Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 13
  • Cited by
    This chapter has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Kreiter, Clarence D. 2013. A measurement perspective on affirmative action in U.S. medical education. Medical Education Online, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 20531.

    Christie, Gregory J. Cook, Charles M. Ward, Brian J. Tata, Matthew S. Sutherland, Janice Sutherland, Robert J. Saucier, Deborah M. and Sinigaglia, Corrado 2013. Mental Rotational Ability Is Correlated with Spatial but Not Verbal Working Memory Performance and P300 Amplitude in Males. PLoS ONE, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. e57390.

    Flores-Mendoza, Carmen Widaman, Keith Mansur-Alves, Marcela Bacelar, Tatiane Dias and Saldanha, Renata 2013. Psychoticism and Disruptive Behavior can be also Good Predictors of School Achievement. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, Vol. 16, Issue. ,

    Nielsen, François 2010. Intelligence of CultureIntelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count, by NisbettRichard E.New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Co., 2010. 320pp. $17.95 paper. ISBN: 9780393337693.. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, Vol. 39, Issue. 4, p. 391.

    Hines, Melissa 2010. The Handbook of Life-Span Development.

    Sternberg, Robert J. 2010. The Wiley-Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development. p. 749.

    Verney, Steven P. Granholm, Eric Marshall, Sandra P. Malcarne, Vanessa L. and Saccuzzo, Dennis P. 2005. Culture-Fair Cognitive Ability Assessment. Assessment, Vol. 12, Issue. 3, p. 303.

    Rushton, J. Philippe and Jensen, Arthur R. 2005. Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability.. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, Vol. 11, Issue. 2, p. 235.

    Furnham, Adrian Moutafi, Joanna and Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas 2005. Personality and Intelligence: Gender, the Big Five, Self-Estimated and Psychometric Intelligence. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, Vol. 13, Issue. 1, p. 11.

    Gray, Jeremy R. and Thompson, Paul M. 2004. Neurobiology of intelligence: science and ethics. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, Vol. 5, Issue. 6, p. 471.

    Kreiter, Clarence D. Stansfield, Brent James, Paul A. and Solow, Catherine 2003. A Model for Diversity In Admissions: A Review of Issues and Methods and an Experimental Approach. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 116.

    Sternberg, Robert J. 2003. WICS: A Model of Leadership in Organizations. Academy of Management Learning & Education, Vol. 2, Issue. 4, p. 386.

    Sternberg, Robert and Hedlund, Jennifer 2002. Practical Intelligence, g, and Work Psychology. Human Performance, Vol. 15, Issue. 1, p. 143.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 2000
  • Online publication date: June 2012

9 - Group Differences in Intelligence

Summary

INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP DIFFERENCES

Individual differences are primary; group differences are secondary. The individual is the biological and societal unit that develops, that learns, that thinks, that wants, that feels, that acts. The group is a collection of individuals – sometimes just that, sometimes with a structure of its own.

The individual members of any species, such as humans, have a great many characteristics in common; indeed, judged against the varied forms of life on this earth one might deem them virtually indistinguishable. Yet from a viewpoint within the human species, we see them as differing in an array of biological and psychological characteristics, and these differences are often of intense social, personal, and economic interest to us.

On the basis of such individual variation, individuals may be classified in numerous ways and for various purposes into subgroups. A particular human may be placed simultaneously into groups according to age, sex, occupation, ancestry, religious preference, marital status, home ownership, political party affiliation, sexual orientation, television viewing habits, taste in soft drinks, and any number of other criteria. These classifications can be said to be secondary in the sense that they derive from already-existing characteristics of the individual; that someone may choose to classify an individual into one or another category does not in itself change that individual in any way whatsoever – although, of course, the individual's or others' reactions to this act of classification may have such an effect.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Handbook of Intelligence
  • Online ISBN: 9780511807947
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511807947
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×