The theory of multiple intelligences (MI) proposes the differentiation of human intelligence into specific intelligences, rather than defining intelligence as a single, general ability.[1] The theory has been criticized for its lack of empirical evidence, its dependence on subjective judgement and its overall unscientific nature, being referred to as a “neuromyth”.[2]
Beginning in the late 1970s, using a pragmatic definition, Howard Gardner surveyed several disciplines and cultures around the world to determine skills and abilities essential to human development and culture building. He subjected candidate abilities to evaluation using eight criteria that must be substantively met to warrant their identification as an intelligence. Furthermore, the intelligences need to be relatively autonomous from each other, and composed of subsets of skills that are highly correlated and coherently organized.
In 1983, the field of cognitive neuroscience was embryonic but Gardner was one of the early psychological theorists to describe direct links between brain systems and intelligence. Likewise the field of educational neuroscience was yet to be conceived. Since Frames of Mind was published (1983) the terms cognitive science and cognitive neuroscience have become standard in the field with extensive libraries of scholarly and scientific papers and textbooks. Thus it is essential to examine neuroscience evidence as it pertains to MI validity.
Gardner defined intelligence as "a biopsychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture."
This definition is unique for several reasons that account for MI theory's broad appeal to educators as well as its rejection by mainstream psychologists who are rooted in the traditional conception of intelligence as an abstract, logical capacity.[3] A fundamental element for each intelligence is a framework of clearly defined levels of skill, complexity and accomplishment. One model that fits with the MI framework is Bloom’s Taxonomy where each intelligence can be delineated along different levels, ranging from basic knowledge up to their highest levels of analysis / synthesis.[4] [5]
MI is also unique because it gives full appreciation for the impact and interactions - via symbol systems - between the individual’s cognitions and their particular culture. As Gardner states,
Unlike traditional practices beginning in the 19th century,[6] MI theory is not built on the statistical analyses of psychometric test data searching for factors that account for academic achievement. Instead, Gardner employs a multi-disciplinary, cross-cultural methodology to evaluate which human capacities fit into a comprehensive model of intelligence. Eight criteria accounting for advances in neuroscience and the influence of cultural factors are used to qualify a capacity as an intelligence. These criteria are drawn from a more extensive database than what was acceptable and available to researchers in the late 19th and 20th centuries. Evidence is gathered from a variety of disciplines including psychology, neurology, biology, sociology, and anthropology as well as the arts and humanities. If a candidate faculty meets this set of criteria reasonably well then it can qualify as an intelligence. If it does not, then it is set aside or reconceptualized.[7]
The eight criteria can be grouped into four general categories:
The criteria briefly described are:
This scientific method resembles the process used by astronomers to determine which celestial bodies to classify as a planet versus dwarf planet, star, comet, etc.
In Frames of Mind and its sequels, Howard Gardner describes eight intelligences that can be expressed in everyday life in a variety of ways referred to as domains, skills, competencies, or talents.[8] Each intelligence is comprised of complex sets of skills and abilities that are strongly correlated within each intelligence and can be shown to share specific cerebral systems.[9] Like describing a multi-layer cake, the complexity depends upon how you slice the cake. One model integrates the eight intelligences with Sternberg's Triarchic theory, so each intelligence is actively expressed in three ways: (1) creative, (2) academic / analytical and (3) practical thinking.[10] [11] In this analogy each of the eight cake layers are divided into three segments with different expressions sharing a central core. The following brief descriptions highlight core cognitive components as described by Gardner and Shearer[12] . Exemplar professions and adult roles requiring specific intelligences are described along with their core skills and potential deficits. Several references to exemplar neuroscientific studies are also provided for each of the eight intelligences. Furthermore, some have suggested that the 'intelligences' refer to talents, personality, or ability rather than a distinct form of intelligence.[13]
The two intelligences that are most associated with the traditional I.Q. or general intelligence are the linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences. Some intelligence models and tests also include visual-spatial intelligence as a third element.
See main article: Musicality.
This area of intelligence includes sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms, pitch, and tones of music. People with musical intelligence normally may be able to sing, play musical instruments, or compose music. They have high sensitivity to pitch, meter, melody and timbre.[14] Musical intelligence includes cognitive elements that contribute to a person’s success and quality of life. There is a strong relationship between music and emotions as evidenced in both popular and classical music spheres. Neuroscience investigators continue to investigate the interaction between music and cognitive performances.[15] Music is deeply rooted in human evolutionary history (Paleolithic bone flute) and culture (every country on Earth has a national anthem') and our personal lives (all important life events are associated with particular types of music (e.g., birthday, wedding songs, funeral dirges, etc.).
Deficits in musical processing and abilities include congenital amusia, tone deafness, musical hallucinations, musical anhedonia, acquired music agnosia, and arrhythmia (beat deafness).
Professions requiring essential musical skills include vocalist, instrumentalist, lyricist, dancer, sound engineer and composer. Musical intelligence is combined with kinesthetic to produce instrumentalists, dancers and, combined with a linguistic intelligence, for music critics and lyricists. Music combined with interpersonal intelligence is required for success as a Music Therapist or teacher.
See main article: Spatial intelligence (psychology).
This area deals with spatial awareness / judgment and the ability to visualize with the mind's eye. It is comprised of two main dimensions: A) mental visualization and B) perception of the physical world (spatial arrangements and objects). It includes both practical problem-solving as well as artistic creations. Spatial ability is one of the three factors beneath g (general intelligence) in the hierarchical model of intelligence.[16] Many I.Q. tests include a measure of spatial problem-solving skills, e.g., block design and mental rotation of objects.[17]
Visual-spatial intelligence can be expressed in both practical (e.g., drafting and building) or artistic (e.g., fine art, crafts, floral arrangements) ways. Or they can be combined in fields such as architecture, industrial design, landscape design, and fashion design. Visual-spatial processing is often combined with the kinesthetic intelligence and referred to as eye-hand or visual-motor integration for tasks such as hitting a baseball (see Babe Ruth example for Kinesthetic), sewing, golf or skiing.
Professions that emphasize skill with visual-spatial processing include carpentry, engineering, designers, pilots, firefighters, surgeons, commercial and fine arts and crafts. Spatial intelligence combined with linguistic is required for success as an art critic or textbook graphic designer. Spatial artistic skills combined with naturalist sensitivity produce a pet groomer or clothing designer, costumer.
See main article: Verbal intelligence.
The core linguistic ability is sensitivity to words and their meanings. People with high verbal-linguistic intelligence display a facility with expressive language and verbal comprehension. They are typically good at reading, writing, telling stories, rhetoric and memorizing words along with dates. Verbal ability is one of the most g-loaded abilities.[18] Linguistic (academic aspect) intelligence is measured with the Verbal IQ in WAIS-IV.
Deficits in linguistic abilities include expressive and receptive aphasia, agraphia, specific language impairment, written language disorder and word recognition deficit (dyslexia).
Linguistic ability can be expressed according to Triarchic theory in three main ways: Analytical-Academic (reading, writing, definitions); Practical (verbal or written directions, explanations, narration); and Creative (story telling, poetry, lyrics, imaginative word play, science fiction).
Professions that require linguistic skills include teaching, sales, management, counselors, leaders, childcare, journalists, academics and politicians (debating and creating support for particular sets of values). Linguistic intelligence combines with all other intelligences to facilitate communication either via the spoken or written word. It is frequently highly correlated with the interpersonal intelligence to facilitate social interactions for education, business and human relations. Successful sports coaches combine three intelligences: kinesthetic, interpersonal and linguistic. Corporate managers require skills in the interpersonal, linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligences.
This area has to do with logic, abstractions, reasoning, calculations, strategic and critical thinking. This intelligence includes the capacity to understand underlying principles of some kind of causal system. Logical reasoning is closely linked to fluid intelligence as well as to general intelligence (g factor).[19] This capacity is most often associated with convergent problem-solving but it also includes divergent thinking associated with “problem-finding”.
This intelligence is most closely associated with the cognitive development theory described by Jean Piaget (1983). The four main types of logical-mathematical intelligence include logical reasoning, calculations, practical thinking (common sense) and discovery.
Deficits in logical-mathematical thinking include acalculia, dyscalculia, mild cognitive impairment, dementia and intellectual disability.
Some critics believe that the logical and mathematics domains should be separate entities. However, Gardner argues that they both spring from the same source—abstractions taken from real world elements – e.g., logic from words, and calculations from the manipulation from objects. This is not dissimilar from the relationship between musical intelligence and vocal or instrumental skills where they are very different expressions springing from a shared musical source.
Professions most closely associated with this intelligence include accounting, bookkeeping, banking, finance, engineering and the sciences. Logic-mathematical skills combine with all the other intelligences to facilitate complex problem solving and creation such as environmental engineering and scientists (naturalist); symphonies (music); public sculptures (visual-spatial) and choreography/ movement analysis (kinesthetic).
The core elements of the bodily-kinesthetic intelligence are control of one's bodily movements and fine motor control to handle objects skillfully. Gardner elaborates to say that this also includes a sense of timing, a clear sense of the goal of a physical action, along with the ability to train responses. Kinesthetic ability can be displayed in goal-directed activities (athletics, handcrafts, etc.) as well as in more expressive movements (drama, dance, mime and gestures). Expressive movements can be for either concepts or feelings. For example, saluting, shaking hands or facial expressions can convey both ideas and emotions. Two major kinesthetic categories are gross and fine motor skills.
Deficits in kinesthetic ability are described as proprioception disorders affecting body awareness, coordination, balance, dexterity and motor control.
Gardner believes that careers that suit those with high bodily-kinesthetic intelligence include: athletes, dancers, musicians, actors, craftspeople, builders, technicians, and firefighters. Although these careers can be duplicated through virtual simulation, they will not produce the actual physical learning that is needed in this intelligence.[20]
Often people with high physical intelligence combined with visual motion acuity will have excellent hand-eye coordination and be very agile; they are precise and accurate in movement (surgeons) and can express themselves using their body (actors and dancers). Gardner referred to the idea of natural skill and innate kinesthetic intelligence within his discussion of the autobiographical story of Babe Ruth – a legendary baseball player who, at 15, felt that he had been 'born' on the pitcher's mound. Seeing the pitched ball and coordinating one’s swing to meet it over the plate requires highly developed visual-motor integration. Each sport requires its own distinctive combination of specific skills associated with the kinesthetic and visual-spatial intelligences.
Physical intelligence, also known as bodily-kinesthetic intelligence, is any intelligence derived through physical and practiced learning such as sports, dance, or craftsmanship. It may refer to the ability to use one's hands to create, to express oneself with one's body, a reliance on tactile mechanisms and movement, and accuracy in controlling body movement. An individual with high physical intelligence is someone who is adept at using their physical body to solve problems and express ideas and emotions.[21] The ability to control the physical body and the mind-body connection is part of a much broader range of human potential as set out in Howard Gardner's Theory of multiple intelligences.[22]
Exhibiting well developed bodily kinesthetic intelligence will be reflected in a person's movements and how they use their physical body. Often people with high physical intelligence will have excellent hand-eye coordination and be very agile; they are precise and accurate in movement and can express themselves using their body. Gardner referred to the idea of natural skill and innate physical intelligence within his discussion of the autobiographical story of Babe Ruth – a legendary baseball player who, at 15, felt that he has been 'born' on the pitcher's mound. Individuals with a high body-kinesthetic, or physical intelligence, are likely to be successful in physical careers, including athletes, dancers, musicians, police officers, and soldiers.
See main article: Social skills.
In MI theory, individuals who have high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments, motivations, and their ability to cooperate or to lead a group. According to Thomas Armstrong in How Are Kids Smart: Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, "Interpersonal intelligence is often misunderstood with being extroverted or liking other people”.[23] Those with high interpersonal intelligence communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. They often enjoy discussion and debate." They have insightful understanding of other peoples’ point of view. Daniel Goleman based his concept of emotional intelligence in part on the feeling aspects of the intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences.[24] Interpersonal skill can be displayed in either one-on-one and group interactions.
Deficits in interpersonal understanding are described as ego centrism, narcissism, socio-pathology, Asperger’s Syndrome and autism.
Gardner believes that careers that suit those with high interpersonal intelligence include leaders, politicians, managers, teachers, clergy, counselors, social workers and sales persons.[25] Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson are cited as historical leaders with exceptional interpersonal intelligence. Interpersonal combined with intrapersonal management are required for successful leaders, psychologists, life coaches and conflict negotiators. And obviously, team sports require specific combinations of the interpersonal and kinesthetic intelligences while individual sports emphasize the kinesthetic and intrapersonal intelligences (i.e., Tiger Woods and gymnasts).
In theory, individuals who have high interpersonal intelligence are characterized by their sensitivity to others' moods, feelings, temperaments, motivations, and their ability to cooperate to work as part of a group. According to Gardner in How Are Kids Smart: Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom, "Inter- and Intra- personal intelligence is often misunderstood with being extroverted or liking other people".[26] "Those with high interpersonal intelligence communicate effectively and empathize easily with others, and may be either leaders or followers. They often enjoy discussion and debate." Gardner has equated this with emotional intelligence of Goleman.
Gardner believes that careers that suit those with high interpersonal intelligence include sales persons, politicians, managers, teachers, lecturers, counselors and social workers.
This refers to having a deep and accurate understanding of the self; what one's strengths and weaknesses are, what makes one unique, being able to predict and manage one's own reactions, emotions and behaviors. Activities associated with this intelligence include introspection and self-reflection. Intrapersonal skills can be categorized in at least four areas: metacognition, awareness of thoughts, management of feelings and emotions, behavior, self-management, decision-making and judgment.
Deficits in intrapersonal understanding are described as anosognosia, depersonalization, dissociation and self-dysregulation (ADHD).
Leaders and people in high stress occupations need well developed intrapersonal skills, e.g., pilots, police and firefighters, entrepreneurs, middle managers, first responders and health care providers. Gandhi, Jesus, Martin Luther King are all noted for their strong self-awareness. Deficits in intrapersonal understanding may be correlated with ADHD, substance abuse and emotional disturbances (mid-life crisis, etc.).
Intrapersonal intelligence may be correlated with concepts such as self-confidence, introspection and self-efficacy but it should not be confused with personality styles/preferences such as narcissism, self-esteem, introversion or shyness. High level performance in many demanding professions and roles requires exceptional intrapersonal intelligence: Olympic athletes, professional golfers, stage performers, CEOs, crisis managers.
Not part of Gardner's original seven, naturalistic intelligence was proposed by him in 1995. "If I were to rewrite Frames of Mind today, I would probably add an eighth intelligence – the intelligence of the naturalist. It seems to me that the individual who is readily able to recognize flora and fauna, to make other consequential distinctions in the natural world, and to use this ability productively (in hunting, in farming, in biological science) is exercising an important intelligence and one that is not adequately encompassed in the current list."[27] This area has to do with nurturing and relating information to one's natural surroundings. Examples include classifying natural forms such as animal and plant species and rocks and mountain types. Essential cognitive skills include pattern recognition, taxonomy and empathy for living beings. Nature deficit disorder describes a recent hypothesis that mental health is negatively impacted by a lack of attention to and understanding of nature, e.g., nature deficit disorder. This ability was clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers; it continues to be central in such roles as botanist or chef.
This sort of ecological receptiveness is deeply rooted in a "sensitive, ethical, and holistic understanding" of the world and its complexities – including the role of humanity within the greater ecosphere.[28]
This ability was clearly of value in our evolutionary past as hunters, gatherers, and farmers and it continues to be central in such roles as botanist, chef, animal care, veterinarians, ecological scientists and botanists.
From the beginning Howard Gardner has stated that there may be more intelligences beyond the original six identified in 1983. That is why the Naturalist was added to the list in 1999. Several other human capacities were rejected because they do not meet enough of the criteria including personality characteristics such as humor, sexuality and extroversion.
See main article: Spiritual intelligence.
Gardner declined in his 1999 book to include spiritual intelligence, but suggested that an "existential" intelligence may be a useful construct that further research might clarify. The hypothesis of an existential intelligence has been further explored by educational researchers.[29] At present there is insufficient evidence to support its inclusion on the list of validated intelligences and instead suggest that it is better labeled as "existential thinking". Of course, this is a valued form of human thought but there are two specific problems with its identification as a unique intelligence. First, there is insufficient evidence indicating it is processed by a coherent neural system. Second, there is no practical method of determined levels of skill and ability for existential thought and action (cite forthcoming).
In January 2016, Gardner mentioned in an interview with Big Think that he was considering adding the teaching–pedagogical intelligence "which allows us to be able to teach successfully to other people".[30] In the same interview, he explicitly refused some other suggested intelligences like humour, cooking and sexual intelligence.[30] Professor Nan B. Adams argues that based on Gardner's definition of multiple intelligences, digital intelligence – a meta-intelligence composed of many other identified intelligences and stemmed from human interactions with digital computers – now exists.[31]
Within his Theory of Multiple Intelligences, Gardner stated that our "educational system is heavily biased towards linguistic modes of intersection and assessment and, to a somewhat lesser degree, toward logical quantities modes as well". His work went on to shape educational pedagogy and influence relevant policy and legislation across the world; with particular reference to how teachers must assess students' progress to establish the most effective teaching methods for the individual learner. Gardner's research into the field of learning regarding bodily kinesthetic intelligence has resulted in the use of activities that require physical movement and exertion, with students exhibiting a high level of physical intelligence reporting to benefit from 'learning through movement' in the classroom environment.[32]
Although the distinction between intelligences has been set out in great detail, Gardner opposes the idea of labelling learners to a specific intelligence. Gardner maintains that his theory should "empower learners", not restrict them to one modality of learning.[33] According to Gardner, an intelligence is "a biopsychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture". According to a 2006 study, each of the domains proposed by Gardner involves a blend of the general g factor, cognitive abilities other than g, and, in some cases, non-cognitive abilities or personality characteristics.
Gardner defines an intelligence as "bio-psychological potential to process information that can be activated in a cultural setting to solve problems or create products that are of value in a culture". According to Gardner, there are more ways to do this than just through logical and linguistic intelligence. Gardner believes that the purpose of schooling "should be to develop intelligences and to help people reach vocational and avocational goals that are appropriate to their particular spectrum of intelligences. People who are helped to do so, [he] believe[s], feel more engaged and competent and therefore more inclined to serve society in a constructive way."
Gardner contends that IQ tests focus mostly on logical and linguistic intelligence. Upon doing well on these tests, the chances of attending a prestigious college or university increase, which in turn creates contributing members of society. While many students function well in this environment, there are those who do not. Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, exercises and activities to reach all students, not just those who excel at linguistic and logical intelligence. It challenges educators to find "ways that will work for this student learning this topic".
James Traub's article in The New Republic notes that Gardner's system has not been accepted by most academics in intelligence or teaching. Gardner states that "while Multiple Intelligences theory is consistent with much empirical evidence, it has not been subjected to strong experimental tests ... Within the area of education, the applications of the theory are currently being examined in many projects. Our hunches will have to be revised many times in light of actual classroom experience."
Jerome Bruner agreed with Gardner that the intelligences were "useful fictions", and went on to state that "his approach is so far beyond the data-crunching of mental testers that it deserves to be cheered."[34]
George Miller, a prominent cognitive psychologist, wrote in The New York Times Book Review that Gardner's argument consisted of "hunch and opinion" and Charles Murray and Richard J. Herrnstein in The Bell Curve (1994) called Gardner's theory "uniquely devoid of psychometric or other quantitative evidence".
In spite of its lack of general acceptance in the psychological community, Gardner's theory has been adopted by many schools, where it is often conflated with learning styles, and hundreds of books have been written about its applications in education. Some of the applications of Gardner's theory have been described as "simplistic" and Gardner himself has said he is "uneasy" with the way his theory has been used in schools. Gardner has denied that multiple intelligences are learning styles and agrees that the idea of learning styles is incoherent and lacking in empirical evidence.[35] Gardner summarizes his approach with three recommendations for educators: individualize the teaching style (to suit the most effective method for each student), pluralize the teaching (teach important materials in multiple ways), and avoid the term "styles" as being confusing.[35]
Gardner argues that there is a wide range of cognitive abilities, but that there are only very weak correlations among them. For example, the theory postulates that a child who learns to multiply easily is not necessarily more intelligent than a child who has more difficulty on this task. The child who takes more time to master multiplication may best learn to multiply through a different approach, may excel in a field outside mathematics, or may be looking at and understanding the multiplication process at a fundamentally deeper level.
Intelligence tests and psychometrics have generally found high correlations between different aspects of intelligence, rather than the low correlations which Gardner's theory predicts, supporting the prevailing theory of general intelligence rather than multiple intelligences (MI).[36] The theory has been criticized by mainstream psychology for its lack of empirical evidence, and its dependence on subjective judgement,[37] and it has been deemed unscientific.[2]
A major criticism of the theory is that it is ad hoc: that Gardner is not expanding the definition of the word "intelligence", but rather denies the existence of intelligence as traditionally understood, and instead uses the word "intelligence" where other people have traditionally used words like "ability" and "aptitude". This practice has been criticized by Robert J. Sternberg, Michael Eysenck, and Sandra Scarr. White (2006) points out that Gardner's selection and application of criteria for his "intelligences" is subjective and arbitrary, and that a different researcher would likely have come up with different criteria.
Defenders of MI theory argue that the traditional definition of intelligence is too narrow, and thus a broader definition more accurately reflects the differing ways in which humans think and learn.
Some criticisms arise from the fact that Gardner has not provided a test of his multiple intelligences. He originally defined it as the ability to solve problems that have value in at least one culture, or as something that a student is interested in. He then added a disclaimer that he has no fixed definition, and his classification is more of an artistic judgment than fact:
Generally, linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities are called intelligence, but artistic, musical, athletic, etc. abilities are not. Gardner argues this causes the former to be needlessly aggrandized. Certain critics are wary of this widening of the definition, saying that it ignores "the connotation of intelligence ... [which] has always connoted the kind of thinking skills that makes one successful in school."
Gardner writes "I balk at the unwarranted assumption that certain human abilities can be arbitrarily singled out as intelligence while others cannot." Critics hold that given this statement, any interest or ability can be redefined as "intelligence". Thus, studying intelligence becomes difficult, because it diffuses into the broader concept of ability or talent. Gardner's addition of the naturalistic intelligence and conceptions of the existential and moral intelligence are seen as the fruits of this diffusion. Defenders of the MI theory would argue that this is simply a recognition of the broad scope of inherent mental abilities and that such an exhaustive scope by nature defies a one-dimensional classification such as an IQ value.
The theory and definitions have been critiqued by Perry D. Klein as being so unclear as to be tautologous and thus unfalsifiable. Having a high musical ability means being good at music while at the same time being good at music is explained by having high musical ability.
Henri Wallon argues that "We can not distinguish intelligence from its operations".[38] Yves Richez distinguishes 10 Natural Operating Modes (Modes Opératoires Naturels – MoON).[39] Richez's studies are premised on a gap between Chinese thought and Western thought. In China, the notion of "being" (self) and the notion of "intelligence" do not exist. These are claimed to be Graeco-Roman inventions derived from Plato. Instead of intelligence, Chinese refers to "operating modes", which is why Yves Richez does not speak of "intelligence" but of "natural operating modes" (MoON).
Critics argue that MI cannot be taken seriously as a scientific theory of intelligence for a number of reasons that have kept it marginalized from mainstream psychology despite worldwide influence among educators. It is understandable that psychologists in the normal science tradition question the validity of an idea that challenges one of its core concepts – IQ – without providing a wealth of psychometric evidence. While there are a variety of specific criticisms, the most common are given below:
Andreas Demetriou suggests that theories which overemphasize the autonomy of the domains are as simplistic as the theories that overemphasize the role of general intelligence and ignore the domains. He agrees with Gardner that there are indeed domains of intelligence that are relevantly autonomous of each other. Some of the domains, such as verbal, spatial, mathematical, and social intelligence are identified by most lines of research in psychology. In Demetriou's theory, one of the neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development, Gardner is criticized for underestimating the effects exerted on the various domains of intelligences by the various subprocesses that define overall processing efficiency, such as speed of processing, executive functions, working memory, and meta-cognitive processes underlying self-awareness and self-regulation. All of these processes are integral components of general intelligence that regulate the functioning and development of different domains of intelligence.
The domains are to a large extent expressions of the condition of the general processes, and may vary because of their constitutional differences but also differences in individual preferences and inclinations. Their functioning both channels and influences the operation of the general processes. Thus, one cannot satisfactorily specify the intelligence of an individual or design effective intervention programs unless both the general processes and the domains of interest are evaluated.
The premise of the multiple intelligences hypothesis, that human intelligence is a collection of specialist abilities, have been criticized for not being able to explain human adaptation to most if not all environments in the world. In this context, humans are contrasted to social insects that indeed have a distributed "intelligence" of specialists, and such insects may spread to climates resembling that of their origin but the same species never adapt to a wide range of climates from tropical to temperate by building different types of nests and learning what is edible and what is poisonous. While some such as the leafcutter ant grow fungi on leaves, they do not cultivate different species in different environments with different farming techniques as human agriculture does. It is therefore argued that human adaptability stems from a general ability to falsify hypotheses and make more generally accurate predictions and adapt behavior thereafter, and not a set of specialized abilities which would only work under specific environmental conditions.[46] [47]
Gardner argues that IQ tests only measure linguistic and logical-mathematical abilities. He argues the importance of assessing in an "intelligence-fair" manner. While traditional paper-and-pen examinations favor linguistic and logical skills, there is a need for intelligence-fair measures that value the distinct modalities of thinking and learning that uniquely define each intelligence.[14]
Psychologist Alan S. Kaufman points out that IQ tests have measured spatial abilities for 70 years. Modern IQ tests are greatly influenced by the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory which incorporates a general intelligence but also many more narrow abilities. While IQ tests do give an overall IQ score, they now also give scores for many more narrow abilities.
Another criticism of MI theory is that there is no evidence for educational efficacy and that the use of MI may undermine school effectiveness. In other words, even if MI can describe an accurate map of the mind-brain, does this map help people (teachers, counselors, psychologists, parents, students) to achieve educational goals? Criticisms of the educational applications of MI theory break into three general types: questions about efficacy, theoretical disagreements and fear of consequences for large scale application.
According Ravitch’s review of school reform, not all progressive school initiatives were failures because, "Surely, the elementary schools were more joyful places, yet there was no good reason to pose a dichotomy between children’s well-being and the thoughtful study of school subjects". The problem that remains is how to build practical bridges in the daily classroom between the forces of traditional academics and recognizing individual differences? Can the theory of multiple intelligences help? Near the end of Ravitch’s examination of American schools’ struggle to achieve the dream of providing high quality education for all students regardless of status, she notes,
"Howard Gardner became a national leader of an effort to reclaim the strain of progressivism that championed students’ joy in learning without denying the importance of academic disciplines and to cleanse progressivism of its earlier association with IQ testing, curricular differentiation, anti-intellectualism, and life adjustment education".
Many of Gardner's "intelligences" correlate with the g factor, supporting the idea of a single dominant type of intelligence. Each of the domains proposed by Gardner involved a blend of g, of cognitive abilities other than g, and, in some cases, of non-cognitive abilities or of personality characteristics.
The Johnson O'Connor Research Foundation has tested hundreds of thousands of people[48] to determine their "aptitudes" ("intelligences"), such as manual dexterity, musical ability, spatial visualization, and memory for numbers.[49] There is correlation of these aptitudes with the g factor, but not all are strongly correlated; correlation between the g factor and "inductive speed" ("quickness in seeing relationships among separate facts, ideas, or observations") is only 0.5,[50] considered a moderate correlation.[51]
Linda Gottfredson (2006) has argued that thousands of studies support the importance of intelligence quotient (IQ) in predicting school and job performance, and numerous other life outcomes. In contrast, empirical support for non-g intelligences is either lacking or very poor. She argued that despite this, the ideas of multiple non-g intelligences are very attractive to many due to the suggestion that everyone can be smart in some way.
A critical review of MI theory argues that there is little empirical evidence to support it:
The same review presents evidence to demonstrate that cognitive neuroscience research does not support the theory of multiple intelligences:
Gardner has frequently responded that MI theory is in fact based on "at least 500 empirical studies" cited in Frames of Mind.[52] He has also stated,
"I’ve never felt that MI theory was one that could be subjected to an "up and down" kind of test, or even series of tests. Rather, it is and has always been fundamentally a work of synthesis; and its overall fate will be determined by the comprehensiveness of the synthesis, on the one hand, and its utility to both scholars and practitioners, on the other"[53]