factor analytic techniques to test it. Whereas other
psychometric approaches generally attempted to
infer a model from the data, Guilford used the
model as a guide in generating data.
Guilford reasoned that the components of
intelligence could be organized into three dimen-
sions: operations, contents, and products. The
operations are cognition, memory, divergent
production (constructing logical alternatives),
convergent production (constructing logic-tight
arguments), and evaluation. The content dimension
involves the areas of information in which the
operations are performed: figural, symbolic, seman-
tic, and behavioral. Finally, when a particular men-
tal operation is applied to a specific type of content,
there are six possible products: units, classes,
systems, relations, transformations, and implications.
If we contemplate all possible combinations, we
arrive at 120 separate intellectual abilities. Perhaps
the most widely held reservation about Guilford’s
approach is that it is a taxonomy or classification
rather than a theory.
More Recent Developments. Traditionally, intel-
ligence tests have been constructed to assess what we
know or can do. Recent approaches, however, have
begun to take on a highly cognitive or information-
processing look. For example, some researchers try
to describe a person’s moment-by-moment attempts
to solve a problem—from the moment a stimulus
registers to the person’s verbal or motor response.
This is a more dynamic view of intelligence than
the older theories of mental components. Some of
these researchers have focused on speed of informa-
tion processing and others on strategies of processing.
A number of levels of processing have been studied,
including speed of processing, speed in making
choices in response to stimuli, and speed with
which individuals can extract various aspects of
language from their long-term memory. But many
problems and questions remain. Is there a central
processing mechanism for information? How do
the processing elements change as the person devel-
ops? Are there general problem-solving skills or
merely skills specific to certain ability areas? Perhaps
time will tell.
Gardner (1983, 1999) has described a theory of
multiple intelligences. Human intellectual compe-
tence involves a set of problem-solving skills that
enable the person to resolve problems or difficulties.
Sometimes this results in the potential for acquiring
new information. To date, Gardner has described a
family of eight intelligences: linguistic, musical,
logical-mathematical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic, nat-
uralistic, interpersonal, and intrapersonal (Chen &
Gardner, 2005). For example, the interpersonal refers
to the ability to notice, appreciate, and make distinc-
tions among other individuals in terms of feelings,
beliefs, and intentions. A major criticism of Gardner’s
theory is that some of his proposed“intelligences”
may be better conceptualized as“talents”than as
forms of intelligence (Neisser et al., 1996). Never-
theless, Gardner’s views have attracted a great deal of
attention from psychologists and educators alike and
emphasize areas of potential and ability that are not
tapped by traditional psychological tests.
To cite another example of a theory of multi-
ple forms of intelligence, Sternberg (1985, 1991,
2005) has proposed atriarchic theory of intelligence.
He maintains that people function on the basis of
three aspects of intelligence: componential, experi-
ential, and contextual. This approach deemphasizes
speed and accuracy of performance. Instead, the
emphasis is on planning responses and monitoring
them. The componential aspect refers to analytical
thinking; high scores would characterize the person
who is a good test-taker. The experiential aspect
relates to creative thinking and characterizes the
person who can take separate elements of experi-
ence and combine them insightfully. Finally, the
contextual aspect is seen in the person who is
“street smart”—one who is practical, knows how
to play the game, and can successfully manipulate
the environment. According to Sternberg, a per-
son’s performance is governed by these three
aspects of intelligence. However, whether all the
foregoing can account for individual differences or
is just a theory of cognition is debatable.
Although Spearman, Thurstone, and others
may seem to have given way to Cattell, Guilford,
Gardner, or Sternberg, clinicians’day-to-day use of
tests suggests that they have not really outgrown theTHE ASSESSMENT OF INTELLIGENCE 199