INTELLIGENCEextremely low or “mentally retarded” (although this term is quickly
falling out of favour).
Intelligence testing remains highly controversial. Critics, such as
Stephen Jay Gould, have argued that the tests are culturally biased; that
people can improve their performance through practice; that results are
contaminated by factors like motivation and educational background;
and that not enough weight is given by the tests to soft skills such as
empathy and creativity. (Recognizing some of these concerns, tests
designed to measure Sternberg’s “successful intelligence” are more
varied and include practical and creative tasks alongside more tradi-
tional items.)
There are also objections to the uses intelligence-tests are put to, for
instance determining whether a person gains access to certain psycho-
logical or social services; filtering schools admissions; appraising job
candidates; and assessing a person’s legal capacity (i.e. their ability to look
after their own affairs). Often these life-changing decisions are based on
what many regard as arbitrary cut-offs, such as whether a person has an
IQ of 70 or less, or above 130, the latter considered by some test admin-
istrators as a sign of “giftedness”. If the tests are flawed and biased, so
the argument goes, then it is scandalous that the tests can have such
influence on people’s lives. Negative feedback from a test can also be self-
fulfilling, damaging a person’s confidence and affecting their life choices.
To fully appreciate the controversies that cloud intelligence-testing, it’s
worth taking a step back in time to see how intelligence-testing evolved
and how it has been abused.
55 70 10085 115 130 145shaded area indicating
one standard deviationbelow the meanan IQ of below 70% is
considered “learning disabled”
or “mentally retarded”this shaded area
marks one standard deviationabove the mean68% of people
have an IQ score
between 85 and 115number of scorersIQ scores