Editing Intelligence (section)

== Human ==
{{Main|Human intelligence}}

Human intelligence is the intellectual power of humans, which is marked by complex [[cognition|cognitive]] feats and high levels of [[motivation]] and [[self-awareness]].<ref>{{cite book|last1=Tirri, Nokelainen|title=Measuring Multiple Intelligences and Moral Sensitivities in Education|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-94-6091-758-5|url=https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789460917585|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170802041535/http://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789460917585|archive-date=2 August 2017|year=2011|series=Moral Development and Citizenship Education}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Colom |first1=Roberto |date=Dec 2010 |title=Human intelligence and brain networks |journal=Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=489–501 |doi=10.31887/DCNS.2010.12.4/rcolom |pmc=3181994 |pmid=21319494}}</ref> Intelligence enables humans to remember descriptions of things and use those descriptions in future behaviors. It gives humans the cognitive abilities to [[learning|learn]], [[Concept learning|form concepts]], [[understanding|understand]], and [[reason]], including the capacities to [[pattern recognition|recognize patterns]], innovate, [[planning|plan]], [[problem solving|solve problems]], and employ [[language]] to [[Human communication|communicate]]. These cognitive abilities can be organized into frameworks like [[Fluid and crystallized intelligence|fluid vs. crystallized]] and the Unified Cattell-Horn-Carroll model,<ref name=":5">{{Citation |last1=Stanek |first1=Kevin C. |title=Taxonomies and Compendia of Cognitive Ability and Personality Constructs and Measures Relevant to Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology |date=2018 |url=http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/the-sage-handbook-of-industrial-work-and-org-psychology-vol1/i3345.xml |work=The SAGE Handbook of Industrial, Work and Organizational Psychology: Personnel Psychology and Employee Performance |pages=366–407 |access-date=2024-01-08 |place=1 Oliver's Yard, 55 City Road London EC1Y 1SP |publisher=SAGE Publications Ltd |doi=10.4135/9781473914940.n14 |isbn=978-1-4462-0721-5 |last2=Ones |first2=Deniz S.|url-access=subscription }}</ref> which contains abilities like fluid reasoning, perceptual speed, verbal abilities, and others.

Intelligence is different from [[learning]]. Learning refers to the act of retaining facts and information or abilities and being able to recall them for future use. Intelligence, on the other hand, is the cognitive ability of someone to perform these and other processes. 

=== Intelligence quotient (IQ) ===
{{Main|Intelligence quotient}}

There have been various attempts to quantify intelligence via [[psychometric]] testing. Prominent among these are the various [[Intelligence quotient|Intelligence Quotient]] (IQ) tests, which were first developed in the early 20th century to screen children for [[intellectual disability]].<ref name=":6">{{Cite book |last=Kaufman |first=Alan S. |title=IQ Testing 101 |publisher=Springer |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-8261-0629-2}}</ref> Over time, IQ tests became more pervasive, being used to screen immigrants, military recruits, and job applicants.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Richardson |first1=John T. E. |year=2003 |title=Howard Andrew Knox and the origins of performance testing on Ellis Island, 1912-1916 |journal=History of Psychology |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=143–70 |doi=10.1037/1093-4510.6.2.143 |pmid=12822554}}</ref> As the tests became more popular, belief that IQ tests measure a fundamental and unchanging attribute that all humans possess became widespread.<ref name=":6" /> 

An influential theory that promoted the idea that IQ measures a fundamental quality possessed by every person is the theory of [[G factor (psychometrics)|General Intelligence, or ''g'' factor]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Schlinger |first=Henry D. |date=2003 |title=The myth of intelligence |url=https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2003-01443-003 |journal=The Psychological Record |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=15–32}}</ref> The ''g'' factor is a construct that summarizes the [[Correlation|correlations]] observed between an individual's scores on a range of cognitive tests. 

Today, most psychologists agree that IQ measures at least some aspects of human intelligence, particularly the ability to thrive in an academic context.<ref name="Weiten" /> However, many psychologists question the [[Validity (statistics)|validity]] of IQ tests as a measure of intelligence as a whole.<ref name="Weiten">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ALkaCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT331 |title=Psychology: Themes and Variations |vauthors=Weiten W |publisher=[[Cengage Learning]] |year=2016 |isbn=978-1305856127 |page=281 |quote=IQ tests are valid measures of the kind of intelligence necessary to do well in academic work. But if the purpose is to assess intelligence in a broader sense, the validity of IQ tests is questionable.}}</ref><ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last=Bouchard|first=Thomas J.|date=1982|title=Review of The Intelligence Controversy|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1422481|journal=The American Journal of Psychology|volume=95|issue=2|pages=346–349|doi=10.2307/1422481|jstor=1422481|issn=0002-9556|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

There is debate about the [[heritability of IQ]], that is, what proportion of differences in IQ test performance between individuals are explained by [[Genetics|genetic]] or [[Biophysical environment|environmental]] factors.<ref name="Bouchard2013W">{{cite journal|last1=Bouchard|first1=Thomas J.|date=7 August 2013|title=The Wilson Effect: The Increase in Heritability of IQ With Age|journal=Twin Research and Human Genetics|volume=16|issue=5|pages=923–930|doi=10.1017/thg.2013.54|pmid=23919982|s2cid=13747480|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name="pmid12486697">{{cite journal |last1=Bouchard |first1=Thomas J. |last2=McGue |first2=Matt |title=Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences |journal=Journal of Neurobiology |date=January 2003 |volume=54 |issue=1 |pages=4–45 |doi=10.1002/neu.10160 |pmid=12486697 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The scientific consensus is that genetics does not explain [[Race and intelligence|average differences in IQ test performance between racial groups.]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bird |first1=Kevin |last2=Jackson |first2=John P. |last3=Winston |first3=Andrew S. |date=2024 |title=Confronting Scientific Racism in Psychology: Lessons from Evolutionary Biology and Genetics |url=https://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2Famp0001228 |journal=American Psychologist |volume=79 |issue=4 |pages=497–508 |doi=10.1037/amp0001228 |pmid=39037836 |quote=Recent articles claim that the folk categories of race are genetically meaningful divisions, and that evolved genetic differences among races and nations are important for explaining immutable differences in cognitive ability, educational attainment, crime, sexual behavior, and wealth; all claims that are opposed by a strong scientific consensus to the contrary.|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref name=":02">{{cite journal |last1=Nisbett |first1=Richard E. |author-link1=Richard E. Nisbett |last2=Aronson |first2=Joshua |last3=Blair |first3=Clancy |last4=Dickens |first4=William |last5=Flynn |first5=James |author-link5=Jim Flynn (academic) |last6=Halpern |first6=Diane F. |author-link6=Diane F. Halpern |last7=Turkheimer |first7=Eric |date=2012 |title=Group differences in IQ are best understood as environmental in origin |url=http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20Online%20CV/Nisbett%20(2012)%20Group.pdf |url-status=live |journal=American Psychologist |volume=67 |pages=503–504 |doi=10.1037/a0029772 |issn=0003-066X |pmid=22963427 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150123114230/http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20Online%20CV/Nisbett%20(2012)%20Group.pdf |archive-date=23 January 2015 |access-date=22 July 2013 |number=6}}</ref><ref name=":22">{{Cite journal |last1=Ceci |first1=Stephen |last2=Williams |first2=Wendy M. |date=1 February 2009 |title=Should scientists study race and IQ? YES: The scientific truth must be pursued |journal=Nature |volume=457 |issue=7231 |pages=788–789 |bibcode=2009Natur.457..788C |doi=10.1038/457788a |pmid=19212385 |s2cid=205044224 |quote=There is an emerging consensus about racial and gender equality in genetic determinants of intelligence; most researchers, including ourselves, agree that genes do not explain between-group differences. |doi-access=free}}</ref>

=== Emotional ===
{{Main|Emotional intelligence}}

Emotional intelligence is thought to be the ability to convey [[emotion]] to others in an understandable way as well as to read the emotions of others accurately.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last1=Salovey|first1=Peter|last2=Mayer|first2=John D.|date=March 1990|title=Emotional Intelligence|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG|journal=Imagination, Cognition and Personality|language=en|volume=9|issue=3|pages=185–211|doi=10.2190/DUGG-P24E-52WK-6CDG|hdl=10654/36316|s2cid=219900460|issn=0276-2366|hdl-access=free}}</ref> Some theories imply that a heightened emotional intelligence could also lead to faster generating and processing of emotions in addition to the accuracy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mayer|first1=John D.|last2=Salovey|first2=Peter|date=1993-10-01|title=The intelligence of emotional intelligence|url=https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2F0160-2896%2893%2990010-3|journal=Intelligence|language=en|volume=17|issue=4|pages=433–442|doi=10.1016/0160-2896(93)90010-3|issn=0160-2896|url-access=subscription}}</ref> In addition, higher emotional intelligence is thought to help us manage emotions, which is beneficial for our problem-solving skills. Emotional intelligence is important to our [[mental health]] and has ties to social intelligence.<ref name=":0" />

=== Social ===
{{Main|Social intelligence}}

Social intelligence is the ability to understand the [[social cue]]s and motivations of others and oneself in social situations. It is thought to be distinct from other types of intelligence, but has relations to emotional intelligence. Social intelligence has coincided with other studies that focus on how we make judgements of others, the accuracy with which we do so, and why people would be viewed as having positive or negative [[social character]]. There is debate as to whether or not these studies and social intelligence come from the same theories or if there is a distinction between them, and they are generally thought to be of two different [[School of thought|schools of thought]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Walker|first1=Ronald E.|last2=Foley|first2=Jeanne M.|date=December 1973|title=Social Intelligence: Its History and Measurement|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.2466/pr0.1973.33.3.839|journal=Psychological Reports|language=en|volume=33|issue=3|pages=839–864|doi=10.2466/pr0.1973.33.3.839|s2cid=144839425|issn=0033-2941|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

=== Moral ===
{{Main|Moral intelligence}}
Moral intelligence is the capacity to understand right from wrong and to behave based on the value that is believed to be right.<ref name="Langkah">'''[http://www.micheleborba.com/Pages/7virtues.htm The Step-By-Step Plan to Building Moral Intelligence]'''[http://www.micheleborba.com/Pages/7virtues.htm .] Retrieved 28 April 2016.</ref> It is considered a distinct form of intelligence, independent to both emotional and cognitive intelligence.<ref>Beheshtifar, M., Esmaeli, Z., & Moghadam, M. N. (2011). Effect of moral intelligence on leadership. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences, 43, 6-11.</ref>

=== Book smart and street smart ===
Concepts of "book smarts" and "street smart" are contrasting views based on the premise that some people have knowledge gained through academic study, but may lack the experience to sensibly apply that knowledge, while others have knowledge gained through practical experience, but may lack accurate information usually gained through study by which to effectively apply that knowledge. [[Artificial intelligence]] researcher [[Hector Levesque]] has noted that:

{{blockquote|Given the importance of learning through text in our own personal lives and in our culture, it is perhaps surprising how utterly dismissive we tend to be of it. It is sometimes derided as being merely "book knowledge", and having it is being "book smart". In contrast, knowledge acquired through direct experience and apprenticeship is called "street knowledge", and having it is being "street smart".<ref>[[Hector J. Levesque]], ''Common Sense, the Turing Test, and the Quest for Real AI'' (2017), p. 80.</ref>}}