Kinds of Intelligence - Research Paper Example

Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments There are a lot of measurements to determine the intelligence of a certain individual. In doing such, it isvital to test and to have a qualitative and quantitative description of the person's intelligence. Primarily, these kinds of instruments are needed to know the mental capability of a certain person to perform different tasks with regards to the requirements to fulfill those things. In doing such a lot of procedures are made in order to determine the needed output and to categorize a certain person's mental capability based on his/her intelligence. However, we cannot deny the fact that there are discrepancies among these tests. Primarily, these tests are done differently based on the kind of output that administers of tests as well as the people who are taking these kinds of tests wants. In these cases, determining the kind of instruments and the recommendations it provides is the main factor why this kind of instruments, though similar in nature differs with their uses and the procedures. On the second thought, one might ask, why there are varieties of tests where in fact, the main goal of these tests boils down to one thing- to determine the intelligence of a certain individual. However, as the famous saying goes that everything has its purpose, these kinds of tests perform specific functions based on the intended output why such tests are conceived and being used. Taking a closer look into these kinds of instruments will also help us analyze on how these instruments work. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 2 Kinds of Intelligence Test During the past few years in dealing with intelligence test, I.Q. test perhaps is the most sought upon test that is being consulted nowadays. The word I.Q. stands for Intelligence Quotient. The website iq-test.learninginfo.org (2007) on the other hand defined I.Q. tests as "Supposedly, it is a score that tells one how "bright" a person is compared to other people. And - also supposedly - the score is an indication of the person's potential. The average IQ is by definition 100; scores above 100 indicate a higher than average IQ and scores below 100 indicate a lower than average IQ. Half of the population has IQ's of between 90 and 110." However, there critics who claim that due to the differences of people, dealing with this kind of test would limit the classification of people who are over the prescribed parameter of this kind of test as well as to undermine the people below the measure of the test. In this regard, a number of tests have been newly introduced in order to classify the intelligence of a certain person. Test #1 Comprehensive Test of Non-Verbal Intelligence (CTONI) Formatted 1997 by Hammil, Don; Nils Pearson and J. Lee Wiederholt, this kind of test is primarily used in Psycho educational assessment. This kind of test is used for non-verbal reasoning of people in almost all the age bracket. This test caters for people ranging from age 6-89 years old (psyc.jmu.edu 2005). The major purpose of this test is to weigh the mental capability of a person disregarding verbal practices. In this case, the problem of language barrier of examinees is now resolved through this kind of test as this can be conducted without verbal interaction. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 3 Also this kind of test is used to assess the intelligence of people with speech deficiencies such mute and other similar defects. Primarily, this test is performed to find out categorical, contextual and abstract reasoning of a certain individual. This is usually done through gestures and signs. Also, this test can be attributed in activities such as simple classification of colors and shapes (Aizenstien et al 2000). Psychiatrists are the ones who are more than capable of administering this kind of test. Also, their psychologist counterparts could also administer this. By using analytical tools in their field, they can conclude the findings and assign the intellectual capacity of certain person. Also, a product of 20-year research in the form of TONI 3 is a thing capable of administering this test. "The TONI3, a major revision of the popular and well-built Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, is a norm-referenced measure of intelligence, aptitude, abstract reasoning, and problem solving that is completely free of the use of language. The test requires no reading, writing, speaking, or listening on the part of the test subject. It is completely nonverbal and largely motor-free, requiring only a point, nod, or symbolic gesture to indicate response choices (ags.pearsonassessments.com 2007)." To add to that, "Complete TONI3 Kit includes Examiner's Manual, Picture Book, 50 Form A Answer Booklet and Record Forms, and 50 Form B Answer Booklet and Record Forms, all in a sturdy storage box. (1997)." However, this test should be administered individually. This kind of test usually lasts for 20 minutes but the people behind this suggests that it would take 10 minutes per sublevel test and the scores and the interpretation of the findings could be illustrated through this formula: Age-based standard scores (M = 100, SD = 15), percentile Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 4 Going back to the subtests, these are divided into Pictorial Analogies, Geometric Analogies, Pictorial Categories, Geometric Categories, Pictorial and Geometric Sequences. This instrument is theorized based on the knowledge that the real world knowledge works without a language. This illustrates that the intellectual capacity of a person could be more studied minus the language. The validity of this kind of test showed effective to those people with cognitive, linguistic, and sensory exceptionalities, including those who are intellectually gifted or challenged. This kind of instrument is useful to those who are bounded by language barrier language-wise or due to physical limitations. In this case, one can know the mental capability of an individual without the hassle of having different kind of languages and physical impairment. Test #2- Draw a person, Intellectual Ability Test (DAP-IQ) This kind or instrument seem to have its similarity with the latter instrument as this test doesn't require language and verbal interaction as this test assesses how a person's cognitive function performs by drawing a person and through that drawing the persons mental ability could be weighed. This kind of test is a qualitative one so the drawn person is assessed to its quality and the assessors would make corresponding grade out of that. Re-conceptualized by Cecile Reynolds and Julia Hickman in 2004, this kind of test looks into the fact how people intellectual capacity could be scanned by drawing an image like him. In doing such, a lot of differences were traced from different examiners, probably would explain the fact that the Intellectual level of a certain person differs from one another. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 5 Being non verbal in nature, this instrument requires a drawing skill of a certain person in order to be assessed using this kind of intellectual measurement. The website psych-edpublications.com (2006) describes this kind of test as "The Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults (DAP:IQ) provides a common set of scoring criteria to estimate intellectual ability from a human figure drawing. This flexible assessment is for use by psychologists, school counselors, and professionals working with special-needs populations. The DAP:IQ allows you to derive reliable, quantitative ability estimates by using the largest single collection of normative data on this task ever gathered. Psychometric data, including normative reference data, are provided for ages 4 years to 89 years and are based on a total sample of 3,090 individuals across the United States. The validity and utility of this test lie in the scoring system's emphasis of concepts over artistic skill and motor coordination. The collection of an HFD is easily standardized with a set of simple, easily understood instructions, and requires a very short period of time to administer, 10 to 12 minutes, individually or to a group." This is also administered by a Psychiatrist or Psychologist, they look into key points of a body parts wherein they look into possible clues and patterns of a certain body part to suggest the idea or coordination of the brain and the mobility of hands in order to form a figure out of drawing. By doing such, the administrator of the test will have the clues on how the examiners respond to the stimuli given by the brain and how detailed the instructions of the brain could be. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 6 This test could be done by group or individually. Usually, if one is engaged into a group test, every person in that certain group would be given specific task or body part to be drawn. By doing such, the assessor would look into the uniformity of the body parts. This kind of tests suggests how a certain individual reacts to the norm of the people around him and how will he adopt into the situation to become a part of that norm. This kind of activity suggests that intellectual capability of a certain individual in order to adopt with the situation and how will a person be able to join the norm of a certain society. If we are to compare this with the instrument prior to this, the first instrument deals with individuality of a certain individual on how he reasons out with abstract. Also, psycan.com (2006) added that, "The DAP:IQ improves the practice of evaluating human figure drawings (HFDs) as a measurement of cognitive ability by scoring elements representative of universal features of the human figure." Also, this test surpasses limitations of miscommunications due to several languages and physical hindrances as this kind of test only requires the examinee to draw and there is no or minimal amount of words to be uttered knowing that the assessor of this kind of test look into the aesthetic value of the drawn material of the patient and that would be basis of determining the mental capability of a certain patient based on how detailed the patient is with regards to "making a self-replica" Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 7 There are a lot of groups and individuals who affirm the reliability of this instrument with regards to determining the intellectual capability of a certain individual." (Reliability) of scores for the Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults is examined with a sample of 110 college students from two universities in the southeast. The alpha coefficient for the total sample and the interscorer and intrascorer reliability for a subset of 31 students are analyzed. The alpha coefficient for the 23 items for the total sample was .82. The correlation coefficient for IQ is .83 for interscorer reliability and .92 for intrascorer reliability. Results are consistent with those reported by the test authors. (jpa.sagepub.com 2006)" Furthermore, this test is beneficial to those who people who are finding their purpose and their capabilities. This test is used to validate the current mind state as well as intellectual capability of a certain individual without the aide of language but by the aide of drawings and illustrations drawn. In this case, one can be assured that the answers provided would be more accurate because verbal answers could sometimes depict lies and untruth but this kind of test assures that the drawn image of a certain examiner suggests the present mindset of that certain person and it would be the basis to know the present way of thinking as well as the intellectual capacity of a certain individual. This test is to further analyze the coordination of the brain and how the body parts, particularly the hand to respond to stimuli and to establish the details of a certain image based on the perception of that person. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 8 Instrument # 3- Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT) This kind of instrument is also nonverbal. Like that of the second instrument, this deals how a certain individual reacts in a certain stimuli that would define how a certain individual could surpass cultural barriers and bias through general intelligence and equivalency among other people. This test was conceived by Raymond Cattell and AKS Cattell. This test could be administered either by group or individually. This kind of test was conceptualized like the first two examples due to language barrier that makes intellectual assessments more complicated because of such related problems. The website personality-and-aptitude-career-tests.com (2004) also describe this kind of intellectual assessment as "The Culture Fair Intelligence Test (CFIT) was conceived by Raymond B. Cattle in 1920s. It is a nonverbal IQ test to measure your analytical and reasoning ability in the abstract and novel situations. The test includes mazes, classifications, conditions and series. Such problems are believed to be common with all cultures. That's the reason that the testing industry claims it free from all cultural influences. The culture fair is a high speed IQ test. The full scale is to be resolved in less than one hour. When you ignore the speed factor, your results can be misleading and even dangerous to your career efforts." In this kind of examination, even a simple mind game could be complicated and would require a lot of intellectual ability to solve some analytical problems that are required by this kind of test. Also, patience play a vital role in achieving the intended goal of this kind of test. Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 9 This kind of test is oftentimes branded as deceiving as some parts of this test looks easy but as the examination goes by; the examinee would then realize that this kind of exam is complicated and would require enough logical and analytical skill to be able to surpass the needed requirement for this kind of examination. This kind of test was derived from different intellectual games from different parts of the globe. Primarily, it is safe to say that the fusion of different tests is present in this kind of instrument. This kind of examination is divided into three specific age groups which serve as scales. The first scale caters for children 4-8 years old while the second one is used for people in school while the third is used for the purpose of entrance examinations in college or in securing a job. Also the recently mentioned website added the two kinds of Culture fair I.Q. Test as the following; "The scale 2 and 3 contain two equivalent forms as A and B with the following features. - Each form can be administered individually or with combination of the other form. When it is administered individually, it is called short intelligence test. However, when the both forms of a scale are combined, it is called a full scale test. - Each form is comprised of four subtests: series, classifications, matrices and conditions. Each subtest is preceded by several practice questions. You are offered a booklet of eight-pages of multiple choice questionnaires." Comparison of 3 Similar Instruments 10 This kind of Instrument or test usually lasts for 30 minutes and is classified under level B. Though patience is a must for this kind of test, responding into the situation and given problems in this kind of test must be made the soonest possible time and must be resolved in less than an hour. Time perhaps is an important factor in this kind of test as the ability to respond on things that stimulates movement is a must for this kind of activity. However, several problems arises in using this kind of test as most agree that this kind of test is not free from cultural bias. Psychologist W. R. Coch(2004) rejects the findings of this kind of instrument stating that "Cultures differ with respect to the importance they place on competition with peers in performing tasks or solving problems, on speed or quality of performance, and on variety of other test-related behaviors. Some cultures emphasize concrete rather than abstract problem solving, often to the extent that a problem has no meaning except in a concrete setting. They very notion of taking some artificially contrived test is nonsensical." All in all, the comparison boils down to one thing, different tests are introduced to serve as different gauge in assessing the intellectual capacity and capability of an individual. Due to the fact that they are different by nature and usage, the results should be deemed as also different from one another and must be regarded individually to serve different specific tasks and intellectual measurement. Reference: 1) iq-test.learninginfo.org (2007). I.Q. Tests, do they measure intelligence Opened February 19,2007, URL available http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq02.htm 2) psyc.jmu.edu (2005). PARC TEST FINDER INDEX. Opened February 19,2007, URL available http://www.psyc.jmu.edu/school/parc/testlist.pdf 3) Aizenstien et al 2000, Complementary Category Learning Systems Identified Using Event-Related Functional MRI, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience December 2000 issue, 977-987 4) ags.pearsonassessments.com 2007, TONI-3: Test of Nonverbal Intelligence, Third Edition. Opened February 19, 2007, URL Available http://ags.pearsonassessments.com/group.aspnGroupInfoID=a19100 5) psych-edpublications.com (2006), Draw a person, Intellectual Ability Test (DAP-IQ).Opened February 19, 2007, URL available http://www.psych-edpublications.com/cognitive.htm#dap 6) psycan.com (2006), Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults (DAP:IQ) . Opened February 19,2007 URL availablehttp://www.psycan.com/ShoppingCart/productdetail.aspxpid=37 7) jpa.sagepub.com(2006) The Reliability of Scores for the Draw-A-Person Intellectual Ability Test for Children, Adolescents, and Adults. Opened February 19, 2007, URL available http://jpa.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/24/2/137rss=1 8) personality-and-aptitude-career-tests.com (2004) Features of the Culture Fair Intelligence Test opened February 19, 2007, URL available http://www.personality-and-aptitude-career-tests.com/culture-fair-intelligence-test.html 9) W. R. Coch(2004) Culture Fair IQ Test and Cultural Biases Read More