Why intelligence testing maybe isn’t such an intelligent idea…

vanessa.woroniak
Psyc 406–2016
Published in
3 min readFeb 1, 2016

All those unfamiliar with psychological testing or even with psychology itself have at least heard of intelligence testing. The first test established to measure intelligence was developed by Alfred Binet in the 1900s and served to identify children with learning disabilities. Multiple different forms of these kinds of tests have been developed since then, some being more specific and some more widely used. The most commonly heard of intelligence test results in the quantification of intelligence into an Intelligence Quotient or IQ score that reflects the results of many subtests, all measuring aptitudes in different categories. Although a subject of controversy today, these tests are still widely used and are often a determining factor in important decisions made about an individual’s life. Multiple questions arise in debates such as can intelligence really be quantified? How valid and reliable are these tests in today’s multicultural and contemporary societies? Based on this questioning that remains unresolved, is intelligence testing well… an intelligent thing to do?

First of all, let’s all try to think of an operational definition of intelligence… Okay, once you have come up with one, try to determine whether that definition really englobes all spheres or types of intelligence. After that, ask yourself whether these types of intelligence are significantly different from one another or do some factors interact or overlap? Is one type of intelligence more important than the others or should they all hold the same weight? Once you have answered these questions, think of an effective way one should go about testing this construct. Now, once the testing complete, how would you quantify such a thing as intelligence? How would you measure intelligence? Not as easy as it seems… Many have argued that some of these questions have still yet to be answered. Nevertheless, IQ scores are still being measured and important decisions are still being made based off of them. How ethical is it to base decisions such as qualification of job applicants or of students on a construct that is still not correctly and precisely defined?

The second topic of debate is whether or not the intelligence tests used today are accurate in measuring intelligence in societies where people come from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds such as ours. Indeed, the tests used today were mostly developed by wealthy white men and are often times outdated. How does their conception of intelligence extend and translate to our contemporary, multicultural society? The construct of intelligence is tightly bound to the social context in which it was defined. For example, think about how you would measure up to the standards of intelligence from a hunter-gatherer tribe from New Guinea where the most successful (and smart) members are those who can track and capture animals by closely observing changes in their environment… Not so good, heh? Now think about how these people would do on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)? Below is a link you can check out to have an idea of the type of questions they would be asked on this test. Would their IQ scores be a good reflection of their intellectual capabilities? Indeed, some minority groups or newly arrived immigrants from non-western cultures would most likely be penalized and probably labelled with a score unrepresentative of their intellect. So, is intelligence testing in multicultural and modern societies a “smart” thing to do?

https://www.wechsletadultintelligencescale.com/

Based on this questioning, without a clear and accepted operational definition, can we say that intelligence testing really measures the construct of intelligence? Is it reasonable to assume that the intelligence tests used today measure intelligence as it is represented in our modern society? Without clear answers to these questions and solutions to these issues, intelligence testing will remain a flawed practice influencing important outcomes. Can someone with a super high IQ come up with a better solution? (get the irony?)

--

--