Threes

Professor Robert Sternberg is a well known researcher in psychology, and he's a man with a passion for threes - that is, the theories for which he is most well known include a triarchic theory of intelligence and a triangular theory of love.

I'm recording this here 'cos I want to come back to it after I've finished digesting all of the relevant components of 'Principles of Psychological Assessment', and survived biting my nails through to the quick in sheer nervousness about my upcoming exams. There's something in here my brain can't quite catch, but that I want to give my consciousness a chance to apprehend. Maybe typing it out will help.

Sternberg's triarchic theory of intelligence proposes three fundamental aspects of intelligence - analytic, creative and practical- of which only the first is measured by mainstream tests. His investigations suggest the need for a balance between analytic intelligence on the one hand, and creative and especially practical intelligence on the other....Analytic problems tend to:

a) have been formulated by other people;

b) be clearly defined;

c) come with all the information needed to solve them;

d) have only one single right answer;

e) be disembodied from ordinary experience;

f) have little or no intrinsic interest.

Practical problems on the other hand:

a) require recognition and formulation;

b) are poorly defined;

c) require information seeking;

d) have various acceptable solutions;

e) are embedded in and require everyday experience;

f) require motivation and personal involvement.

One important form of practical intelligence is 'tacit knowledge', defined by Sternberg and his collaborators as 'action-oriented knowledge, acquired without direct help from others, that allows individuals to achieve goals that they personally value'.

Which is so very different from scaffolding and joint attention, a la Vygotsky, at least in principle.

Mm.

Regardless of the type of intelligence that is being measured - verbal, performance, visio-spatial, reasoning, ability to respond to non-verbal cues (I like this one, even though there are no nearly adequate tests for it, yet), speed-of-processing comes out as a consistent factor that can be isolated on a per-individual basis and remains relatively constant for an individual, over time.

The thing about speed and intelligence, for my mind (ha!), is not so much about ways that You Can Improve Your Speed Of Processing, as the way that it just shows up, in everyday life.

My example today comes from a lady, let's call her 'Andrea', who (and I was going to search for some euphemisms and PC terms, but that does little to dignify her with her actual challenges) is has a mental illness and is mostly homeless, to boot. We catch up for a cup of tea every now and then when we're in the same place, at the same time. Conversation with Andrea gets a little repetitive, but she caught me completely off guard today.....

Andrea: Oh and that Jane girl, you know the one, she gets onto a roll, that girl, and tells the same story, and tells it over and over and over again, and I don't like her, you know, I really don't....

Me: (all serious frown and concern) Why, Andrea?

Andrea: 'Cos she just says the same stuff all the time! (while attempting to catch my eye, and smiling lopsidedly) You know, not like someone else we know......

A thousand blessings upon Andrea, for waking me up from my slumber and sleep, and for sharing a giggle, at that.