CHAPTER IV INTELLIGENCE : STATISTICAL CONCEPTIONS OF ITS NATURE

Stern : Unifactor Theory Spearman : Two - factor Theory Thomson ;

Sampling Theory Thorndike : Multi-factor Theory Thurstones : Multiple-
factor Theory Three Models of Intelligence : The Burt Model : The
Vernon Model : The Guilford Model The Present Situation
INTELLIGENCE : STATISTICAL CONCEPTIONS OP ITS NATURE In th e
preceding c h a p te r, seme d e s c rip tiv e co n cep tio n s, fu n c tio n a
l In c h a ra c te r, about th e n a tu r e ,o f in te llig e n c e were d e a lt w
ith . But as G uilford su g g ests, a b e tt e r way o f achieving unanim ity
of re fe re n c e , the t e s t c o n stru c to r should seek a foundation in p
sy ch o lo g ical theory and assen t i t by experim ental d em o n stratio n
s. (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 13) The p re se n t c h a p te r, as i t s t i t l e in d ic a
te s , would d eal w ith th e s ta tis tic a l concepts o f in te llig e n c e g iv
in g out d if f e r e n t th e o rie s which a re , o f co u rse, not unanimous
ones. The p re se n t in v e s tig a to r does n o t co n sid er h im self
competent enough to have h is own c ritic is m o f th e views o f th e g
ia n t s&taSTicians. H is is. a modest attem pt to understand th e d if f e
r e n t th e o rie s o f in te llig e n c e in so f a r as they concern h is p re s
e n t work. 3foe m ajor th e o rie s w ith th e i r re s p e c tiv e exponents
a re as fo llo w s: U n i-fa c to r Theory Tw o-factor Theory Sampling
Theory M u lti-fa c to r Theory M u ltip le -fa c to r Theory T hurstonas
Thorndike Spearman Thomson Stern The p re se n t in v e s tig a to r has
l i b e r a l l y drawn from 66 th e excellent paper of L. J. Blschof. The
various drawings to explain the th eo ries are to ta lly copied down from
i t . As Bischof s ta te s , "perhaps by means of graphic presentation, we
may save words and create a clearer p ictu re of ! ju st what the
theories of in te llig en ce are", th is method is employed here as i t
presents "a very complicated s ta tis t ic a l theory in an uncomplicated
way." (Bischof, P. 5) STERN : UN I-FAC TOR THEORY Around 1911,
Wilhelm Stern introduced his u n i-facto r theory of in te llig en ce which
has also been known as the general capacity theory. Accordingly, in
tellig en ce is a general or unitary a b ility which has been lab elled G in
Figure 1. As Bischof remarks, "the contours of the drawing have d elib
erately been made loosely rounded in order to indicate the shapeless, d
iffic u lt-to -d e fln e c h a ra c te ristic called in te llig e n c e ." (Bischof,
p. 6) Fig. l s S tern 's u ni-factor theory of in te llig en ce , showing in
tellig en ce to consist of on!lF a general capacity, G. (Bischof, p. 6) 67
Stern considered th a t a l l p erso n s are endowed w ith G, though in
unequal amounts. I t i s ap p lied to any problemso lv in g s itu a tio n ,
th e e ffic ie n c y o f which depends so le ly upon th e environm ent.
Thus, S te r n 's u n i-fa c to r th eo ry is th e sim p lest ohe. Though th e
most elem entary, i t i s n o t w ithout d i f f i c u l t i e s when we co n
sid er th e n atu re -am rtu re sid e o f th e q u estio n . (B isehof, p . 7) T
his th e o ry , th e p re se n t in v e s tig a to r u n d erstan d s, i s alm ost
p a r a lle l to th e "U nifocal or Monarchic view" d isc u sse d in " A b
ilitie s o f Man" by Shearman, as both th e th e o r ie s connote one and
th e same th in g . Hence, t h is theory i s in c o n tra d ic tio n to th e th
eo ry and p r a c tic e o f c u rre n t m ental t e s t s which c le a r ly show
th a t "the fu n ctio n o f in te llig e n c e is d iv is ib le in to se v e ra l u n
its more or le s s u n c o rre la te d and th e re fo re each needing a se p
a ra te m easurement o f i t s own." (D esai, p . 21) SPEARMAN : TWO-
FACTOR THEORY C h arles Spearman proposed a tw o -fac to r theory in
1904. He claim s to show th a t, sin ce measurements o f d if f e r e n t a
b i l i t i e s s a tis f y th e te tr a d - eq u atio n , th e re must be in each o
f th e se a b i l i t i e s a g en eral f a c to r , which i s common to them a l
l , and a s p e c ific f a c to r , which is confined to the p a r tic u la r a b i l
i t y in 'q u e s tio n . Figure 2 i l l u s t r a t e s the o rig in a l tw o -fa c to
r th eo ry . H ere, l e t t e r re p re se n ts gen eral in te llig e n c e .
Crowing out o f t h is £p‘ are th re e sm aller shapes la b e lle d S1, S2
and S3. Spearman c a lle d th e s e , th e s p e c ific in te llig e n c e s .
The shaded p o rtio n s o f s'-, S2 and S3 in d ic a te th o se p o rtio n s o f
th e s p e c ific in te llig e n c e which a re s im ila r to th e g e n e ra l-fa c
to r w hile unshaded p o rtio n s re p re se n t s p e c ific k in d s o f in te
llig e n c e th a t a re n o t s im ila r to th e g en eral f a c to r . (B ischof,
pp. 7-8) The p re se n t in v e s tig a to r, h e re , opines th a t ‘m ental
energy* o r ‘g en eral m ental en erg y ' would be more p re fe ra b le
and a c c u ra te p h rase to 'g e n era l in te llig e n c e * in th e above p
arag rap h , fo r Spearman has n o t id e n tifie d h is *g‘ w ith g en eral
in te llig e n c e . F ig . 2 : ^ e a rm a n 's tw o -fa c to r th eo ry , w ith a g
en eral c ap a city (g) and th re e s p e c ific kin d s o f in te llig e n c e ( s i
, S2 and S3 ) (B ischof, p . 7) In stead o f s ta b iliz in g h is id e a s,
Spearman continued to r e f in e h is c o rre la tio n tech n iq u es and
methods and l a t e r on, improved h is tw o -fac to r th eo ry . The f in a
l work of Spearman is summarized in Figure 3.■ F igure 3 d i f f e r s
from Figure 2 in having two new a re a s , s£ and S5. This c re a te s two
new overlapping a re a s ; The cro ss-h atch ed area which i s now
shared by th e g f a c to r and th e S4 and S® f a c to r s , and th e b lack a
re a which only S4 and S5 sh are in common. (B ischof, p . 8) F ig. 3 :
Speannan’s tw o -fa c to r theory showing a g en eral c ap a city - (g ), fiv
e s p e c ific in te llig e n c e s (S I, S2, S4 and S5) and a group fa c to r (b
lack a re a ). (B ischof, p . 9) Spearman n ev er c la r if i e d th e meaning
o f th e a re a seen in cro ss-h atch ed form. The b lack a re a , he c a lle
d a group f a c to r , and he recognised f iv e group fa c to rs which were
named as v erb al a b i l i t y , num erical a b i l i t y , m echanical a b i l i t
y , a tte n tio n and im agination. As B ischof concludes: Spearman l a t e
r suggested th re e nonin te lle c tu a l a re a s which needed f u r th e r
resea rch b efo re they could be c a lle d i d e n t i ti e s in t h e i r own r
ig h t. These th re e he named and la b e lle d p re s e rv a tio n (P ), o s c
il la t i o n (0) - th a t c h a r a c te r is tic we a l l have o f varying in our ?
0 perform ance during prolonged m ental work - and a w ill f a c to r
(W). (B isehof, p. 9) G. H. Thomson was Spearm an's most a c tiv e c r i t
i c in B rita in . But h is c r i t i c i s n s , however, were d ire c te d a g a in
st Spearm an's f i r s t p ro o f o f th e two fa c to r th eo ry . The tw o -fa
c to r th eo ry was long attac k ed by Thorndike, but l a t e r on, he to o ,
abandoned h is form er view and searched fo r a "u n ita ry fa c to r" or
g en eral fa c to r-u n d e rly in g v a rio u s i n te l le c t u a l a b i l i t i e
s , t h is change being obvious from h is p u b lic a tio n "The
Measurement o f In te llig e n c e " in 1927. G uilford f e e ls th a t th e
group fa c to rs th a t Spearman id e n tifie d , and In te rp re te d p sy c
h o lo g ic ally appear to b ear much resem blance to some of th e m u
ltip le f a c to r s found to day. He, o f co u rse, adds th a t Spearman
never gave much c r e d it to group f a c to r s . (G uilford,' 4 , p . 56)
Spearm an's theory enables a test-m ak er to d ev ise s a tis f a c to r y t
e s t s o f g on lo g ic a l grounds and t h is can be done, as Vernon o b
serv es, by s e le c tin g t e s t s which have been proved by c o rr e la tio
n a l a n a ly s is , to have high g - lo a d in g s; and because th e s - f a c
to rs a re , by d e f in itio n , independent, th e v a rio u s S 's w ill cancel
o u t,.le a v in g us w ith a p u re r m easure o f g. (Vernon, 1, p . 13) W
echsler pays th e due t r ib u te to Spearman, saying: Spearman's
demonstration of the existence of a t le a s t one pervasive facto r in a ll
performances requiring in te lle c tu a l abil i t y remains one of the
great discoveries of psychology. (Wechsleroj 1, p. 9) „ THOMSON :
SAMPLING THEORY m 1916 G. H. Thomson f i r s t proposed h is
sampling theory which he refined in 1935 and s t i l l la te r in 1948. By
the throwing of dice and the random selection of cards, th a t is , by the
study of purely chance selectio n , Thomson indicated th a t any given
mental te s t may sample a number of independent, a b ilitie s . Thus h
is idea was to show th a t test-item s should, be selected by chance rath
e r than by the method of purposive sampling which Binet and
Spearman had used. (Bischof, p. 10) Commenting on Spearman's.
theory, Thomson holds th a t the h ierarch ical order and. the zero te tra
d differences can be explained by h is sampling theory.according to
which "any a c tiv ity such as a mental te s t c a lls upon a sample of
bonds which the. mind can form, and th at some of these bonds are
common to two sets, and cause th e ir c o rre la tio n ." (Thomson, p.
45). Sampling theory of in te llig e n c e is illu s tra te d in Figure 4. I t is
quite apparent that, the diagram contains no over-all g factor, found in
the f ir s t two theories so far discussed. Bach small circle,, in the
drawing, represents an ab ility independent of other a b ilitie s. Bach of
these specific a b ilitie s, however, enters into a factor of greater
breadth. %e. larger circles indicated by the le tte r A, B, C and D are
intended to represent mental tests. For example, Test A deals with a to
tal of twenty five a b ilitie s as indicated by twenty five small circles. Out
of these, eight are shared with test B, five with te s t G, and four with te
sts B and C together. Thus, if a g factor did exist, according to Thomson,
i t would be these four ab ilitie s, which tests A, B and C test in
common. Again, as the drawing indicates, Test D shares no a b ilitie s
with any other te st. For example, Test D may presumably measure a
physical characteristic such as strength, in comparison with tests A, B
and C by which a b ilitie s of verbal, mathematical and space
comprehension might be measured. (Bischof, pp. 10-11) Fig. 4 : Godfrey
Thomson’s sampling theory of intelligence, . with small circles to
represent independent mental a b ilitie s and circles A, B, G and D to
indicate tests (Bischof, p. 10) As ju s t c ite d , th e co ntroversy between
tw o -facto r th eo ry and sampling theory has been reduced as
Spearman l a t e r on accepted the e x iste n c e o f group fa c to rs and
now c e n tre s round th e in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e h iera rch y .
Thomson on t h i s p o in t, s ta te s : B r ie f ly , th e o p p o sitio n
between the two p o in ts o f view would d isap p ear i f f a c to rs were
adm itted to be only s t a t i s t i c a l c o e f f ic ie n ts , p o ssib ly w ith o
u t any more ’r e a l i t y 1 than an average, or an index o f th e c o st o f
l i v i n g . . . . . .................................................. (Thomson, p . 42)
Thomson concludes th e co n tro v ersy by re fe re n c e to th e f a c t p o
in ted out by Mackie th a t sim ultaneous b e lie f in ’•bonds*1 and '’s p
e c ific s " i s absurit. p sy c h o lo g ic a lly and hence, we must e ith e r
give up th e f a c to r s o f the twof a c to r th eo ry , o r th e bonds o f th
e sampling th e o rie s as r e a l i t i e s . "We can n o t keep both as r e a
l i t i e s , though we may employ e ith e r m a th e m a tic a lly .'1
(Thomson, p . 53) C y ril B u rt, to o , b rin g s o ut: The sampling theory i
s m erely an o th er v ersio n o f th e g en eral f a c to r th eo ry : th e c h
ie f d iffe re n c e is th a t with Spearman th e g eneral fa c to r i s id e n
tifie d w ith something co n crete (mental energy); w ith Thomson i t re
p re se n ts something a b s tra c t (the f a c t th a t th e n e u ra l elem
ents have th e same g en eral c h a ra c te r throughout) (B urt, 1, p .
164) 74 THORNDIKE : MULTI-FACTOR THEORY E. L. Thorndike
propounded h is m u lti- f a c to r th eo ry , on a n e u ro lo g ica l b a s is
as w ell as through s t a t i s t i c a l p ro ced u res. According to him, in
te llig e n c e i s c o n stitu te d o f a m u ltitu d e o f h ig h ly se p a ra te f
a c to r s which he did n o t name but which he In d ica te d could be re
fe rre d to th e n e u ro lo g ic a l p ro c e sse s. Each one o f th e se p a ra
te f a c to rs i s a m inute elem ent o f a b il i ty . Figure 5 i s th e grap h ic
re p re se n ta tio n o f T horndike’s th e o ry . A m ental a c t would c o n
trib u te San i n f i n i t e number and i n f i n i t e com bination of n e u
ra l con n ectio n s as th e im pulse tra v e lle d through our nervous
system . Each column, in fig u re 5 , denotes a com bination o f
connections among th e nerve c e l l s used fo r our s p e c ific m ental a
c t. ^he columns a re a l l o f d if f e r e n t h e ig h ts and d if f e r e n t w
id th sa la c k o f u n ifo n a ity - in d ic a tin g th a t th e number of n e u
ra l connections involved i s p o ssib ly never th e same fo r any two m
ental a c ts . The w ider th e colunn, th e g re a te r is th e number o f n e
u ra l connections involved. ®he h ig h er th e column, th e more com
plicated is th e m ental a c t. (B ischof, p . 12) 75 ! o /h lF /N /T ,r z r 3 ft
6 ft ,3 jo // s s 5 5 s S s s 6 s £ \ P ig . 5 s T horndike's m u lti- f a c to r th
eo ry , in d ic a tin g a m u ltitu d e o f s p e c ific n e u ro lo g ic a l
connections approaching i n f in ity . (B ischof, p . 12) Thorndike h im
self adm its th a t in c o n stru c tin g a m ental t e s t , h is 'a to m is tic '
th eo ry is of le s s p r a c tic a l s ig n ific a n c e than th e conception th
a t manyt o f th e s p e c ific s o p e ra te to g e th e r in any s itu a tio n
demanding in te llig e n c e . He h im self recognised th a t some a sp e c
ts o f h is m u ltif a c to r theory a re very highly th e o r e tic a l. He
devised a t e s t named CAVD, th u s tu rn in g to a more p r a c tic a l
asp ect o f m easuring a b s tr a c t in te llig e n c e . 76 THURSTONE S :
MULTIPLE-FACTOR THEORY L. L* Thurstone a n d .h is w ife, Thelma G.
Thurstone m ight be c la s s if ie d under th e unusual t i t l e o f s t a t i s
t i c a l p sy c h o lo g is ts , sin ce th ey were p sy c h o lo g ists and a lso
b r i l l i a n t s t a t i s t i c i a n s . T heir work d a te s from approxim
ately 1938, w ith th e p u b lic a tio n o f th e a r t i c l e , “Prim ary M
ental A b ilitie s '1 which gave a n a ly s is o f 56 t e s t s given to 340 c o
lle g e stu d e n ts , i t being done by c e n tro id te c h n iq u e . This re s
u lte d in a com plete break w ith Spearman, f o r i t rev ealed no g a t a l
l b u t a s e r ie s o f d i s t i n c t m u ltip le f a c to r s . These a re in d ic a
te d in Figure 6 fo r which B isch o f has r ig h tly commented th a t " i t
is in th© p re se n ta - . » \ tio n by draw ings o f th e m u ltip le - f a c to
r th eo ry th a t we may be prone to o v e rg e n e ra lise in attem pting
to p re se n t a very involved s t a t i s t i c a l procedure in a sim ple and
f o r th - r ig h t m anner." (B ischof, p . 13) The unusual drawing in F ig u
re 6 attem p ts to In d ic a te th r e e fundam ental id e a s: (1) th e
number o f prim ary m ental a b i l i t i e s in th e Thurstone*s th eo ry
(2) th e re la tio n s h ip each one o f th e se prim ary m ental a b i l i t i e
s has to every o th e r prim ary m ental a b i l i t y , and (3) th e re la tio n
s h ip each prim ary m ental a b i l i t y has to a g en eral m ental a b i l i t
y . / 77 Figure 6 reveals six, d efinitely established by the Thurstones,
primary mental a b ilitie s and the seventh a b ility , the perceptual
speed. The la s t one, although not d efin itely established, in the
original research, has been included here because i t appears to hold
some promise for future testing. (Bischof, p. 13) Each primary mental a
b ility in tersects each one of the other primary mental a b ilitie s} th is
intentional crossing of the a b ilitie s sig n ifie s that they are related to
each other in some p o sitiv e way. The numbers within the
intersections are but the coefficients of correlation between the a b
ilitie s so involved. As no correlations between the perceptual speed
and the other mental a b ility were reported by Thurstones, those
intersections are kept blank. All the primary mental a b ilitie s are, then,
incorporated into a large area marked G (general mental a b ility ),
descending to d ifferen t depths. Bischof c la rifie s that correlations
shown in Figure 6 are not lik ely to be exactly the same as resu lt from
other studies using the te s t scores of people d ifferen t from those
used in the original research. 78 F ig . 6 ; T h u rsto n es1 m u ltip le -fa c
to r th eo ry , w ith prim ary m ental a b i l i t i e s re la te d to each o th
er and to a gen eral c a p a c ity (B ischof, p . 14) n B ischof, th en ,
concludes: In regard to g en eral m ental a b i l i t y , G, T hurstones f e e
l th a t i t r a is e s th e in te r e s tin g qu estio n w hether a '‘unique gen
eral fa c to r can be d e te rm in e d ." This i s an illu m in a tin g statem
ent and causes one to wonder i f Spearnan and h is fo llo w e rs, w ith t
h e i r g fa c to r and s f a c to r s , are to o f a r removed from th e T h u
rsto n es' seven prim ary m ental a b i l i t i e s w ithre s id u a l g en eral
m ental a b i l i t i e s . (B ischof, p . 15) In 1948, L. L, Thurstone w r ite s :
When th e p o s itiv e c o rr e la tio n s between th e prim ary fa c to rs
are examined f a c t o r ia ll y , th e re appear, second-order f a c to r s ,
and th e most conspicuous o f th ese second-order f a c to r s ag rees w
ell w ith Spearm an's h y p o th esis. Here we have a clu e to an in te r p
r e ta tio n th a t may unify th e e a r l i e r work o f Shearman and th e l
a t e r work w ith m u ltip le - f a c to r a n a l y s i s .......T h e f i r s t - o r
d e r prim ary f a c to r s may be regarded as se p a ra te organs, in a g
en eral sense, w hile th e second-order o r g eneral f a c to r s re p re se
n t p aram eters which in flu e n c e th e a c t i v i t i e s o f th e se v e ra l
organs or prim ary f a c to r s . (T hurstone, pp. 618-619) Commenting
on m u ltip le - f a c to r th eo ry , Vernon s ta te s : C u rren tly th e re
seems to be g re a te r re c o g n itio n o f the f a ilu r e o f m u ltip le - f a
c to r p r o f ile s to f u l f i l th e ir prom ise and scep ticism over th e p r
o lif e r a tio n o f f a c to r s . In 1962 Lloyd Humphreys came out in
favour o f something very s im ila r to th e B r itis h g + g ro u p -fa c to r
model. (Vernon, 4 , pp. 552-553) THREE MODELS OP INTELLIGENCE The
p ic tu r e about th e concept o f in te llig e n c e would remain r a th e r
incom plete i f some 'o th er* m odels - th o se o f B u rt, Vernon, G u
ilfo rd - a re not considered here fo r a b r i e f review ; th e p re se n t in
v e s tig a to r uses th e word ‘other* models p u rp o se fu lly fo r '‘fa c
to r th eo ry I t s e l f u t i l i z e s a dim ensional ty p e o f m odel, in
which each fa c to r i s rep resen ted by a unique dimension in common
- fa c to r sp a c e ." (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 67) The B urt Model According to
C y ril B u rt, th e mind Is organised on what may be c a lle d a h ie ra rc
h ic a l type o f m odel, which i s l i k e an in v e rte d t r e e , as shown in
Figure 7. The model as shown h e re , a p p lie s to th e whole o f th e
human mind, w ith th e f i r s t m ajor dichotomy between i n t e l l e c
tu a l c h a r a c te r is tic s , o r g, and .'p r a c tic a l * o r b eh av io u ral
c h a r a c te r is tic s . The l a t t e r c o n s titu te d psychomotor a b i l i t
i e s and a b i l i t i e s fo r d ealin g w ith space and mechan ic a l a f f a i
r s . The f i r s t b ifu rc a tio n a t the h ig h e st le v e l was id e n tif ie d
as " r e la tio n s ," th e second " a s so c ia tio n s " a com paratively sm
all number o f broad group f a c to r s , covering d if f e r e n t a c t i v i t i
e s c la s s if ie d according to , t h e i r fonn or c o n te n t. The su b -d iv
isio n o f " a sso c ia tio n s" gave narrow er group f a c to rs which B urt
c a lle d "percep tio n " w hich, in tu rn , subdivided in to "sen satio n "
fa c to rs - the m ost s p e c ific and the most nianerous o f a l l . F ig . 7 :
B u r t's conception o f an id e a liz e d h ie ra rc h ic a l model fo r a p
titu d e f a c to r s , w ith su ccessiv e d ich o to m izatio n s a t d if f e r e
n t le v e ls o f m ental g e n e ra lity . (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 58) As G uilford
w r ite s , "in f i t t i n g group f a c to rs in to th e m odel, however, B urt
had to d ep art from s t r i c t dicboto m iz a tio n , fo r many su b c ate g
o rie s co n tain more than two f a c t o r s ." (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 57) 82
The Vernon Model The Vernon model also f a lls in the category of h
ierarch ical model. Figure 8 gives the p ictu re of the fa c to rs th a t
emerge most consistently when larg e and varied te s t b a tte rie s are
applied to representative samples of adolescents or young ad u lts. A
fter the removal of g, the p o sitiv e residual co rrelatio n s always f a l l
into two main groups: the verbal-num erical-educational on the one
hand (v-ed fa c to r), and the spatial-practical-m echanical-physical on
the other (k-m fa c to r). I f the. analysis is s u fficien tly d etailed , that i
s , i f su ffic ie n t te s ts are Included, these types themselves, subdivide.
The v-ed subdivides into verbal and numerical w hile the k-m s p lits
into space a b ility , manual a b ility , and mechanical inform ation.
Beyond these are sp ecific facto rs which are of very narrow scope and
of tr iv ia l importance as considered by Vernon. jHC-ndi 1' 1 ‘( | S f ’e.c.i
C fctchyrS ■ k .m n r - r n i Fig. 8 Diagram Illu s tra tin g h ierarch ical stru
ctu re of Human A b ilitie s. (Vernon, 1, p. 22) 83 1 Vernon does c la r if y
th a t th e diagram (fig u re 8) i s "a h y p o th etica l in te g ra tio n o f a l
l th e f a c to r ia l in v e s tig a tio n s th a t have been c a rrie d o u t, r a
th e r than an e s ta b lis h e d f a c t ." (Vernon, 1, p . 26) D iscussing r e
la tiv e im portance o f f a c to r s a t d if f e r e n t le v e ls ,. Vernon w
rite s : I f our diagram could be worked out com pletely to cover a l l
human a c t i v i t i e s , th e g - v arian ce m ight amount to about 40 p e
r c e n t, th e m ajor and m inor group f a c to rs to some 10 p e r cen t
each, and th e rem aining 40 p e r cent would c o n s is t o f very narrow
group fa c to r s and u n r e lia b ility . This means t h a t , f a i r l y good
p re d ic tio n s o f a b i l i t y in ed u catio n , in d u stry , o r everyday l i f
e , can be achieved by g - te s ts a lo n e .................... (Vernon, 1, pp. 27-
28) G uilford o ffe rs some argum ents a g a in st th e id ea o f a g f a c to
r , a key concept of th e h ie ra rc h ic a l models o f B urt and Vernon. As
G uilford p u ts f o r th , g i s n o t an in v a ria n t v a ria b le but changes
alm ost w ith every b a tte ry o f t e s t s th a t i s analy sed . This i s p a r
tic u la r ly tru e when th e f i r s t c e n tro id f a c to r is taken to be g.
By th e p r a c tic e of oblique r o ta tio n o f ax es, Thurstone d eriv ed
second-order f a c to rs from 'w hich g was to be found. As more than
one se co n d -fa cto r i s found in a la r g e b a tte ry o f a p titu d e t e s t
s , G u ilfo rd , h e re , q u e stio n s, '•Which second-order fa c to r i s ,
th en , to be recognised as g?'* (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 59) 84 While d e liv e
rin g "The W. V. Bingham Lecture'* a t Pardue U n iv ersity on A p ril 21,
1966, Vernon a v ers: D esp ite T hu rsto n e’s and G u ilfo rd 's assu ran
ce th a t g en eral in te llig e n c e i s too vague and heterogeneous a c o
n stru c t to be worth m easuring - we should b reak i t down in to i t s
components and m easure each in d iv id u a l's p r o f ile of fa c to rs -
most p ra c tic in g p sy c h o lo g ists in sch o o ls, c l i n i c s , and in d u
stry hap p ily go on using th e f a m ilia r group or in d iv idual t e s t s o f
in te llig e n c e . (Vernon, 4 , p . 562) The G uilford Model . The most re
c e n t development in th e f a c to r ia l a n a ly s is o f in te llig e n c e
cranes from th e long - range resea rch o f J . P. G uilford and h is a s s o
c ia te s a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Southern C a lifo rn ia . He has
developed a u n ifie d theory o f human i n t e l l e c t , which o rg an ises
th e known, unique or prim ary i n te lle c tu a l a b i l i t i e s in to a sin g
le system c a lle d th e "S tru c tu re o f I n t e l l e c t . " According to G u
ilfo rd , th e f a c to r s can be c la s s if ie d in th re e d if f e r e n t ways:
C o n ten t, o p eratio n and th e p ro d u ct. In c o n te n t, he recognised
th re e d i s t in c t c a te g o rie s and termed them as f ig u r a l,
symbolic and sem antic. A fte rw ards he added a fo u rth kind o f co n
ten t which was termed as b e h a v io ra l. These fo u r c o n te n ts can
be e a s ily compared w ith th re e kin d s o f in te llig e n c e o f
Thorndike. Hie f i r s t c o n te n t, fig u r a l p a r a l le l s w ith c o n crete
in te llig e n c e . The second and th e th ir d ones - symbolic and sem
antic to g e th e r - can be compared with a b s tr a c t in te llig e n c e ,
and th e rem aining one, b e h a v io ra l, goes w ith so c ia l in te llig e n
c e . According to th e b a sic kind o f process, or o p eratio n perform
ed, th e in te l le c t u a l fa c to rs can be c a te g o rise d in to fiv e m ajo
r groups which a re c o g n itio n , memory, convergent th in k in g , d iv
erg en t th in k in g , and e v a lu a tio n . •’A th ird , way of looking a t th
e a b i l i t i e s and a 11 th ir d way o f c la s s ify in g them came to view
more slow ly. I t came about because o f th e need fo r tak in g in to
account th e p a r a l le l s th a t appeared a cro ss both th e co n ten t
and th e o p eratio n c a te g o r ie s ." (G u ilfo rd , 4 , p . 62) When a c e
r ta in o p eratio n is ap p lied to a c e rta in kind o f co n ten t a c e rta in
, kind o f product may be involved. The s ix k in d s o f p ro d u c ts,
according to G u ilfo rd , ares u n its , c la s s e s , r e la tio n s , system s,
tra n sfo rm a tio n s, and im p lic a tio n s. F igure 9 shows a sin g le s o
lid model, c a lle d "the s tr u c tu r e o f i n t e l l e c t " model o r s h o
rtly th e SI model by means o f which th e th re e k in d s o f c la s s if ic a
tio n s o f th e f a c to r s o f i n t e l l e c t a re re p re se n te d . Along
one dimension v a rio u s kin d s o f o p e ra tio n s a re shown; along a
second one a re th e v a rio u s k in d s o f p ro d u c ts, and along th e th
ird a re v a rio u s kinds- o f c o n te n t. CLASSES p.E.I_A-rioN SyST&MS
TP-A-MSFORMftTIONS IP A pLlcA -TlO N S eOHTE-NT BTCru RA J—
Sywaowc s a M a-n t i c BS-H-RVfOP-friO P E R /+ T IO N E.VALU/=VT!ON
_ C O N V e R & E N T PRODUCTION X>ivpR