Psychometric View of Intelligence

According to the most well known theory,, intelligence is understood  as a single, general cognitive ability, measured by standardised IQ tests – giving you an ‘IQ level’ such as 105.  This view was heavily influenced by the early 20th-century psychometric approaches, with Charles Spearman’s (1904) theory of general intelligence, or “g factor,” being particularly influential. Spearman proposed that intelligence is a general cognitive ability that influences performance across different cognitive tasks. According to this perspective, while individuals may have varying ability levels across different types of tasks (such as, verbal, mathematical, spatial abilities), a single underlying factor contributes to performance across all these domains.

The Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of cognitive abilities (McGrew and colleagues) perhaps offers the  most comprehensive and empirically supported framework in the psychometrics tradition. The CHC theory provides a detailed hierarchical model of intelligence that includes a spectrum of ‘broad’ cognitive abilities.

Stratum III (Top Level): At the apex of the hierarchy is the general intelligence (“g factor”).

Stratum II (Middle Level): This level consists of broad abilities including fluid intelligence (Gf), which involves reasoning, problem-solving, and the ability to learn new information; crystallized intelligence (Gc), representing accumulated knowledge and skills, quantitative reasoning (Gq), reading and writing ability (Grw), short term memory (Gsm), long-term storage and retrieval (Glr), visual processing (Gv), auditory processing (Ga), processing speed (Gs), and decision/reaction time/speed (Gt).

Stratum I (Bottom Level): This level includes more narrow and specific cognitive skills and abilities that fall under the broader categories of Stratum II – such as visual rotation ability under the broader category of visual processing.

.

The psychometric IQ account has a number of shortcomings the Trident framework overcomes:

1. Executive Functions: Traditional psychometric IQ tests overlook specific executive functions like attention focus and inhibitory control which is pivotal for goal-directed behavior and self-regulation in the face of distractions or default behaviours. 
2. Goal-Attainment: Traditional IQ tests are focused on symbolic problem-solving and memory.  This is important to measure as an important dimension of intelligence, but it does not extend to what is equally important – intelligence in action; that is, strategic decision-making and ability to attain our goals efficiently.
3. Creative Problem-Solving: Traditional tests often fail to measure the creative aspects of problem-solving, such as the ability to generate novel solutions or insights. Creative problem solving and innovation are important aspects of intelligence.
4. Cognitive Resilience: Intelligence clearly depends on our ability to function effectively across a range of stress levels and challenges. Traditional psychometric measures do not assess this important dimension of general intelligence.
5. Emotional & Social Intelligence: The psychometric understanding of intelligence is confined to processing abstract symbolic or visuospatial information, but not the complex emotional, motivational, social and cultural dimensions of life.
6. Situated Cognition: Traditional measures of IQ do not assess our ability to use external tools and networks to solve problems or reach decisions, such as we do in everyday life – through intelligent systems, apps, social networks and AI.  Intelligence is extended beyond what we can process just in our independent minds.
7. Intelligence Changes over Time Traditional psychometrics typically do not account for the dynamic interactions between individuals and their environments over time, nor do they explain how intelligence can be enhanced through circumstances – such as higher education – via the well-known multiplier effect.  

Jordan Peterson – the clinical psychologist  and public speaker – is someone who is deterministic about IQ. He believes that you have a fixed IQ and that there’s nothing you can do to improve it: you need to find the right job for your IQ in the ‘hierarchy of competence’ – or you will be out of your depth and miserable. How smart you are according to Peterson is genetically hardwired and there is little you can do to change this.

Some people are naturally smart: they learn quickly, grasp complex matters, problem solve effectively and make good decisions. Others struggle. Some people are gifted – the cognitive elites with IQs of 130 plus (Mensa standard). They are destined for the Ivy League colleges and their brilliance entitles them to the highest leadership roles in society and the highest paid jobs. Others can’t attain this no matter how hard they work at it: their genetics simply prevent it.

But is this true? Is IQ genetically determined, constraining you like a tram-track?

The answer is clearly no as can be inferred from the following facts.

20 point IQ changes through education

Cathy Price at University College London and her colleagues tracked the IQs of 33 adolescents between 12- to 16-years-old for four years. Fluctuations in IQ were enormous: up to 20-plus IQ points, one way or another – enough to take a person of ‘high average’ intelligence to ‘gifted’ status, or vice versa. And these changes in IQ were associated with substantial neuroplasticity change in their brains measured by brain scanning. (1) And someone with average high school IQ who earns a university degree can expect their adult IQ level to be the same as someone at high school with an IQ 8 to 23 IQ points higher who did not go to university. So just by virtue of going to university a student may gain an additional 20 IQ points. (2)

15 point IQ gains in mid adulthood

Another study revealed that 8-9% of 30-39 year olds had changed 15 IQ points over an interval of 10 years. Dramatic IQ gains can occur well beyond the 20s when the brain stops maturing in its developmental trajectory from infancy.

20 point IQ increases over generations

If our genes are in control, average national IQ levels should not change over one or two generations. But they have done – dramatically. For instance, 18-year-old Dutch men tested in 1982 scored 20 IQ points higher on the same fluid intelligence tests than did 18-year-old Dutch men in 1952. Between 1950 and 1980 average IQ levels of nations across the globe have increased an average 3-5 points per decade. This is the well-known Flynn Effect. (3) Genetic explanations can be ruled out; the effect is cultural and environmental. (4)

Heritability changes with context

The impact of genetics on IQ compared to environment is measured by a statistic called heritability. This measures whether parents’ genes matter for IQ levels. The story goes that because heritability measures in adulthood are 70-80%, that IQ is ‘mainly genetic’. But this is misleading.

Despite there being no change in the genes with links to IQ, there big differences in measures of heritability across the lifespan ad between generations, and in different social classes and countries.

• Heritability has been measured at ~20% in infancy (where parents’ genes don’t matter much) to ~80% in late adulthood (where parents’ genes matter a lot). (5)
• The heritability of IQ is measured as greater in upper socioeconomic groups than in lower ones. (6)
• The adult heritability of IQ in developed countries is measured to be higher than in developing countries. (6)

It’s clear that IQ can’t become ‘more genetic’ from one context to another when there are no underlying change in the genes. So what’s going on with this measure?

Changing intelligence over the lifespan

Intelligence is better thought of as a vector that can evolve in different directions to different magnitudes and how the vector evolves depends on two-way genetics-environment interactions.

IQ multiplier effects: a ‘law of attraction’

Sauce and Matzel review all the evidence in their 2018 review of the heritability of general intelligence (7) and conclude:

“The influence of genes on IQ, are not as powerful or constrictive as might be assumed. … intelligence seems to be quite malleable, and changes in the environment can, by interacting with genes, explain a great deal of differences in IQ across families, lifespan, socioeconomic status, and generations.” Sauce & Matzel, 2018

Heritability estimates exaggerate the impact of genetics. One way this can happen is through the multiplier effect.

Multiplier effects on IQ works like a ‘law of attraction’. Small initial IQ differences (under 5 IQ points) can magnify quickly over time through ongoing IQ-environment feedback loops into very large IQ differences. (4) Small advantages in genetics or environment can ramify over time through positive feedback loops into large IQ increase:

“… through the interplay between ability and environment, [an] advantage can evolve into something far more potent. So we have found something that acts as a multiplier.” Dickens & Flynn, 2001

For example, someone may start with an IQ of 110 as a child. A small genetic and family advantage can result in getting into a better college, which can result in a cognitively enriching environment that amplifies the initial IQ advantage into something much greater -perhaps an IQ of 130 as a young adult.

This graph illustrates the IQ multiplier process which works on gene-environment interactions making IQ highly plastic over time. The red regions are where cognitive demands in the environment challenge your current general ability (IQ) level. The green regions are when cognitive demands can be processed easily within existing capacity.

(1) Ramsden, S., Richardson, F. M., Josse, G., Thomas, M. S. C., Ellis, C., Shakeshaft, C., … Price, C. J. (2011). Verbal and non-verbal intelligence changes in the teenage brain. Nature, 479(7371), 113–116.

(2) Clouston, S. A., Kuh, D., Herd, P., Elliott, J., Richards, M., & Hofer, S. M. (2012). Benefits of educational attainment on adult fluid cognition: International evidence from three birth cohorts. International Journal of Epidemiology, 41(6), 1729.

(3) Trahan, L. H., Stuebing, K. K., Fletcher, J. M., & Hiscock, M. (2014). The Flynn effect: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(5), 1332–1360.

(4) Dickens, W. T., & Flynn, J. R. (2001). Heritability estimates versus large environmental effects: The IQ paradox resolved. Psychological Review, 108(2), 346–369.

(5) Plomin, R., & Deary, I. J. (2015). Genetics and intelligence differences: Five special findings. Molecular Psychiatry, 20(1), 98–108.

(6) Kovacs, K., & Conway, A. R. A. (2016). Process Overlap Theory: A Unified Account of the General Factor of Intelligence. Psychological Inquiry, 27(3), 151–177.

(7) Sauce, B., & Matzel, L. D. (2018). The Paradox of Intelligence: Heritability and Malleability Coexist in Hidden Gene-Environment Interplay. Psychological Bulletin, 144(1), 26–47.

Brain Criticality & Metastability

Brain criticality is a network state in which the brain operates at a critical point between order and chaos – a balanced state that optimises dynamic range of information processing, capacity of integrated information, and adaptability. Brain criticality promotes both stability and flexibility over multiple time scales and dimensions.

Metastability is enabled by near-critical states, where multiple, locally stable states coexist and the brain can rapidly switch between these states in response to the demands of a challenging situation. This enables the emergence of complex cognitive functions and behaviors through  coordinated synchronisation and desynchronisation of neural assemblies.

Two Axes of Brain Criticality

Intelligent functioning plays out on two primary axes, representing the dimensions of information processing and resilience:

• Vertical Axis (Dynamic Range of Fluid Intelligence, ϕg): This axis underlies the capacity for fluid intelligence (g), integrating both ‘top down’ executive processing, rule-use and coordination of learned skills, and ‘bottom up’ creative insight, exploration and divergent thinking. The integration enables effective relational reasoning, problem-solving, decision-making, and learning in complex, novel situations. This capacity is measured by traditional IQ tests.
  .
• Horizontal Axis (Dynamic Range of Cognitive Resilience, ϕr): This axis underlies the capacity for cognitive resilience (r), defined by the ability to function effectively across a wide range of free energy (prediction error) demands. The more free energy there is to process, the more arousal and stress there is. This axis spans from a restful alertness in a subcritical state to to supercritical states requiring intense cognitive engagement. Cognitive resilience concerns extending near-critical information processing capacity into high-stress situations while also enabling rest and recovery.

Criticality and Free Energy Management

• Critical Point: An intelligent, well-calibrated brain functions to maintain processing at the critical point — a state where the flow of experience does not deviate from expected free energy.  Expected free energy (expected F) is a point between complete predictability and control and complete uncertainty and unpredictability, allowing for both accurate understanding of reality but also tolerance for error and uncertainty to enable exploration and learning.
  .
• Free Energy & Processing Allostasis:  The intelligent brain is governed by two kinds of self-organising mechanisms to maintain stability through change. There is an allostatic energetics system, in which periods of arousal and stress induced by demanding problem solving, strategic action or learning are counterbalanced by periods of rest, recovery and consolidation, and vice versa. There is also an allostatic processing system, governed by positive free energy (F+) or negative free energy (F-). F+ is when there is an unexpected reward or better than expected certainty, simplicity or rate of free energy reduction; F- is when there is an unexpected punishment, uncertainty, complexity, or worse than expected rate of free energy reduction. F+ induces divergent, creative thinking, where creative insights and new ideas may be generated. This is associated with net excitation in the cortical network, and more relaxed, parasympathetic activity. This ‘creative insight’ mode results in the generation of more prediction errors, complexity or uncertainty which brings the network back to expected free energy levels. Conversely,  F-  induces convergent, linear, controlled processing, in an attempt to reduce error, lack of understanding or control, uncertainty and complexity.  This is associated with net inhibition in the cortical network, and more aroused, sympathetic activity. This ‘executive’ mode results in the minimisation of prediction errors, complexity or uncertainty which brings the network back to expected free energy levels.
  .
• Self-Organised Criticality (SOC): Both types of allostatic processing can be integrated over multiple time scales and dimensions in a more intelligent brain in a way that is self-organising around the critical point. This is SOC.

Equation for General Intelligence (G)

The dynamic range of intelligence is the joint product of fluid intelligence (ϕg​) and cognitive resilience ($\varphi r$). The bigger the range, the more information the brain can process to solve problems and be creative, and the more stress the brain can cope with while functioning well.

G = >>(ϕg × ϕr)<<

In this formula:

• $G$ represents general intelligence.
• ϕg​ and ϕr​ symbolise the dynamic ranges of fluid intelligence and cognitive resilience.
• The arrows $>>$ and << indicate the system’s ability to return (allostatically) to the expected free energy level (expected F) – a measure of prediction error and complexity.

Associated Cognitive Zones

The Trident system identifies specific cognitive states associated with different areas of the brain’s criticality spectrum:

• Zen Mode: Associated with the subcritical state of ‘relaxed alertness’, with lower free energy levels (less stimulation), allowing for flexible, fluid access to well-learned skills and thought processes – in ‘autopilot’ or ‘intuitive efficiency’ mode. This is the staff of the trident.
• Executive Mode: A supercritical state with higher free energy (and arousal) levels, tapping goal-directed processing using rule-based strategies and coordinated recruitment of learned skills. The aim is efficiently reducing prediction error and increasing ‘syntropy’ through efficient problem-solving, strategic action and automatisation through deliberate practice. This is an outer fork of the trident.
• Creative Insight Mode: Another supercritical state with higher free energy (and arousal) levels, but tapping lateral thinking, making new connections, cognitive flexibility, creativity, risk-taking and exploration. The aim is increasing free energy by extending beyond established models and strategies, and generating new perspectives, meanings and opportunities. This is the other outer fork of the trident.
• Fluid Intelligence (g): The capacity for processing integration bridging both executive and creative insight modes. The central fork in the trident!
• General Intelligence (G): This is the dynamic range of both fluid intelligence and cognitive resilience – stress tolerance and the capacity to rest and recover – over multiple dimensions – subjective and objective, self and world.

Training Programs and Techniques

The Trident system includes training programs designed to augment fluid intelligence, cognitive resilience, and general intelligence by a synergistic ‘Squaring the Circle’ far transfer method. The 4 square elements of this method are:

a) brain training apps, b) brainwave entrainment, c) AI mindware, d) bio-interventions.

These combine to tune the brain to be in a near critical state for optimal learning and far transfer to real life contexts. This synergistic system is embedded in pathways for ‘multiplier effects’ for augmenting intelligence over the months and years following the one month training period.

Tutorials & References

To access background high level scientific tutorials on the Trident Brain Training system for augmenting intelligence, download this PDF.

 Click to access