Columbia Science Review
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Team
  • Blog
  • Events
    • 2022-2023
    • 2021-2022
    • 2020-2021
    • 2019-2020
    • 2018-2019
    • 2017-2018
    • 2016-2017
  • Publications
  • COVID-19 Public Hub
    • Interviews >
      • Biology of COVID-19
      • Public Health
      • Technology & Data
    • Frontline Stories >
      • Healthcare Workers
      • Global Health
      • Volunteer Efforts
    • Resources & Links >
      • FAQ's
      • Resource Hubs
      • Student Opportunities
      • Podcasts & Graphics
      • Mental Health Resources
      • Twitter Feeds
      • BLM Resources
    • Columbia Events >
      • Campus Events
      • CUMC COVID-19 Symposium
      • CSR Events
    • Our Team
  • Contact

I(n search of and) Q(uestioning measures of intelligence)

2/25/2021

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Ellen Alt

Book is to reading, as fork is to:
a. drawing, b. writing, c. stirring, d. eating.

If you got “d,” congrats! You just got one IQ question right, and you exercised your brain in the process. Although increasing our intelligence might be an entertaining thought, intelligence is not that simply defined. IQ is understood as one’s intelligence quotient, or “a number representing a person’s reasoning ability,” or alternatively, “the ability to collect and apply knowledge and skills.” Western society values higher intelligence as it contributes to increased success in the workplace, but that is merely based on our warped metrics of intelligence and success, as there are other types of intelligence. Rather, when considering a comprehensive understanding of intelligence, we should consider varying levels of the intelligence quotient IQ, different types of intelligence (emotional, artistic, etc.), and different ways of learning.

IQ might be our most common term associated with intelligence, but it is only one metric of one's ability to reason and measure, ignoring other aspects that make up intelligence. For example, genetic factors such as genetic predispositions help shape brain mechanics. In fact, all of the following play a role in IQ make-up: environmental factors, like a strong learning environment and love and support; and practice that strengthens the brain and its neuronal pathways. Thus, a mutable metric that disproportionately affects people without resources puts into question the IQ metric itself.

These disproportionate effects are inherent in the racist history behind the IQ test. French psychologist Alfred Binet designed the IQ test in the early 1900s to help identify students who might need more help in school, yet even he stressed the limitations of the test: it is impossible to capture innate intelligence, intelligence changes over time, and the test results are only comparable between test-takers of similar environmental backgrounds. Despite these limitations, Binet’s test was adopted by American physicians around 1910, by American public schools in 1911, and by officials to test immigrants at Ellis Island in 1913, all thanks to Henry Goddard, a prominent twentieth century eugenicist. Goddard was a member of the Ohio Committee for the Sterilization of the Feebleminded, which in 1963 sterilized four women, sanctioned by law, only on the basis of the Binet intelligence test.

IQ is highly dependent on environmental factors; IQ results are correlated with higher socioeconomic status, academic achievement, and systemic racism (bringing its own environmental factors). The same is true for other psychometric standardized tests such as the SAT and ACT, which are widely used for undergraduate college applications without acknowledging the environmental factors that go into these measurements of intelligence. Knowing this, the University of California dropped its standardized test requirement in May 2020, and plans to develop its own test by 2025. Other universities may follow in switching to more holistic tests. 

Scientists also criticize IQ as a valid metric of intelligence: how much of intelligence is nature, how much is nurture? No study can perfectly measure the degree to which nurture contributes to intelligence, but they all conclude that IQ does not sufficiently describe all of cognition and social cognition, nor does it explore the social, environmental, and technological factors that can impact intelligence. Many modern scientists have moved past conceptions of intelligence based solely on IQ to include more nuanced understandings of intelligence, such as emotional intelligence. A new study published in Personality and Individual Differences explores the connection between well-being and intelligence using multiple metrics such as emotional intelligence, socioeconomic factors, and skills such as managing emotions.

New studies such as the one just mentioned are exploring another aspect of intelligence, not trying to be the new IQ test. This approach is remarkably similar to a culmination of 20 years of research by the Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge; this lab explored every lobe of the brain and used as many tests as possible to measure metrics from memory to planning. The result? The 12 pillars of wisdom, based on the correlation of all known levels of cognition to each part of the brain. For example, the task of mental rotation correlates to the superior parietal cortex, which is found at the back and top of the brain, one piece, one pillar, of the complex ways that our bodies compose intelligence. The researchers admit that even the most detailed studies can never truly characterize intelligence, but their study scientifically typifies intelligence in the most comprehensive way thus far, shutting down naively using the IQ test, and contextualizing more aspects of intelligence.

The more that scientists include different metrics of intelligence in their studies, the better people can interpret how their own intelligence can benefit them in life, and how people can work towards more equitable intelligence acquisition or learning environments with socioeconomic factors in mind. Intelligence isn’t just a number; we cannot define it by one metric, but we can research it and combat the socioeconomic inequities that go into it.

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Categories

    All
    Artificial Intelligence
    Halloween 2022
    Winter 2022-2023

    Archives

    April 2024
    January 2024
    February 2023
    November 2022
    October 2022
    June 2022
    January 2022
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    November 2019
    October 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    July 2009
    May 2009

Columbia Science Review
© COPYRIGHT 2022. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
Photos from driver Photographer, BrevisPhotography, digitalbob8, Rennett Stowe, Kristine Paulus, Tony Webster, CodonAUG, Tony Webster, spurekar, europeanspaceagency, Christoph Scholz, verchmarco, rockindave1, robynmack96, Homedust, The Nutrition Insider
  • Home
  • About
    • Our Team
  • Blog
  • Events
    • 2022-2023
    • 2021-2022
    • 2020-2021
    • 2019-2020
    • 2018-2019
    • 2017-2018
    • 2016-2017
  • Publications
  • COVID-19 Public Hub
    • Interviews >
      • Biology of COVID-19
      • Public Health
      • Technology & Data
    • Frontline Stories >
      • Healthcare Workers
      • Global Health
      • Volunteer Efforts
    • Resources & Links >
      • FAQ's
      • Resource Hubs
      • Student Opportunities
      • Podcasts & Graphics
      • Mental Health Resources
      • Twitter Feeds
      • BLM Resources
    • Columbia Events >
      • Campus Events
      • CUMC COVID-19 Symposium
      • CSR Events
    • Our Team
  • Contact