2. 职称英语
  3. Early intelligence tests were not without their critics. Man enduring concer

Early intelligence tests were not without their critics. Man enduring concer

游客2023-08-25  19
问题     Early intelligence tests were not without their critics. Man enduring concerns were first raised by the influential journalist Walter Lippman, in a series of published debates with Lewis Terman, of Stanford University, the father of IQ testing in America. Lippman pointed out the superficiality of the questions, their possible cultural biases, and the risks of trying to determine a person’s intellectual potential with a brief oral or paper-and-pencil measure.
    Perhaps surprisingly, the conceptualization of intelligence did not advance much in the decades following Terman’s pioneering contributions. Intelligence tests came to be seen, rightly or wrongly, as primarily a tool for selecting people to fill academic or vocational niches. In one of the most famous remarks about intelligence testing, the influential Harvard psychologist E. G. Boring declared, "Intelligence is what the tests test." So long as these tests did what they were supposed to do(that is, give some indication of school success), it did not seem necessary or prudent to probe too deeply into their meaning or to explore alternative views of the human intellect.
    Psychologists who study intelligence have argued chiefly about two questions. The first: Is intelligence singular, or does it consist of various more or less independent intellectual faculties? The purists — ranging from the turn-of-the-century English psychologist Charles Spearman to his latter-day disciples Richard J. Herrntein and Charles Murray — defend the notion of a single overarching "g". The pluralists — ranging from L. L. Thurstone, of the University of Chicargo, who posited seven vectors of the mind, to J. P. Guilford, of the University of Southern California, who discerned 150 factors of the intellect — construe intelligence as composed of some or even many dissociable components.
    The public is more interested in the second question: Is intelligence(or are intelligences)largely inherited? This is by and large a Western question. In the Confucian societies of East Asia individual differences in endowment are assumed to be modest, and differences in achievement are thought to be due largely to effort. In the West, however, many students of the subject sympathize with the view that intelligence is inborn and one can do little to alter one’s intellectual birthright.
    Studies of identical twins reared apart provide surprisingly strong support for the "heritability" of psychometric intelligence. That is, if one wants to predict someone’s score on an intelligence test, the scores of the biological parents(even if the child has not had appreciable contact with them)are more likely to prove relevant than the scores of the adoptive parents. By the same token, the IQs of identical twins are more similar than the IQs of fraternal twins. And, contrary to common sense, the IQs of biologically related people grow closer in the later years of life. [br] The divergence between the purists and the pluralists is that the purists______.
选项 A、think intelligence is inborn but the pluralists don’t think so
B、don’t think intelligence is composed of many components but the pluralists think it has
C、think intelligence tests are useful in deciding one’s IQ but the pluralists don’t thinks so
D、think intelligence could be influenced by environment but the pluralists don’t think so
答案 B
解析 根据题干中的the purists和the pluralists将本题出处定位于第3段。该段主要是关于研究智力的心理学家们所争论的第一个问题，即：Is intelligence singular…?(智力是单一的还是由其他各种独立的功能组成?)。通过阅读该段可发现纯化论者认为智力是单一的，而多元论者则认为智力是由多种独立成分构成的，综合上面分析可知，the purists和the pluralists的分歧点就在于二者对智力的组成成分的看法不同，B)正好说明了这一点，故为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2956433.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)