more effective at determining levels of cognitive success than traditional intelligence measures (CJ 2009). A careful comparison of working memory abilities (the ability to retain and process auditory and visual information in rehearsal and manipulation loops) to standard intelligence testing at the age of five and again six years later showed that working memory was a much better predictor of learning outcomes, accounting for as much as twenty percent of the observed variation, far more than intelligence quotients (CJ 2009).

A very different study suggests that other mechanisms could be at work, however. While it is almost certain that intelligence ahs a neurological basis, the extent to which intelligence is determined by neurological and chemical changes is not fully understood. A recent study suggests that changing hormone levels prior to and during puberty have a large effect on intelligence; high salivary testosterone levels in ten-year-old boys showed a positive correlation with intelligence, but a negative correlation in twelve-year-olds (Shangguan & Shi 2009). This shows that intelligence can be quite fluid, and can even be affected quite differently by the same mechanisms. The exact nature of the changing influence testosterone seems to provide or signal is not known, but the correlation demands further study.

These three different research studies display very different theories of intelligence. In the first study, accepted methods of cognitive relationships with the environment are valid, if perhaps somewhat inaccurate at the extremes of the intelligence spectrum. The second study points out the unnecessary effects of such inaccuracies when more accurate measures of cognitive performance are available; this could be considered something of a "memory theory" of intelligence (CJ 2009). The final study examines the purely physiological basis of intelligence, purposefully setting aside environmental influences and focusing on chemical factors. Taken as a while, these studies show several of the different theories and perspectives that can be brought to bear on the issue of intelligence and intelligence testing, both questioning and reaffirming certain established principles and practices, objectively led only after certain assumptions have been made.