What is Spearman's theory of intelligence?
Spearman believed that intelligence was a general ability, and that some people are more or less intelligent than others: http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/intelligence.htm
What do you believe are the pros and cons of charles spearmans theory of intelligence?
The advantages of Spearman's two factor theory is that there is only one score to describe intelligence. When you have a number of different scores, it becomes very difficult to predict outcomes. Intelligence was originally seen as a means of predicting the likelihood that children would complete an entire course of schoolwork through secondary school. Finding multiple abilities (Gardner) is used as a means of determining strengths and weaknesses and teaching students to use their strengths to overcome their weaknesses. Thus, multiple intelligences might be good for training students to become more successful, but single scores help to predict the likelihood that people will complete a certain task.
What are Spearman's G and S factors?
Charles Spearman, gave this theory of G factor using Factor Analysis, which was later revised to two factor theory (G factor and S factor). He believed that there’s one general intelligence which include mental operations that are primary in nature and are common to all performances. It can be understood as anything you do is only because of the general intelligence you possess. Later, he revised the theory and introduced S factor, i.e., specific factor of intelligence.G Factor: It is universal inborn ability. It varies from individual to individual and helps in different mental operations. It is used in everyday activities. G factor influences the performance on all mental tasks. Spearman also claimed that ‘G’ was not made up of one single ability, but rather two genetically influenced, unique abilities working together, these abilities are called "eductive" and "reproductive".S Factor: Every individual possess some specific abilities and usually gets success in the same. Eg, Singing, Painting etc. People can also have more than one special abilities in varying degrees. One form of specific ability may not help in other one. Eg, If you are a very good painter and you can also sing good, doesn’t mean your painting ability helps you in singing. These abilities can also be learned, acquired and strengthened.Now, you can understand this as, any task you perform is mainly driven by your general intelligence but each and every individual has some specific ability which is very specific to that task performed. This specific intelligence or factor varies in nature and intensity among different individuals.Engineers, Doctors, Sportsperson, Musicians, Mathematicians, Painters, etc. everyone possess general intelligence or g factor which help them in their work/task, as well as the distinctive factor which make them specialised in their domain, is the s factor.However, it was challenged by Louis Thurstone who identified a number of primary mental abilities and also by Howard Gardner, he argued about this notion of single general ability capturing all of human mental mental ability. Gardner also proposed ‘multiple intelligence theory’.
Do people who disagree with the concept of "Spearman's G factor" disagree with science? Is there a better way to measure intelligence than I.Q. tests?
IQ tests are actually pretty good at what they do, which is, as you say, to quantify general or correlated fluid intelligence.From what I’ve seen, those who deny that are either not familiar with a broad and deep body of scientific research going back many years, or are indulging in wishful thinking — ideological confirmation bias — which has nothing to do with science at all. Often, from what I’ve seen, both.No one who is familiar with people of various IQ levels, or with the research on IQ, can honestly say that IQ doesn’t have a significant effect on what we do and what we are like.That said, I agree with those here who point out that general intelligence isn’t a complete characterization of intelligence. For one thing, the correlation between sub intelligences isn’t 100%. It is possible to be good at math, say, and to have poor verbal skills — just less likely. And if that’s the case, you’re probably going to be better at engineering than you are at writing.So yes, the g factor is real and important, and yes, IQ scores do a fairly good job of measuring it. More than any other single measure, IQ summarizes how clever we are, and for that reason it has a pretty strong correlation with academic and economic success. And someone who denies that is indeed being unscientific.But it would be unscientific as well to assign to general intelligence more significance than it has, since we have a broad body of scientific research on sub-intelligences and on other factors that contribute to success.As an engineer, I have never seen an advantage in hiring an engineer with a knack for French literature, and I am sure that those who run French departments wouldn’t want to hire me.
What are the key differences between predictive modelling and explanatory modelling?
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)The main purpose of EFA is to building a theory. so many of intelligence theory in Psychology was born from EFA. Charles Spearman’s Intelligence theory for example. But, EFA can be considered an old method and not help too much if you want to check your theory.KEY ELEMENTS:There's no model theory in EFA, Instead we trying to find the model itself from our data.There's no Hypothesis testing in EFA, all results in EFA are arbitrary.Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)The main purpose of CFA is to confirming or testing your model (theory) with the data. So, to performing CFA you gotta have some model specification at first. After you have a model specification (S), then you must comparing your model with the data from your respondend (Σ).The real equation become (S=Σ)?Is your model fitted by data?Or is your theory = reality?KEY ELEMENTS:You must to have a model specification at first, then comparing your model with your data (S=Σ).There's Hypothesis testing in CFA. So, CFA is more scientific than EFA.EXAMPLE :Let’s say you have a model with 6 items that measure a reasoning ability on elementary schoold kids. A Reasoning Ability In this case can we called as Factor. In CFA you will ask..Is it true that your 6 items only measure one factor called reasoning ability?Then, if we draw the model it will be like the image below. (ignore the number, dude). Fokus on the path diagram.For more information and comprehensive explaination i suggesting you to read this references..Sorry if my english is not so well.. yet..Bruce Thompson (I very recommending this one)Timothy BrownBengt Muthen & Linda MuthenIf you want more mathematical approach, you can read Kenneth Bollen.
What is 'g' and how is it defined and calculated individually?
The g refers to the General Factor proposed by Charles Spearman.In general, IQ tests vary quite a bit with regard to content. Some concentrate on abstract reasoning, while others drill down to specifics such as arithmetic, vocabulary, or even general knowledge.In 1904, Spearman created the first formal factor analysis of correlations between IQ tests. He found a correlation between ability in a wide variety of subjects and a child's underlying mental agility. He reasoned that all mental performance could be described with a single general ability factor and a large number of narrow task-specific ability factors. Spearman used g to denote "general factor" and s for the specific factors.In any IQ test, the score that best measures g is the composite score that has the highest correlations with all the item scores. Typically, the "g-loaded" composite score of an IQ test appears to involve a common strength in abstract reasoning across the test's item content. Spearman believed that g is closely related to the essence of human intelligence.
Are top novelists (e.g., Tolstoy) less intelligent than top mathematicians (e.g., Terence Tao)?
First, there are better data than the old Spearman, but generally there are moderate correlations between most types of measured intelligence. And the g factor is real. Nonetheless most modern IQ tests have various sub-scales representing at least mathematical and verbal abilities. The correlation tends to break down for high levels of talent in one or the other. It's far more common to see large differences in IQ components when one of the components is quite high. That said, I'm sorry to say that I think it's a question without a good answer, and I'm not sure what the point is. Surely Tolstoy scored higher on verbal IQ and Tao on mathematical, and it may well be that one outscores the other in general IQ, but so what? Both excelled in their own ways. As a psychologist I'm far more interested in accomplishment than in ability. Americans are far too obsessed with IQ -- it's a useful measure, but not as predictive of accomplishment as most people tend to assume.