From Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues, Third Edition. Edited by Dawn P. Flanagan and Patti L. Harrison. Copyright 2012 by The Guilford Press. All rights reserved. CHAPTER 1 A History of Intelligence Assessment The Unfinished Tapestry John D. Wasserman When our intelligence scales have become more accurate and the laws governing IQ changes have been more definitively established it will then be possible to say that there is nothing about an individual as important as his IQ, except possibly his morals; that the greatest educational problem is to determine the kind of education best suited to each IQ level; that the first concern of a nation should be the average IQ of its citizens, and the eugenic and dysgenic influences which are capable of raising or lowering that level; that the great test problem of democracy is how to adjust itself to the large IQ differences which can be demonstrated to exist among the members of any race or nationality group. —LEWIS M. TERMAN (1922b) This bold statement by the author of the first of intelligence and its assessment deservedly elicits Stanford–Binet intelligence scale captures much many strong feelings. of both the promise and the controversy that have Intelligence is arguably the most researched historically surrounded, and that still surround, topic in the history of psychology, and the concept the assessment of intelligence. Intelligence tests of general intelligence has been described as “one of and their applications have been associated with the most central phenomena in all of behavioral some of the very best and very worst human be- science, with broad explanatory powers” (Jensen, haviors. On the one hand, intelligence assessment 1998, p. xii). Still, social, legal, and political forces can provide a meaningful basis for understanding have in some instances excluded intelligence test the strengths and weaknesses of misunderstood results from important types of educational and children, adolescents, or adults— thereby provid- personnel decision- making processes. Tangible ing data that can be used to design and implement advances in assessment practices have been slow interventions to help people reach their potential and episodic. Following Alfred Binet’s initial suc- more effectively. On the other hand, intelligence cesses, the beginning of the 20th century saw an assessment can be used to segregate and label accelerated pace of small- and large-scale applied people— treating their future as a fixed outcome, intelligence testing, but many anticipated educa- an unchangeable fate. The history of forced steril- tional and occupational benefits were never real- izations of individuals with intellectual disabilities ized. Buros (1977) considered 1927 as the “ banner in the United States and many other countries is year” in which “the testing movement reached ma- a tragic example of how intelligence tests may be turity” (p. 9). The middle of the century saw only misused, exceeded only by the systematic exter- incremental gains in testing, such as electronic mination of intellectually disabled individuals in scoring, analysis, and reporting of test results, but Nazi Germany (e.g., Friedlander, 1995). The topic with comparatively “little progress” (Buros, 1977, 3 4 THE ORIGINS OF INTELLECTUAL ASSESSMENT p. 10) and more than a little “stagnation” (Carroll, another, and that people could best fulfill God’s 1978, p. 93). A landmark quantitative review of will and obtain the greatest happiness by discover- factor- analytic investigations near the end of the ing these laws and obeying them. The book went 20th century (i.e., Carroll, 1993) stimulated a new through eight editions and sold approximately school of thinking about intelligence assessment, 350,000 copies between 1828 and 1900. but the story remains unfinished. In the United The basic tenets of phrenology can be summa- States, federal educational reforms and civil rights rized easily. In a letter to a Viennese official, Gall legislation have had pronounced effects upon the (1798/1857) asserted that the brain was the organ use of intelligence tests in education. It is possible of the mind, that the mind could be reduced to to see the history of intelligence assessment as an a number of faculties, that the faculties were in- unfinished tapestry depicting the rich saga of a nate, that the faculties were located in distinct and developing discipline, with recurrent characters particular organs of the brain, that the surface of interwoven through different narratives, as well the skull was determined by the external form of as more than a few loose and unresolved thematic the brain, and that phrenologists could judge the threads. development of individual faculties merely by ex- In this chapter, the origins of intelligence as- amining the form of the skull. A well- developed sessment are recounted, with an emphasis on mile- faculty was thought to have a large cerebral organ stone events and seminal individuals. Thematic that corresponded to a cranial protuberance. Gall strands present from the early days are traced, originally described and localized 27 distinct facul- including some that were resolved and some that ties; Spurzheim (1815) increased the list to 32 fac- remain unresolved. An effort has been made ulties; Combe (1853) further expanded the list to whenever possible to provide samples of primary 35; and others expanded the list to 43 (e.g., Payne, source material. Finally, although we all tend to 1920). view history through the lens of our own experi- Gall and Spurzheim traveled through Europe ences, it is helpful to appreciate the sociocultural promoting phrenology, which Gall advocated as context, institutional traditions, and professional a science and Spurzheim as a way to reform edu- Zeitgeist associated with historical events, as well cation, religion, and penology. It quickly became as the experiences and personal motivations that popular in the United Kingdom, and Spurzheim may have driven the ideas and behaviors of his- came to the United States in 1832 to promote torical figures. phrenology to a scientific community that was al- ready quite familiar with it. By the time Combe conducted his 1839 American phrenology lecture PSEUDOSciENTific ANTECEDENTS: tour, audiences averaged over 500 across each of PhRENOLOGY IN THE 19TH CENTURY the 16 lectures (Walsh, 1976). A satirical depic- tion of a phrenological examination from about The first science purporting to be a “true science the same time appears in Figure 1.2. of mind” that could measure mental qualities and Gall and Spurzheim are today credited with functions was cranioscopy, introduced at the be- recognizing the significance of gray matter as ginning of the 19th century by Franz Joseph Gall, the source of nerve fibers; most importantly, they and later renamed phrenology by Gall’s associate, are credited with introducing the neuroscientific Johann Gaspar Spurzheim. Gall (1758–1828) was a concept of functional localization in the cerebral Viennese physician and neuroanatomist, and Spur- cortex (Simpson, 2005). Dallenbach (1915) pro- zheim (1776–1832) was a physician and colleague vides evidence that they should be credited with who would ultimately be responsible for the wide- the terms mental functions and faculties. British spread dissemination of phrenology. But it would philosopher and critic G. H. Lewes (1867) went a be a Scotsman, George Combe (1788–1858)—who step further, asserting that Gall laid the ground- developed and published a two- volume system of work for psychology as a science rather than phi- phrenology in 1824, as well as launching a phre- losophy: “Gall rescued the problem of mental nology journal with his brother—who would functions from Metaphysics and made it one of prove most instrumental in the popularization of Biology” (p. 407). Even so, there is a long history phrenology. Combe’s system appears in Figure 1.1. of disparaging efforts to localize mental functions He also wrote the immensely successful book The in specific regions in the brain by calling them a Constitution of Man, which advanced the idea that new “phrenology” (e.g., Franz, 1912; Fuster, 2008, all the laws of nature were in harmony with one p. 346). A History of Intelligence Assessment 5 FIGURE 1.1. George Combe, the best-known phrenologist of the 19th century, divided the brain into intel- lectual faculties and feelings. The plate of the phrenological bust faces the title page in Combe (1830). In the public domain. 6 THE ORIGINS OF INTELLECTUAL ASSESSMENT by the luck that Spencer and Darwin published almost simultaneously, thereby making their very different concepts of evolution indistinguishable to the public. Beyond Spencer’s philosophical influence, the foundation for psychology as a science, as well as for the scholarly study of intelligence, was laid by naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882), who is most remembered for his theory of evolution by natural selection. In his writings, Darwin fre- quently referred to adaptive behavior in animals and humans as “intelligent”; more importantly, he argued that the same forces that act on ani- mal evolution also apply to human mental abili- ties: “There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties” (Darwin, 1871, p. 35). In The Descent of Man, Darwin (1871) went even further in ap- plying his evolutionary theory to human mental characteristics— probably after reading the work of his half- cousin Francis Galton, the Victorian polymath, whose drive for scientific measurement FIGURE 1.2. Illustration from a fictional story of of human capabilities would start the race to de- a member of a phrenology society who decides to use velop measures of intelligence in motion. phrenology to identify a possible thief in his house- It is difficult to overstate the impact of Darwin’s hold. The drawing shows a servant who was paid five theory of evolution on psychology. By considering shillings to shave his head so that the phrenological human behavior in an evolutionary context, Dar- organs could be traced in ink, not a standard part of win treated the study of psychology as no less a phrenology practice.