29-2 How do Gardner’s and Sternberg’s theories of multiple intelligences differ, and what criticisms have they faced?

Other psychologists, particularly since the mid-1980s, have sought to extend the definition of intelligence beyond the idea of academic smarts.

Howard Gardner has identified eight relatively independent intelligences, including the verbal and mathematical aptitudes assessed by standard tests (FIGURE 29.1). Thus, the computer programmer, the poet, the street-smart adolescent who becomes a crafty executive, and the basketball team’s play-making point guard exhibit different kinds of intelligence (Gardner, 1998). Gardner (1999) has also proposed a ninth possible intelligence—existential intelligence—the ability “to ponder large questions about life, death, existence.”

Gardner (1983, 2006; 2011; Davis et al., 2011) views these intelligence domains as multiple abilities that come in different packages. Brain damage, for example, may destroy one ability but leave others intact. And consider people with savant syndrome. Despite their island of brilliance, these people often score low on intelligence tests and may have limited or no language ability (Treffert & Wallace, 2002). Some can compute complicated calculations quickly and accurately, or identify the day of the week corresponding to any given historical date, or render incredible works of art or musical performance (Miller, 1999).

About 4 in 5 people with savant syndrome are males, and many also have autism spectrum disorder (ASD), a developmental disorder. The late memory whiz Kim Peek (who did not have ASD) inspired the movie Rain Man. In 8 to 10 seconds, he could read and remember a page. During his lifetime, he memorized 9000 books, including Shakespeare’s works and the Bible. He could provide GPS-like travel directions within any major U.S. city, yet he could not button his clothes. And he had little capacity for abstract concepts. Asked by his father at a restaurant to lower his voice, he slid lower in his chair to lower his voice box. Asked for Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, he responded, “227 North West Front Street. But he only stayed there one night—he gave the speech the next day” (Treffert & Christensen, 2005).

388

Robert Sternberg (1985, 2011) agrees with Gardner that there is more to success than traditional intelligence and that we have multiple intelligences. But his triarchic theory proposes three, not eight or nine, intelligences:

With support from the U.S. College Board (which administers the widely used SAT Reasoning Test to U.S. college and university applicants), Sternberg (2006, 2007, 2010) and a team of collaborators have developed new measures of creativity (such as thinking up a caption for an untitled cartoon) and practical thinking (such as figuring out how to move a large bed up a winding staircase). These more comprehensive assessments improve prediction of American students’ first-year college grades, and they do so with reduced ethnic-group differences.

389

Gardner and Sternberg differ on specific points, but they agree on two important points: Multiple abilities can contribute to life success, and differing varieties of giftedness add spice to life and challenges for education. Under their influence, many teachers have been trained to appreciate such variety and to apply multiple intelligence theories in their classrooms.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the world were so just that a weakness in one area would be compensated by genius in another? Alas, say critics, the world is not just (Ferguson, 2009; Scarr, 1989). Research using factor analysis confirms that there is a general intelligence factor (Johnson et al., 2008): g matters. It predicts performance on various complex tasks and in various jobs (Gottfredson, 2002a,b, 2003a,b; see also FIGURE 29.2). Much as jumping ability is not a predictor of jumping performance when the bar is set a foot off the ground—but becomes a predictor when the bar is set higher—so extremely high cognitive ability scores predict exceptional attainments, such as doctoral degrees and publications (Kuncel & Hezlett, 2010).

390

Even so, “success” is not a one-ingredient recipe. High intelligence may help you get into a profession (via the schools and training programs that take you there), but it won’t make you successful once there. Success is a combination of talent with grit: Those who become highly successful tend also to be conscientious, well-connected, and doggedly energetic. K. Anders Ericsson (2002, 2007; Ericsson et al., 2007) reports a 10-year rule: A common ingredient of expert performance in chess, dancing, sports, computer programming, music, and medicine is “about 10 years of intense, daily practice” (Ericsson, 2002, 2007; Simon & Chase, 1973). Becoming a professional musician requires a certain cognitive ability. But it also requires practice—about 11,000 hours on average, and a minimum of 3000 hours (Campitelli & Gobet, 2011). The recipe for success is a gift of nature plus a whole lot of nurture.