Intelligence Can Be Used to Make a More Equitable Society but Only When Properly Defined and Applied

Abstract

In the US, undeniable evidence shows that socioeconomic inequities explain a high proportion of individual differences in school achievement. Although not all countries show this same effect due to socioeconomic status, it is consistently found that social inequities lead to achievement gaps. These achievement gaps then manifest into trajectories that set some individuals on a path of lower incomes, poorer health and higher mortality, lower wellbeing, and other poor adult outcomes. Like James Flynn so handily reminded the scientific literature that achievement gaps are explainable by environmental factors, the inequities we see around the world are based on environments some children are exposed to. In his work, Flynn stated his belief that the suppression of scientific work on intelligence would continue to lead to social inequities. We wish to take this idea and move it forward. We believe that the scientific construct of intelligence plays a key role in helping create a more equitable society through science. We also believe that the poor perception of intelligence, rooted in historical realities, means that it will continue to be misunderstood, feared, and misused, limiting how effective it could be in helping to close gaps in achievement and in creating a more equitable society.

A Psychometric Network Analysis of CHC Intelligence Measures: Implications for Research, Theory, and Interpretation of Broad CHC Scores “Beyond g”

“…An intriguing recent suggestion, albeit likely controversial in some circles given the historical realities and track record of intelligence testing and theories with marginalized groups, is that newer non- g emergent property theories of intelligence might lead to better intervention research for individuals who have been marginalized by society. Holden and Hart ( 2021 ) suggest that network-based theories, particularly those that feature Gwm-AC mechanisms (process overlap theory in particular) may hold promise as a vehicle for improving, and not harming, social justice and equity practices and valued outcomes for individuals in marginalized groups. For example, stereotype threat ( Spencer et al 2016 ; Steele and Aronson 1995 ) has been linked to poorer outcomes in performance settings where an individual’s group membership is salient, a situation that can negatively impact an individual’s Gwm-AC complex, executive functions, and more deliberate controlled cognitive processing mechanisms ( Holden and Hart 2021 ; Spencer et al 2016 ).…”

“… Holden and Hart ( 2021 ) suggest that network-based theories, particularly those that feature Gwm-AC mechanisms (process overlap theory in particular) may hold promise as a vehicle for improving, and not harming, social justice and equity practices and valued outcomes for individuals in marginalized groups. For example, stereotype threat ( Spencer et al 2016 ; Steele and Aronson 1995 ) has been linked to poorer outcomes in performance settings where an individual’s group membership is salient, a situation that can negatively impact an individual’s Gwm-AC complex, executive functions, and more deliberate controlled cognitive processing mechanisms ( Holden and Hart 2021 ; Spencer et al 2016 ). The identification of the central Gwm-AC complex and a possible System I-II cognitive processing dimension in the current study aligns with Holden and Hart ’s ( 2021 ) proposal that these cognitive constructs should be featured in a variety of potential interventions for learners who experience learning difficulties, and as articulated by Holden and Hart ( 2021 ), to potentially mitigate the impact of stereotype threat in certain marginalized groups.…”

“…For example, stereotype threat ( Spencer et al 2016 ; Steele and Aronson 1995 ) has been linked to poorer outcomes in performance settings where an individual’s group membership is salient, a situation that can negatively impact an individual’s Gwm-AC complex, executive functions, and more deliberate controlled cognitive processing mechanisms ( Holden and Hart 2021 ; Spencer et al 2016 ). The identification of the central Gwm-AC complex and a possible System I-II cognitive processing dimension in the current study aligns with Holden and Hart ’s ( 2021 ) proposal that these cognitive constructs should be featured in a variety of potential interventions for learners who experience learning difficulties, and as articulated by Holden and Hart ( 2021 ), to potentially mitigate the impact of stereotype threat in certain marginalized groups. In contrast, common cause factor models that include a dominant psychometric or theoretical g construct hold little promise for helping individuals as a century of research has not yet found convincing evidence-based practice approaches for “moving the needle” on general intelligence.…”

“…However, attempts to improve theoretical g (whatever that may be) have largely been proven unsuccessful (when change is reflected in increases in the psychometric g variable, either represented by a global IQ score or a latent factor). These common cause g -dominated models also tend to promote (imply) the harmful and pessimistic notion of biological determinism and immutability of intellectual functioning ( Holden and Hart 2021 ).…”

Developmental behavioral genetics research on school achievement is missing vulnerable children, to our detriment

“…We need to be purposely antiracist in our science (Roberts & Rollins, 2020). We are not the first to say that developmental science (Syed et al., 2018), intelligence and achievement research (Holden & Hart, 2021), or behavioral genetics (Oni‐Orisan et al., 2021) need to include more racialized participants. Indeed, even the National Institutes of Health issued a request to have more racialized participants (policy announcement NOT‐OD‐15−102).…”