What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought, Keith E. Stanovich, Yale University Press, 2009.
Many prominent thinkers over the last few years have pointed out that IQ tests fail to test many abilities of the mind that are useful for making our way in the world. Most argue that there are types of intelligence other than what IQ tests measure, such as emotional intelligence. In his insightful book What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought, Keith Stanovich frames the problem differently. He argues that it is acceptable and even useful to limit the term “intelligence” to the abilities that IQ tests measure, but that in addition to Intelligence Quotient (IQ), a measure of algorithmic thinking, we should also assess Rational Quotient (RQ), a measure of reflective thinking. IQ fails to measure our ability to exercise good judgment and to make good decisions. Smart people often do dumb things. This is because there is almost no correlation between intelligence and our ability to think rationally, that is to avoid thinking errors that lead to poor judgments and the resulting bad decisions that undermine our best interests.Testing IQ has become thoroughly integrated into American society and values. Stanovich points out that “In our society, what gets measured gets valued.” IQ, either measured directly or through proxy tests such as the SAT, has become the standard that determines academic and professional opportunities, yet it entirely fails to measure people’s ability to think rationally, which is every bit as important. In fact, because rationality has been so thoroughly ignored, we now have an American workforce that is sadly lacking in this critical ability. People throughout organizations, from the lowliest workers to the loftiest leaders, make bad decisions that undermine their interests based on irrational, error-prone assessments of the situations rather than rational consideration of available evidence. In his book Breakdown of Will (2001), George Ainslie describes the situation we find ourselves in today:
The prosperity of modern civilization contrasts more and more sharply with people’s choice of seemingly irrational, perverse behaviors, behaviors that make many individuals unhappier than the poorest hunger/gathers. As our technical skills overcome hunger, cold, disease, and even tedium, the willingness of individuals to defeat their own purposes stands in even sharper contrast.
That we focus so much attention on intelligence and value it so greatly is not the problem; the problem is that we focus on and value it so exclusively. It makes perfect sense to value intelligence, because life in the modern world has become increasingly complex. This is certainly true of business. Consider the world of banking. In the movie “It’s a Wonderful Life,” the local banker who lent money to familiar folks in his community could have managed with less intelligence than the bank executives of today who oversee dozens of departments that each handle a host of intricately complicated financial transactions. But back then and now, a high level of rationality has always been required. Its importance, nevertheless, has become under-appreciated.
Legal scholar Jeffrey Rachlinski points out a problem with the way professionals are trained today:
In most professions, people are trained in the jargon and skill necessary to understand the profession, but are not necessarily given training specifically in making the kind of decisions that members of the profession have to make.On several occasions, I’ve written and spoken about this problem, especially as it relates to data analysis and presentation. Rather than learning the concepts and skills that are required, we put a software product on employees’ computers and assume that this is all they need. Software vendors have long promoted this line of reasoning in the way that they market their “intuitive,” “self-service” products.
The truth is, we need a full range of cognitive skills to face the challenges of the workplace and of life in general. As a culture, we must embrace rationality by promoting its value and supporting its development and use as thoroughly as we’ve embraced intelligence.
What does Stanovich mean by rationality?
To think rationally means adopting appropriate goals, taking the appropriate action given one’s goals and beliefs, and holding beliefs that are commensurate with available evidence.Not everything in life requires rationality or even intelligence (that is, what IQ measures). Much of what we do is effectively managed through autonomous mental processes that involve neither. This is great, because it frees up the higher-order processes of cognition, which require conscious attention and greater energy, from being wasted on menial tasks. Walking and even driving are activities that are handled primarily by the autonomous mind. While the autonomous mind does a great job, we get into trouble when we let it handle situations that require higher-order cognition?intelligence and rationality rather than the automatic rules of thumb that the autonomous mind uses to make decisions. One of the important roles of the reflective mind is to interrupt autonomous processing when higher forms of thinking are required. To make better decisions, we need to value and develop the strengths of our reflective minds. Two important rational abilities, especially for data analysis, are the ability to reason logically and the ability to think in terms of probabilities. Unfortunately, relatively few people have been trained in these skills.
Stanovich explains how thinking works based on this tripartite model consisting of the autonomous mind, algorithmic mind, and reflective mind. He talks about the role, importance, strengths and weaknesses of each. He spends a lot of time describing the causes of errors in rational processing (what he calls dysrationalia) and how we can avoid them. And, thankfully, he gives us hope by showing that rational thinking, unlike most intelligence, can be learned. He’s on a mission to make this happen. If you believe in the importance of rationally informed decision making and agree that it’s lacking, I recommend that you read this compelling book.
Take care,
Questions Concerning Mood / Life Satisfaction
Please answer the following items as truthfully as possible so that your results will be helpful to you. Please rate each thought in terms of the degree to which you believe it.
A. I am generally dissatisfied with my life. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree B. I have been feeling depressed lately. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree C. I usually feel depressed. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree D. I have been feeling nervous / anxious lately. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree E. I usually feel nervous / anxious. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree F. I have been feeling angry lately. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree G. I usually feel angry. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree |
Rational Thinking QuestionnaireTM Please answer the following items as truthfully as possible so that your results will be helpful to you. The items are thoughts that relate to yourself and the world around you. Please rate each thought in terms of the degree to which you believe it. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 2. People can make you upset. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 3. I can’t stand certain things in my life. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 4. Some things in life are simply awful and terrible. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 5. I need to think well of myself before I can do certain things. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 6. How I feel depends on how people treat me. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 7. People can’t feel and act better until their situation changes. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 8. You can’t trust someone again after they have violated your trust. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 9. People need to be concerned about other peoples’ opinions. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree10. If I do something good, I should be rewarded. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 11. If I treat people well, they should treat me well, too. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree12. If I am the only one thinking a certain way, then I must be wrong. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree13. If it feels right, it must be right. If it feels wrong, it must be wrong. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree14. It’s important for a person to follow his or her gut instinct. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree15. If I do something wrong, I should punish myself for it. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 16. I must have everyone like me and approve of me. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 17. I must do well and win the approval of others or else I am no good. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 18. I must be competent and successful. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 19. I must successfully avoid unpleasant or undesirable situations. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 20. I must think, feel and act the same as I always have. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 21. I must find order, certainty, and predictability in life. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 22. I must depend on other people because I can't depend on myself. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 23. I must rate myself as either "good" and "worthy," or "bad" and "worthless." Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 24. I must never feel depressed, anxious, or enraged. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 25. Everybody should treat everyone else (especially me) in a fair and considerate manner. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 26. Other people must not act incompetently or unwisely. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 27. Talented people must use their talent. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 28. Other people must not criticize me. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 29. Things must go the way I want them to go. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 30. I must constantly worry about life's predicaments. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 31. I must avoid, rather than face and deal with, life's difficulties and responsibilities. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 32. Justice, fairness, equality, democracy and other "right" values must prevail. I can't stand it when my values are stepped on. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 33. I must not die prematurely. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 34. My life must have meaning and purpose. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 35. If I do not see a solution to my problems, one doesn't exist. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 36. If I have tried to achieve a goal and failed, that means that I do not have the potential to achieve it. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 37. Life should be fair. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 38. Loneliness is a terrible thing and must be avoided at all cost. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 39. Boredom is a terrible thing and must be avoided at all cost. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 40. Everyone has to die at some point, so there is no point in taking care of your body. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 41. I am forced to do certain things, like pay taxes, work, or do my homework. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 42. People need love and affection. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 43. I should never be denied pleasure. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 44. I must achieve perfection with everything I do. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 45. Feeling upset is intolerable. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 46. If people cannot see something, then it doesn't exist. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 47. You are a victim of your childhood and past. What happens to a person affects him or her forever. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 48. The best way to discover what is real is to go with what most people say. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 49. People should love you no matter how you act. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 50. If I have a right to do something, then it makes sense to do it. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 51. If something doesn't come easily, then forget it. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree |
Rationality vs. Intelligence
By Keith E. Stanovich
Project Syndicate
TORONTO ― In 2002, the cognitive scientist Daniel Kahneman of Princeton University won the Nobel Prize in Economics for work done with his longtime collaborator Amos Tversky (who died in 1996).
Their work had to do with judgment and decision-making ― what makes our thoughts and actions rational or irrational. They explored how people make choices and assess probabilities, and uncovered basic errors that are typical in decision-making.
The thinking errors they uncovered are not trivial mistakes in a parlor game. To be rational means to adopt appropriate goals, take the appropriate action given one's goals and beliefs, and hold beliefs that are commensurate with available evidence. It means achieving one's life goals using the best means possible.
To violate the thinking rules examined by Kahneman and Tversky thus has the practical consequence that we are less satisfied with our lives than we might be.
Research conducted in my own laboratory has indicated that there are systematic individual differences in the judgment and decision-making skills that Kahneman and Tversky studied.
Ironically, the Nobel Prize was awarded for studies of cognitive characteristics that are entirely missing from the most well-known mental assessment device in the behavioral sciences: intelligence tests.
Scientists and laypeople alike tend to agree that ``good thinking" encompasses sound judgment and decision-making ― the type of thinking that helps us achieve our goals. Yet assessments of such good (rational) thinking are nowhere to be found on IQ tests.
Intelligence tests measure important things, but they do not assess the extent of rational thought. This might not be such a grave omission if intelligence were a strong predictor of rational thinking.
But my research group found just the opposite: it is a mild predictor at best, and some rational thinking skills are totally dissociated from intelligence.
To an important degree, intelligence tests determine the academic and professional careers of millions of people in many countries.
Children are given intelligence tests to determine eligibility for admission to school programs for the gifted. Corporations and the military depend on assessment and sorting devices that are little more than disguised intelligence tests.
Perhaps some of this attention to intelligence is necessary, but what is not warranted is the tendency to ignore cognitive capacities that are at least equally important: the capacities that sustain rational thought and action.
Critics of intelligence tests have long pointed out that the tests ignore important parts of mental life, mainly non-cognitive domains such as socio-emotional abilities, empathy, and interpersonal skills.
But intelligence tests are also radically incomplete as measures of cognitive functioning, which is evident from the simple fact that many people display a systematic inability to think or behave rationally despite having a more than adequate IQ.
For a variety of reasons, we have come to overvalue the kinds of thinking skills that intelligence tests measure and undervalue other important cognitive skills, such as the ability to think rationally.
Psychologists have studied the major classes of thinking errors that make people less than rational.
They have studied people's tendencies to show incoherent probability assessments; to be overconfident in knowledge judgments; to ignore the alternative hypothesis; to evaluate evidence with a ``my side" bias; to show inconsistent preferences because of framing effects; to over-weigh short-term rewards at the expense of long-term well-being; to allow decisions to be affected by irrelevant context; and many others.
All of these categories of failure of rational judgment and decision-making are very imperfectly correlated with intelligence ― meaning that IQ tests tend not to capture individual differences in rational thought.
Intelligence tests measure mental skills that have been studied for a long time, whereas psychologists have only recently had the tools to measure the tendencies toward rational and irrational thinking.
Nevertheless, recent progress in the cognitive science of rational thought suggests that nothing ― save for money ― would stop us from constructing an ``RQ" test.
Such a test might prove highly useful. Suboptimal investment decisions have, for example, been linked to overconfidence in knowledge judgments, the tendency to over-explain chance events, and the tendency to substitute affective valence for thought.
Errors in medical and legal decision-making have also been linked to specific irrational thinking tendencies that psychologists have studied.
There are strategies and environmental fixes for the thinking errors that occur in all of these domains. But it is important to realize that these thinking errors are more related to rationality than intelligence. They would be reduced if schools, businesses, and government focused on the parts of cognition that intelligence tests miss.
Instead, these institutions still devote far more attention and resources to intelligence than to teaching people how to think in order to reach their goals. It is as if intelligence has become totemic in our culture.
But what we should really be pursuing is development of the reasoning strategies that could substantially increase human well-being.
Keith E. Stanovich is professor of human development and applied psychology at the University of Toronto and the author of ``What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought." For more stories, visit Project Syndicate (www.project-syndicate.org). The Korea Times
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기