We accept

The G Factor in Intelligence

The question of what intellect is and exactly how it is different from other attributes that characterize the task of the human brain is challenging. Nowadays, the natures of cleverness, the enigma of your brain, the riddle of consciousness will be the most disturbing individual problems. Various facts on the problem of IQ can be reduced to three basic questions: What is the human intellect? Can IQ evaluate it? If not, exactly what does it measure? Tries to answer all these important issues have made an appearance in the early 20th hundred years and remain taking place.

The issue of intelligence can't be considered solved. For example, a special committee of the American Psychological Association (APA), in the survey, "What is known and anonymous about intelligence", for some reason agrees that IQ is a valid measure of intelligence. At the same time in the same survey, it warns that "in this argument, our main task is to remind viewers that a range of important questions about the nature of intelligence continue to be unanswered" (McDermott 2011). It really is noted that views on what steps the IQ, are based on the measurements of a single standard factor (G) and a complex hierarchical framework of ability, which consists, in terms of some ideas of twelve individual items. There are no information on theoretical and empirical explorations that could give acceptable answers to these questions. This research work is intended to answer a few of burning questions, clarify what cleverness is, its types and lab tests used to explain it; to clarify the nature of G factor, its natural, genetic and sociable correlates, contradictions around this factor, Spearman's two-factor intelligence theory and other issues.


Intelligence (from Lat. Intellectus - understanding, cognition) - an potential that combines all the cognitive abilities of the average person: sensation, belief, storage, idea, thought, imagination (Nemeth 2011). Brains is an potential to use the cognition process and to effectively problems handling, particularly during understanding a new array of vital tasks. There are many radically different interpretations of cleverness. Within the structural-genetic Piaget's way intelligence is cared for as the supreme way to balance the topic with the surroundings, characterized by versatility. By cognitivist approach intelligence is undoubtedly a set of cognitive functions. And stable factors are found in factor-analytic methodology based on a couple of test variables (C. Spearman, L. Thurstone, H. Eysenck, S. Barth, D. Wexler, F. Vernon). At the present time there is standard brains as a widespread psychic capacity, which based on genetically established property of the unequal system of processing information at a certain speed and correctness (H. Eysenck). Especially, psychogenetically studies have shown that the percentage of genetic factors, which determined from the variance of the outputs of cleverness exams, is sufficiently large. This index has a value from 0. 5 to 0. 8. By far the most genetically dependent brains is verbal one (Nemeth 2011).

Currently the brains is understood as the ability to implement the cognition process and effectively problems dealing with, particularly during mastering a new variety of vital responsibilities. This potential is usually carried out by using other abilities. Such as for example: the capability to cognize, learn, think logically, systematize information through its evaluation, to determine its applicability (categorised), to find its communications, regularities and variances, to associate it with an identical ones, etc. Often this potential is seen as a the attitude to the life span problems. For example, in the framework of the problem of success: success - the key job of man and the rest for him is merely arising things from the principal, or to jobs in virtually any field of activities.

According to Linda Gottfredson, intellect - it is a very general mental ability, which includes the ability to attract conclusions, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, to comprehend complex ideas, learn fast and learn from the experience. This is not just studying books, narrow academic knowledge or skills to go away the tests. On the contrary, according to researchers, intelligence reflects a broad and deep potential to know the entire world around us, to understand the fact of things and think, what to do in one or another situation (Tofield 2010).

At the beginning of the 20th hundred years, Charles Spearman demonstrated that if a person is good at fixing one problem, then he's successful in dealing with the others, this means that all intellectual skills are statistically tied. Spearman presented the "factor g" of standard intelligence, showing the potency of the implementation of all cognitive tasks. Used, it turned out the "factor g" is difficult to assess immediately. However, on its basis was able to formulate principles, which can be done to evaluate, and which signify approximate solution g. Among such parameter is the cleverness quotient (IQ).

Components of cleverness and its own role

Intelligence - the capability to plan, plan and control actions in achieving goals predicated on the coincidence of fact and goodness (Migashkin N. V. ) (Tofield 2010). Essential features of human cleverness are interest and depth of mind, its flexibility and range of motion, and consistency of evidence:

- Curiosity - the desire to learn versatily this or that happening in essential attitude, which is the basic of effective cognitive activity;

- Depth of your brain - the capability to separate quite from the extra, necessary from accidental;

- Versatility and ability to move of brain - a person's ability to make use of broadly his experience, promptly investigate the items in the new cable connections and human relationships, overcoming stereotyped thinking;

- Logicality of thinking - the capability to follow a stringent collection of reasoning, taking into account all essential sides of the analyzed thing and all its likely relationships;

- Conclusiveness of thinking - the ability of using the facts and regularities in the right second, confirming the correctness of the judgments and conclusions;

- Criticality of pondering - the power evaluate purely the results of intellectual activity for discarding inappropriate judgments, conclusions and decisions (the capability to refuse from first actions if they are contradict certain requirements of the problem);

- Breadth of pondering - the capability to detailed coverage of the thing of intellectual activity, considering the type data and multi-variant of its solutions.

Different content of activities requires the development of certain intellectual capabilities of the individual. But in all cases, the individual need s to really have the level of sensitivity to new and genuine problems, to developments in the possible development of the situation. Indicator of cleverness is disconnectedness of subject by external limitations, his lack of xenophobia - concern with a fresh and abnormal.

Essential quality of the individual mind -is expectation of possible repercussions of action created by him, the ability to anticipate and avoid unnecessary conflicts. Among the main top features of the development of intelligence is the ability to intuitively solve complicated problems. Development of specific qualities of intelligence is thought as the genotype of the species, and the breadth of his experience. In totalitarian social conditions in conformal individuals produced the so-called targeted thinking - thinking about the average person sphere shrinks to a very limited life's boundaries, is widely distributed intellectual infantilism, and among intellectuals - contemplation. Within the group commence to dominate the considering different stereotypes, stereotyped orientation, schematized matrix patterns. There are strains in this content of intellect. Possibly, it includes strain in the composition of brains and in its group. Negative quality of intellect is the rigidity of pondering - his inflexibility, prejudices to the sensation, exaggerated sense its experience, dedication to the formulaic quotes.

Different views on intelligence

According to Linda Gottfredson, the intellect is an extremely general mental capability, which includes the capability to get conclusions, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, understand complex ideas, learn fast and learn from the experience. This is not just studying books, narrow academic knowledge or skills to pass the tests. On the other hand, according to scientists, intelligence reflects a broad and deep capacity to know the entire world around us, to understand the fact of things and think, how to proceed in confirmed situation (Hart 2011).

According to Vinogradov I. , cleverness is someone's ability to search, perception, analysis, business and effective use of information to attain the goal. Only narrow-minded, limited person, gathered by an individual, not systematized, not analyzed and not used information may understand as the intellect of the individual (Nemeth 2011). At exactly the same time, Ilyasov F. N. defines intelligence as "the system's ability to create in the course of learning the programs (mostly heuristic) for handling a particular class of complexity also to solve these problems" (Foley 2009).

At the start of the 20th hundred years, Charles Spearman demonstrated that when a person were good at handling one problem, then he was successful in handling other, which meant that intellectual skills were statistically connected. Spearman launched the "factor g" of standard intelligence, showing the effectiveness of the implementation of most cognitive tasks. Used, it proved that the "factor g" was difficult to measure directly. However, on its basis there was in a position to formulate values, that could be measured, and which symbolized approximate solution g. One such parameter is the brains quotient (IQ). Psychologist James Flynn, the first conducted intensive research in to the dynamics of IQ in several countries over an extended period, and demonstrated that the ratio had been increasing consistently for 50 years (Flynn impact).

Lack of intelligence

Level of cleverness is called the amount of development of mental capabilities relative to years. People with insufficient intelligence are suffering for mental retardation - congenital dementia. In addition, there's a dementia. You can find three degrees of congenital dementia:

- debility (the capability to work is maintained);

- imbecility (the ability to self-service is maintained);

- idiocy (the skills to self-service and speech are not retained).

Social intelligence

Social brains is the capability to understand the habit of people correctly. This ability is vital for effective social interaction and successful social adaptation. The word "social cleverness" was presented into the psychology by E. Thorndike in 1920 to indicate "foresight in social human relationships" (Foley 2009). Many famous psychologists have contributed to the interpretation of this idea. In 1937 Allport G. linked social intelligence having the ability to speak fast, almost automatic judgments about people, ability to forecast the most likely human response. Friendly intelligence, matching to G. Allport is a particular "social gift idea", which provides smooth in dealing with people, which is the merchandise of social adaptation, as opposed to the depth of understanding.

The originator of the first reliable test for measuring social intellect was J. Guilford. Beneath the concept of J. Gilford, cultural intelligence is a system of intellectual skills, not depending on factors of general intelligence. These skills, as well as panhuman can be defined in the space of three parameters: content, operations, results. Guilford singled out a single procedure - cognition (C), and focused his research on the cognition of action (CB). This potential includes six factors:

- Cognition of action elements - the ability to distinguish the framework of verbal and nonverbal appearance of patterns (the capability to close to the release of "figures from a background" in Gestalt mindset).

- Cognition of behavior classes - the ability to understand common properties in a blast of expressive or situational information about the action.

- Cognition of tendencies relationships - the ability to understand the romantic relationships that exist between models of information about the patterns.

- Cognition of behavior systems - the capability to understand the logic of the entire situation of people's connections, the meaning of their behavior in these situations.

- Cognition of behavior change - the ability to understand the original value of similar patterns (verbal and nonverbal) in different situational contexts.

- Cognition of tendencies results - the ability to foresee the consequences of behavior, based on available information.

Research of intelligence

Attempt to study creative components of intellect was made by representatives of Gestalt psychology (M. Wertheimer, V. Kohler) who developed the concept of insight. In the early twentieth hundred years French psychologists A. Binet and T. Simon suggested to look for the degree of mental endowments through special exams. Their work was the start of a popular till nowadays pragmatic interpretation of cleverness as the capability to handle the relevant responsibilities, effectively integrated into the socio-cultural life, to modify successfully. It believes in the idea of the existence of underlying buildings of intelligence, irrespective of cultural affects.

In order to boost diagnostic techniques of brains there were held (usually through factor research) various studies of its composition. At the same time different creators allocate different numbers of basic "factor of intelligence": from 12 to 120. Such fragmentation of brains on many components is of an obstacle to understanding its integrity. More often Psychology is based on the principle of unity of cleverness, its romantic relationship with personality. Much attention has been devoted to the relationship of sensible and theoretical brains, depending on their emotional and strong-willed personality qualities. Meaningful meaning of intelligence itself and top features of its way of measuring tools rely upon the type of the socially important spheres of activity of the individual (teaching, development, politics, etc. ). In connection with the successes of clinical and technological revolution, the development of cybernetics, information theory, computer technology, the word "artificial intellect" becomes wide-spread.

Types of Intelligence

Common or basic factor (g) of cleverness demonstrates certain basic attributes necessary to perform all types of problems. In humans, there is a group of genes that defines the features of common factor g. Genetic factors play an important role in determining g, and the estimate of the coefficient of heritability for the overall factor g varies from 40 to 80%. Once acquired knowledge (how to use a computer, method of square designs, etc. ) is stored for later use. Thus, we can identify the data creation as a kinetic intelligence, and understanding of solving the problem as a potential brains. Potential intellect is answers and solutions created by the kinetic intellect. A lot more knowledge and experience we gain, the greater the margin of your potential intellect is.

Agile intellect is the ability not only to understand the learned information, but also the capability to see the applicability of knowledge to the problem situations and creatively to apply knowledge in new environment. Over time, the intellectual ability to move (problem solving, applying information to the context of the situation) has been recognized by some psychologists as an innate capacity or cleverness in general. It is possible to develop mobile intelligence, if the educational program compensates enough focus on the buying and use of knowledge obtained by students.

What is IQ?

The concept of IQ has been unveiled by B. Stern in 1912. Stern drew focus on the serious shortcomings of mental get older as an signal of the Binet scales. Stern suggested to determine the relative match (quotient obtained by dividing mental age group to chronological). IQ was first used in the level of intelligence of Stanford-Binet in 1916. IQ (brains quotient) is the quantitative examination of the amount of human intellect with regards to the average person of the same years. It is determined by special exams. IQ lab tests determine the capability to think, rather than the level of knowledge (erudition). IQ is an attempt to examine the factor of basic intelligence.

IQ-tests are specifically designed for the normal circulation of results with an average IQ, at 100. 50% of people have IQ between 90 and 110, and 25% - below 90 or above 110. Graduates of American colleges have IQ with a value of 115, Excellent ones - 135-140. The worthiness of IQ below 70 is often classified as mental retardation. IQ is an attempt to determine general intellect factor (g) (Foley 2009). Basic intellect factor (g) is a widely used but controversial construct used in mindset to estimate what common all intellect tests reveal. The term "theory g» deals with the hypothesis and from it results of the natural mother nature of g, uniformity / conformity, appropriateness of its request to true to life and other studies.

History of factor g

Charles Spearman, one of the first researchers in the field of psychometrics, found that estimates of students among supposedly unrelated things got a positive relationship between them, and found that those correlations reflected the affect of the dominating factor, which he called g, general cleverness quotient. He developed a model where all the differences in the results of cleverness checks could be discussed by two factors. The first factor was specific to individual intellectual duties - specific features that allowed a person to execute one process for intelligence better than another. Second was g, standard intelligence factor, responsible for the successful execution of intellectual tasks in general. However, Spearman's theory was too simple, since it ignored the influence of group factors (spatial storage, visualization, verbal potential), that could also be detected using factor analysis.

The deposition of information obtained from intelligence tests and more sophisticated evaluation techniques have retained the central role of g and led investigators to the present day theory of the factor g. Hierarchy of factors with g at the best level and group factors at lower levels is currently the most widely used model of mental capabilities. Other models also have been proposed, nevertheless they have been followed by the debates about the g and choice theories of cleverness.

Intelligence lab tests and g factor

Data extracted from observations of what all intellectual lab tests on allocation platform of factors g matter, are favorably correlated with one another. Factor g can be extracted as the key factor of the results of brains tests with research of key components or factor analysis. The relationship between factor g and intellect lab tests can be described by the following example. There exist objects, varying in size, such as, for example, the body. No specific measurement of the body gives a clear notion of its size. On the contrary, there may be done many different measurements, such as the ones that a tailor makes. All these measurements will be positively correlated with the other person and if all of them contributes to the entire result, it will give more appropriate description of how big is the individual, than each single measurement by itself. Thus giving an opportunity to create the method of factor examination. This process is comparable to finding the average of the amount of measurements of a specific variable, but instead of the size this is a summary dimension of examples of the changing. Obviously, the difference in size doesn't supply the full account of all differences of the body. Techniques of factor examination are not limited in the creation of an individual factor. Thus, when studying the body can, for example, there can be emphasized two major factors: the expansion and girth. However, the results of exams of cognitive potential actually create a primary dominant factor g (Buckhalt 2001).

Tests of cognitive talents are as valid as they assess factor g. In the event the quantified performance of the job is highly correlated with g, such an activity is associated with g. Makers of IQ test, who seek to create reliable and valid assessments, try to make their testing as related to g, as is possible. Historically, therefore reducing the influence of group factors by using wider variance of brainteasers on intelligence. However, such testing as the Raven matrix are considered to be the most from the factor g, although they are comprised of fairly homogeneous brainteasers.

Tests of primary cognitive skills are also strongly correlated with the factor g. They, like their name advises, are simple puzzles, seemingly, require very little mental effort, nevertheless they are rather strongly correlated with comprehensive intelligence exams. Determining the color of light: blue or red, or the same meaning of how many squares are attracted on the display: 5 or 4 - they are typical types of such exams. Answers to such questions are usually given by the most fast clicking on the appropriate button. Often, in addition to two buttons used for poll options, it is added to the 3rd button, designed for expectations for the beginning of the test. If the stimulus is provided to the subject, he takes his hand right away button to click on the correct answer. This enables the experimenter to determine how enough time is spent on considering on the answer to the question (response time, measured in fractions of a second) and how much time is spent on the physical activity of the arm to the correct button (while moving). The reaction time is strongly correlated with g, as the moving time - less firmly. Using checks of elementary cognitive abilities made it possible to quantify the hypotheses involving test bias, determination of the tested person and group variations. These testing have an edge in their ease; they provide a connection between the common test of intelligence and biological evidence, such as research of MRI (Brand 1996).

Biological, genetic and interpersonal correlates of g factor

Factor g has a big number of biological correlates. Strongest correlates include the mass of the prefrontal lobes of the mind, the full total mass of the mind, the level of sugar metabolism in the brain. Factor g correlates less strongly but still significantly to the overall size of the body. There exists conflicting information about the relationship between g and the acceleration of nerve impulses in the peripheral anxious system, some studies point out a significant positive relationship, others indicate the lack of it, or even negative relationship.

Modern studies claim that in the broad sense heritability of factor g is between 0. 5 and 0. 8, and its heritability in the small sense, is about 0. 3, although the reason why are still unfamiliar. The heritability of most test results thus is related to the factor g. For a long time it was thought that the size of the brain correlated with factor g. Recent MRI studies on twins show that the amount of gray matter in the frontal cortex is highly significantly correlated with factor g and it is highly heritable. These studies point out that there surely is a correlation between brain size (assuming that its heritability is 0. 85) and factor g 0. 4; and focus on the fact that this correlation is mediated by genetic factors. Factor g is seen in mice and humans. Factor g is probably a restricted amount of short-term recollection. Mental capacity, or C, the amount of short-term memory (measured in bits of information) - is the merchandise of Ck (pieces / sec), the average person speed of producing information on D (s), duration of perception of information in short-term storage area, indicating the length of memorization. Hence:

C (tad) = Ck (bit / s) - D (s) (Gao 2009).

G has an optimistic correlation with typical steps of success (academic achievements, successful execution of duties, career prestige) and negative correlation with socio condemned events (appellation from institution, unplanned being pregnant, poverty). Intelligence testing that assess different abilities terribly lack a higher predictive potential than factor G. Scientific publications on the variations in cleverness found in several ethnic organizations have caused public issue on that subject.

The Flynn effect and factor g

The Flynn impact describes a growth in IQ results over time. There is no single perspective on whether the surge in IQ scores causes the surge of factor g. In addition, recent studies show that IQ results in developed countries neglect to grow. Statistical evaluation of IQ subtest shows that their contribution to the Flynn impact is independent of the factor g (Webb 2000).

Contradictions to factor g

Stephen Jay Gould in his later works indicated his objections about the idea of factor g, and intellect testing in general, it detailed in his questionable book "Wrong sizing of man". Some researchers of an man-made brains have advocated such perspective, which argues that the knowledge of mental ability can be described as "computerism" which is "moronic and meaningless, " noting that Mental Capability Test steps the distinctions in fixing the tasks that will be done for us by computerized equipment. Such capabilities have nothing in connection with genius.

An expert in the field of intellect Howard Gardner notes: "I really do not believe there exists a unitary common talent, no matter how it is called, intelligence, creativity, or a factor g. I'm not placing ability inside the mind, preferring to interpret all the achievements, as the interaction between mental potentials on the main one side, and resources and opportunities provided by the surrounding ethnical environment on the other hand. . . The whole intellectual and creative work is performed under some kind of public sciences, crafts or structured activities called competence. Accordingly, there is absolutely no point in discussing the person that he's in the general expertise or creative" (Cherniss 2010). Philip Kitcher, in 1985 wrote: "Many experts now believe that there is absolutely no single measure of intellectual capability - no widespread cleverness. They suggest the concept of general intelligence predicated on the view that different intellectual capabilities are not perfectly correlated. . . . It is useful to continue to publicly screen the myth of "general brains" (Hart 2011).

The multi-dimensional g-factor

In 1923 the American psychologist Edwin Boring offered humorous classification: "intelligence is what intelligence tests strategy. " But what in reality do these checks measure?

Amazingly, but psychologists haven't still chosen what is intended by the word "intelligence". For example, in Gestalt mindset (Wolfgang K¶hler, Potential Wertheimer) it is regarded as a generalized capacity to create aesthetic images. At institution of the Swiss biologist and philosopher Jean Piaget it's the most perfect form of adaptation to the surroundings. American psihometrist Luis Leon Thurstone seen intelligence as the capability to self-regulation of mental activity. Classification list is never-ending (Sternberg 2002).

Another concern that has ages of record: if the intelligence is of an individual quality or is it a combination of various independent abilities? At the beginning of 20th century, the British psychologist Charles Spearman developed a fresh method of statistical research called "factor analysis". Putting it on to the results in various capacities in intellect tests, he discovered that each of them correlated with one another. Out of this Spearman concluded that there was an over-all factor of intellect, which he called "factor G» (from general"), which manifested itself simultaneously in every types of projects. And in order to clarify some differences between the results of testing in people who have the same basic intelligence Spearman introduced a second factor, which he called S (from "specific"), used as an index of group of specific ability.

It turned out that it was impossible to build up tests which were the net factor steps of primary mental abilities. Testing of main mental abilities are always significantly correlated with one another, because of the contribution of factor g in every cognitive tests. One of the most "clean" tests measure one of the primary mental abilities combined with factor g, and Spearman's factor usually accounts for a greater share of the total variance (individual dissimilarities) of test performance.

Currently there is absolutely no generally accepted theory about the fundamental nature of the factor g, and we are still definately not understanding the mechanisms of the brain, that could be described by Spearman's factor. Although factor g has no satisfactorily theoretical justification, it with no doubt provides as a strong source of individual differences in any pretty much sophisticated cognitive activity, manifesting in the form of conduct, which can be examined from the point of view of an objective standard of performance.

"Spearman's Factor"

Sometimes we listen to that factor of g is inherited. Indeed, it shows a larger heritability than private capacity. However, Peter Scheunemann plus some other researchers (Religious Capron, Adrian Wettach) revealed that heritability of factor g was a statistical artifact of the existing assessment system. Scheunemann in his work "Famous artifacts: Spearman's Hypothesis" (Scheunemann 1997) poses the question: where generally speaking an idea of the factor of standard cleverness, if we discuss technology, not about domestic premises comes from. We have a great number of assessments for different expertise. Each person gets his report on each one of the tests, you have greater results, others - worse, so that for each test there is certainly some deviation.

Usually, the better the average person is responses for one of the checks, the better his email address details are in others, although this dependence is not rigid, but statistical. The results of some recent tests correlate with the results of other checks and with his total score more robust then in other lab tests, but the romance usually exists. Because of this, there's a perception that there is a significant factor explaining the maximum variability of the results of each test in different things (for example, 1 / 2 of the variability of the results of the first test, two-thirds of second, fourth of the third).

Let's imagine something of coordinates in three dimensions. The first axis corresponds to the result of the first test, on the next axis - the second, the third - the 3rd. The results of various tests would symbolize a point in this space. Because the results of three tests correlate with each other, the points will not be everywhere you go, but mainly inside the ellipsoid (amount resembling a melon "torpedo"). The scatter of details is the largest along the key axis of the ellipsoid. It is logical to expect that scatter reflects distinctions in the factor of standard intelligence, which, in one way or another affects the results of all three checks.

Now let's depict on the same graph independently "melons" for both subgroups of content, the average overall score which differs, for example, for blacks and whites. Brand linking their centers, will approximately parallel to axis of the top "melon" (see fig. ). Advocates of the racial space - racial dissimilarities in intellect - understand this, saying that the main variations between these organizations is just because of the difference generally intelligence. Factor g gets the strongest effect on the results of the next test, the weakest - the results of the third. Plus the difference between blacks and whites is the major in the results of the next test, least of most - on the results of the third.

In this example, it is luring to ascribe difference between white and black people to the variations in G, to suggest a physiological reason for these variations (eg, differing the speed of nerve operations). In fact, if the blacks and whites change most strongly in those tests, where G makes the largest contribution, it could be the point of difference between your average G. This process was suggested by Spearman in the 1920s and revived by Arthur Jensen in the 1970s when the movement for civil equality of dark people has triggered a natural response ot the white world. In 1994, the same procedure was found by Herrstayn Richard and Charles Murray in the e book "The bell curve», which advertised the heredity of cleverness and unavoidable racial space in IQ (Wicherts 2010).

According to Scheunemann, it generally does not follow that factor G for different battery of checks is the same G. The fact that their results usually lay within an ellipsoid with major axis is due to the fact that the exams in the power are chosen matching to internal regularity and, normally, their results are consistent with each other. Unfortunately, this persistence is not related to the predictive ability of the test (for example, using its ability to anticipate academic success for quite some time ahead). A similar correlation also points out the fact that the distinctions between the groups with high and low overall credit score are well correlated with variations of the main component of G, which corresponds to the primary axis. Similar results can be obtained not only for sets of whites and blacks, also for other teams with high and low total report, and even for the power supply of internally consistent tests that do not measure intellect, but some other features.

Therefore, factor G (and "fixed" on its basis prolonged variations between races in intelligence) is a statistical artifact of the techniques of evaluation, triggered by an attempt to make clear the inexplicable with the help of unknown. Another thing is that it does not (yet) discredit the very notion of basic intelligence, as defined in internal theory. It could happen that psychologists will be able to "get close" to it in any other case, moving from the cognitive constructions of experience, due to different individuals in handling different kinds of tasks which work generates a whole lot of expectations in this regard. But you can't really come to it from the results of IQ assessment.

Spearman's two-factor intellect theory is the theory of intelligence, created by Charles Spearman, the primary characteristic feature which is the idea that any intellectual activity is affected by two factors: general (G») and specific (S»). Founder of the idea, Charles Spearman was an English statistician and psychologist, a specialist in the field of experimental psychology, methods of assessment and dimension, theory, history and beliefs of mindset, personality mindset and social mindset.

Spearman believed that any intellectual activity acquired a common starting, which was called "general factor of intelligence. " Common (standard) factor G» forms the building blocks of any successful mental activities. Together with factor g, there's been allocated a specific factor S», peculiar and then one form of activity, it functions only in a single situation which is essential to solve problems in specific areas. Factor g is the correct cleverness, which essentially boils down to specific dissimilarities in "mental energy". Mental energy is seen as a Spearman by three indications:

- number, level of mental energy;

- amount of energy, ie the quickness of transition from one activity to some other;

- the degree of energy vibration, so-called ease of its recovery from certain activities.

Studies have shown that typically the following tests have the maximum weight on the factor g: Raven progressive matrices, targeted at diagnosing the capability to identify habits in the business of some successively increasing complexity of geometric shapes and Kettel intelligence tests that divide Spearman's g-factor into two components (g- "crystallized cleverness" and g-liquid intelligence"). Corresponding to Kettel crystallized intellect is the consequence of education and various cultural affects, its main function is to fully capture and organize knowledge and skills. Liquid intelligence characterizes the biological capacity of the stressed system.

Spearman defines factor g as a typical "mental energy", which is similarly vested in people, but which influences the success of carrying out any activities. Studies on the relationships of general and specific factors in resolving various issues allowed Spearman to establish that the role of factor g is maximal in dealing with complex mathematical problems and tasks in conceptual thinking and minimal in the performance of sensorimotor actions.

A quantity of important consequences suggests from Charles Spearman's theory. First is the fact the only thing that unites the successful solution of a number of tests is a factor common mental energy. Second, the correlation of the results of carrying out any intellectual tests by any group of people should maintain positivity. Thirdly, for evaluating factor g it is best to apply responsibilities of discovering abstract relationships. G. Eysenck interprets the "G-factor" as the quickness of information handling of the central anxious system (mental tempo). Mental rate is an over-all psycho-physiological feature of an individual, which predetermines an extremely high speed of digesting diverse information.

He set an extremely high relationship between IQ, defined by high-speed tests of cleverness, timing and variability of evoked potentials, as well as the bare minimum time that a man needs to identify simple images. However, the hypothesis of "the quickness of information control by the mind" doesn't have serious nerve-physiological arguments yet (Lovie 2010). So, based on the two-factor system: general factor (g) is really the essence of intelligence which is reduced to the individual distinctions in "mental energy" (it's the amount of the results of most test items); factor s characterizes the specificity of every particular job. Spearman delimited leveling properties of cleverness: 1 - Indications of creation of basic sensory-perceptual and verbal functions, and 2 - combinatorial features (the capability to clarify the partnership between stimuli).

A little later J. Raven persisted development of the idea, highlighting the fruitful intellect or the ability to identify relationships and romantic relationships, and emerged to conclusions that were not directly symbolized in confirmed situation; reproductive brains is the ability to use past encounters and assimilate information. He created a test "Raven matrix. " R. Kettle divided Spearman's factor g into 2 components: gc - crystallized intelligence (reproductive ability, the result of education and various cultural influences, its function is the build up and company of knowledge dependant on exams on vocabulary, reading, account of social norms, etc) and gt - current cleverness (profitable capacity; it is based on biological characteristics of the NS; its function is quickly and effectively processing of the information determined by tests on the id of habits + 3 factors: visualization (the ability to change images in fixing divergent problems), memory space and speed. Relating to F. Vernon factor g splits into two major group factors: verbal-digital-educational and spatial-mechanical-practical.

For three decades, two-factor theory was subjected to severe criticism. Some have refused the lifestyle of a common factor g» as congenital; others were not persuaded by its numerical proofs. In response, Spearman and his staff perfected the theoretical and statistical basis. Two-factor style of intelligence has been supplemented by the factors responsible for mechanical, arithmetic and language (verbal) capability, which were located between the S-and G-factors that has turned model of Spearman into a hierarchical one. But already in 1930, the thought of a simple two-factor structure of brains less popular than multifactorial ideas (L. Thurstone, J. Gilford, etc. ).

Several secondary principles, emphasizing different facets of the factor g derive from the two-factor theory of brains of Spearman. Raymond Kettle recognized two components that are called crystallized and smooth intellect. The first shows the knowledge about the world and past activities, and the second is the quantity of operative memory, the rate of the mental processes and characteristics of other, more reliant on heredity. Spearman's student John Raven also distributed factor G into two components, but in yet another way, highlighting the productive intellect (capacity to identify associations and relations to come to conclusions that aren't explicitly represented in a given situation) and duplication (the capability to use past activities and assimilate information). Donald Wexler suggested sharing a typical intelligence on verbal and nonverbal.

Summarizing everything written above, it is grasped that brains is an extremely general mental capability, which includes the ability to pull conclusions, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, to comprehend complicated ideas, learn fast and study from the experience. This is not just studying books, narrow academics knowledge or skills to pass the tests. Intelligence reflects a broad and deep capability to know the planet around us, to understand the essence of things and think, what to do in a single or another situation. G factor performs am important role in determining human brains. Nowadays, the natures of intellect, the secret of the mind, the riddle of awareness will be the most interesting and discussed human being issues that still remain unknown.

More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment