topic 1: intelligence Flashcards
1
Q
van leewen
how does research into intelligence be seen as reductionist
A
- Point: it would be reductionist to assume that intelligence is simply due to genetics 1
- Example: Van leeuwen’s research suggests intelligence is 67% down to genetics
- Explanation: to only focus on the single factor or genetics ignores the role of other biological factors or environmental factors in the development of intelligence
- Counter-argument: However, it is important to try to find out the extent to which genetics influences intelligence even if there isnt much that could be done to change it.
2
Q
schoenthaler
how does research into intelligence be seen as reductionist
A
- Point: It would be reductionist to focus on diet as the only way to improve peoples scores on tests of intelligence
- Example: Schoenthalers research found that vitamins improved IQ scores by 15 points
- Explanation: To only focus on vitamins as the single factor influencing intelligence ignores the potential for other factors to influence intelligence (e.g. education)
- Counter-argument: However, focusing on a single factor can provide information about the extent to which it affects outcomes and this can be especially useful if it could lead to cost-effective interventions
3
Q
How can research into intelligence be seen as holistic
A
- Point: It is more holistic to consider a range of intelligences within a person, rather than just focusing on one
- Example: Gardner highlights seven different intelligences including bodily kinaesthetic, musical and interpersonal skills
- Explanation: Allowing for the possibility of multiple way of being intelligent is much more holistic than working with a narrow definition of intelligence that reduces it down to logical-mathematical and/or linguistic ability
- Counter-argument: However, there may be other ways of being intelligent than the seven orignically identitified by Garder, so even his theory may not be as holistic and all-embracing as he would like it to be
4
Q
van leeuwen
How can research into intelligence be seen as socially sensitive
A
- Point: Research into intelligence can be sensitive to parents who are less intelligent
- Example: Van leeuwans research suggests that intelligence is 67% down to genetics
- Explanation: This could be sensitive to adults who believe they are less intelligent as they might feel judged if they decide to have children, or to those who already have children
- Counter-argument: However, parents can try and encourage their children to engage in stimulating environments which would boost their intelligence
5
Q
How can research into intelligence be seen as NOT socially sensitive
A
- Point: Research into intelligence can be less sensitive if it encourages greater value to be placed on non-academic intelligences
- Example: Gardner highlights seven different inteligences including bodily kinaestehtic, musical and interpersonal skills
- Explanation: This would be less sensitive as its acknowledging and celeberating the diversity of people, rather than only focusing on those who are academically able (e.g. linguistic or logical)
- Counter-argument: However, educational systems still tend to value linguistic and mathemtaical skills more, so parents may be concerned about their childrens prospects in exams, even if the child has highly developed interpersonal ability
6
Q
schoenthaler
How can research into intelligence be seen as socially sensitive
A
- Point: Research into intelligence can be seen as socially sensitive to those who are low on income
- Example: For example, schoenthalers research found that vitamins improved IQ scores by 15 points
- Explanation: This could be sensitive to families on low incomes as they would struggle ti find the additional money to buy vitamin and mineral supplements
- Counter-argument: However, it is still important research and vitamin supplements would be a relatively low-cost solution which could be fuded by the state for those on particularly low incomes
7
Q
How can research into intelligence be seen as NOT scientific
A
- Point: Research into intelligence is not scientific when it is subjective
- Example: In the draw-a-person by Goodenough-harris, some of the scoring is open to interpretation (e.g. whether the proportions of the person are correct)
- Explanation: This can make the research more subjective and potentially mean that two people may not score a drawing in the same way
- Counter-argument: However, if a researcher is open in acknowledging their biases, then this can be in many ways make a study more honest than one where the researcher tries insisitng that they are totally objective and have no biases
8
Q
van leeuwen
How can research into intelligence be seen as scientific
A
- Point: Research into intelligence is scientific when it involves the use of a testable hypothesis
- Example: Van leeuwen et al tested the hypothesis that the scores of MZ twins on intelligence tests would be more similar to each other than those of DZ twins
- Explanation: Having a testable hypothesis is scientific because the subsequent research may support the hypothesis or may require it to be rejected
- Counter-argument: However, it would be possible to have a testable hypothesis and still not be scientific (e.g. if the subsequent research was not sufficiently controlled or if data was ‘cleansed’ to fix the results
9
Q
schoenthaler
How can research into intelligence be seen as scientific
A
- Point: Research into intelligence is scientific when it is replicable
- Example: The clear procedure of group allocation, the timing and the process of testing could all be repeated in the future by the same or different researchers, making it replicable
- Explanation: Schoenthaler’s study gave all the 615 children studied the same Wechsler IQ tests and they were randomly assigned to one of four vitamin groups for a 12-week period
- Counter-argument: However, just because a study has a replicable procedure doesnt necessarily mean that the same results would always be obtained if or when it was repeated.
10
Q
How would you assess the intelligence….?
A
- Ravens progressive matrices
- Draw a person test
- Multiple intelligence
11
Q
structure for suggestion question.
(question c)
A
- 3 paragraphs
- Suggestion [What would you do]
- Implementation [How would you do this]
- Rationale [Why is it a good idea]
REPEAT 3 TIMES
12
Q
structure for methodological issue (question b)
A
- DoT and 3 PEECs
- Define term
- Point
- Example
- Explanation
- Counter-arguments
REPEAT 3 TIMES
13
Q
structure for question (a)
A
- **half-and-half **approach
- description of study: aim,procedure,findings,conclusion
- application of study according to the question [suggests 2-3 ways in which the study could explain ____]
