Validity of Various Intelligence Theorists
Thurstone, Gardner, Guilford, Spearman, and Sternberg all had great theories about intelligence. With Thurstones statistical procedure, Gardners Multiple Intelligence aspects, Guildfords Three Dimensions, Spearmans Specific Mental Abilities, and Sternbergs three aspects of a personality. All of them have flaws or problems and can be personally reflected by myself.
Thurstone opposed the general intelligence concept, which states that every task is measured by an intelligence test. Thurstones theory of factor analysis was used to identify different strengths and weaknesses. Factor analysis is a statistical procedure, which identifies clusters of related items, also called factors, on a test. The flaw in this theory is that it is a culturally biased. Other cultures may have stronger strengths in different intelligence areas such as math, science, English, etc. Another flaw would be gender. Men and women both have different strengths and weaknesses such as different experiences in life. Another flaw may be that not everybody in the entire world either has one weakness or a certain strength. Thurstones factor analysis doesn’t analyze every single strength and weakness, which would be impossible.
Gardner believed in multiple intelligences, which included eight aspects including spatial, linguistic, logic, math related, bodily kinesthetic, musical interpersonal, intrapersonal, and naturalistic. Multiple intelligences is the idea that rather than having one single intelligence that is used in multiple areas, we have many different independent intelligences. Breaking down all of these aspects into a study will provide much more accurate interpretations of intelligences rather than a more broad ones like Sternbergs three aspects. One flaw I found with multiple intelligence is that there are so many factors that it isn’t as applicable to the general population today. Also, Gardeners...