talent assessment. A consequence of that alienation may be a poorer average
performanceonIQtests.
Cultural Differences in Prized Intellectual Competencies
In general, then, research shows that when the cultural and economic environ-
mentsofethnicgroupsareroughlyequated,performanceonIQtestsisroughly
equated as well. But impoverished minority groups involuntarily displaced or
shunned by the culture as a whole tend to do poorly on IQ tests. It would be a
mistake, though, to conclude from the research that the poverty and cultural
alienation endured by many minorities invariably suppresses intellectual de-
velopment. Rather, people from different cultures place emphasis on different
kinds of intellectual development (Garcia, 1981; Heath, 1983, 1989; Helms, 1992;
Miller-Jones, 1989).
IQ tests were developed by middle- and upper-middle-class Europeans and
people of European descent, so it is unsurprising that the intellectual skills
relevant to IQ testing are emphasized more in their culture than in most other
cultures. But the skills developed in other cultures in response to their envi-
ronments, including impoverished environments, may be ‘‘invisible’’ to IQ
tests. If care is taken to develop tests that reflect the intellectual competencies
prized by a minority culture, but not necessarily by the majority culture, then
the minority culture will do as well, and sometimes even better, on such tests.
Heath (1983) studied children from low-income African-American fami-
lies, low-income European-American families, and middle-income European-
American families. She noted that, on average, there were differences in the
kinds of intellectual competencies with which these children began school. The
African-American children from low-income families tended to be very skilled
at responding to novel situations, defending themselves against a verbal insult,
and telling creative stories. The European-American children from middle-
income families were typically good at responding to requests, responding
quickly when timed by a psychologist administering a test, and answering
‘‘why’’ questions. In general, then, this study makes the point that poverty or
lack of formal education does not necessarily depress intellectual development;
rather, it can lead to the development of intellectual skills different from those
at which well-educated Europeans tend to excel and to measure with IQ tests.
Similar conclusions may be drawn from cross-cultural studies. Berry (1974)
found that people from hunting cultures tend to do better on tests of perceptual
discrimination and spacial processing than people from cultures in which
hunting is less important. Rice farmers from Liberia are better than Americans
at estimating quantities (Gay & Cole, 1967).
Children from Botswana, accustomed to storytelling, are better than Ameri-
can children at remembering stories (Dube, 1982). In one of my favorite exam-
ples, Cole, Gay, Glick, and Sharp (1971) asked adult Kpelle tribespeople to sort
20 familiar objects, such as knives, oranges, and so on, into groups of things
that belong together. The Kpelle separated the objects into functional groups
(e.g., knife with orange) and not taxonomic groups (e.g., knife with fork).
Western adults, on the other hand, sort on the basis of taxonomy, as do chil-
dren who receive higher IQ scores. But when the Kpelle adults were asked to
sort the objects the way a ‘‘stupid’’ person would do it, the Kpelle sorted like
802 R. Kim Guenther