Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

  1. #1
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,703
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Triarchic Theory of Intelligence

    I remember reading about the Triarchic Theory of Intelligence by Robert J. Sternberg a while back and I found it pretty interesting. It's a theory of intelligence that basically states that there are three kinds of intelligence and only one of them is the traditional definition of intelligence. The three different kinds of intelligence according to this theory are Component/Analytical, Experiential/Creative, Practical/Contextual.

    This link explains the theory in detail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triarch...f_intelligence


    Componential / Analytical Subtheory

    Sternberg associated the componential subtheory with analytical giftedness. This is one of three types of giftedness that Sternberg recognizes. Analytical giftedness is influential in being able to take apart problems and being able to see solutions not often seen. Unfortunately, individuals with only this type are not as adept at creating unique ideas of their own. This form of giftedness is the type that is tested most often.
    Other areas deal with creativity and other abilities not easily tested. Sternberg gave the example of a student, “Alice”, who had excellent test scores and grades, and teachers viewed her as extremely smart. Alice was later seen having trouble in graduate school because she was not adept at creating ideas of her own (Sternberg, 1997). ..


    Experiential / Creative Subtheory

    Sternberg’s 2nd stage of his theory is his experiential subtheory. This stage deals mainly with how well a task is performed with regard to how familiar it is. Sternberg splits the role of experience into two parts: novelty and automation.
    A novel situation is one that you have never experienced before. People that are adept at managing a novel situation can take the task and find new ways of solving it that the majority of people would not notice (Sternberg, 1997).
    A process that has been automated has been performed multiple times and can now be done with little or no extra thought. Once a process is automatized, it can be run in parallel with the same or other processes. The problem with novelty and automation is that being skilled in one component does not ensure that you are skilled in the other (Sternberg, 1997).
    The experiential subtheory also correlates with another one of Sternberg’s proposed types of giftedness. Synthetic giftedness is seen in creativity, intuition, and a study of the arts. People with synthetic giftedness are not often seen with the highest IQ’s because there are not currently any tests that can sufficiently measure these attributes, but synthetic giftedness is especially useful in creating new ideas to create and solve new problems. Sternberg also associated another one of his students, “Barbara”, to the synthetic giftedness. Barbara did not perform as well as Alice on the tests taken to get into school, but was recommended to Yale University based on her exceptional creative and intuitive skills. Barbara was later very valuable in creating new ideas for research (Sternberg, 1997).


    Practical / Contextual Subtheory

    Sternberg’s third subtheory of intelligence, called practical or contextual, “deals with the mental activity involved in attaining fit to context” (Sternberg, 1985, p.45). Through the three processes of adaptation, shaping, and selection, individuals create an ideal fit between themselves and their environment. This type of intelligence is often referred to as "street smarts."
    Adaptation occurs when one makes a change within oneself in order to better adjust to one’s surroundings (Sternberg, 1985). For example, when the weather changes and temperatures drop, people adapt by wearing extra layers of clothing to remain warm.
    Shaping occurs when one changes their environment to better suit one’s needs (Sternberg, 1985). A teacher may invoke the new rule of raising hands to speak to ensure that the lesson is taught with least possible disruption.
    The process of selection is undertaken when a completely new alternate environment is found to replace the previous, unsatisfying environment to meet the individual’s goals (Sternberg, 1985). For instance, immigrants leave their lives in their homeland countries where they endure economical and social hardships and go to other countries in search of a better and less strained life.
    The effectiveness with which an individual fits to his or her environment and contends with daily situations reflects degree of intelligence. Sternberg’s third type of giftedness, called practical giftedness, involves the ability to apply synthetic and analytic skills to everyday situations. Practically gifted people are superb in their ability to succeed in any setting (Sternberg, 1997). An example of this type of giftedness is "Celia". Celia did not have outstanding analytical or synthetic abilities, but she “was highly successful in figuring out what she needed to do in order to succeed in an academic environment. She knew what kind of research was valued, how to get articles into journals, how to impress people at job interviews, and the like” (Sternberg, 1997, p.44). Celia’s contextual intelligence allowed her to use these skills to her best advantage.
    Sternberg also acknowledges that an individual is not restricted to having excellence in only one of these three intelligences. Many people may possess an integration of all three and have high levels of all three intelligences.
    Practical Intelligence is also a topic covered by Malcolm Gladwell in his book "Outliers: The story of success" [1]

    I'm just curious to know what you guys would rank these intelligences in order from strongest to weakest for yourself. If you don't believe the theory is accurate then I'd like to know why. I also wonder if this has any correlation with Socionics if at all.


    I'd rank myself:

    1. Experiential / Creative
    2. Componential / Analytical
    3. Practical / Contextual
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  2. #2
    Sauron, The Great Enemy ArchonAlarion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    POOPLAIR
    TIM
    Alpha NT 5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    4,399
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I guess

    componential/analytical
    experiential/creative
    practical/contextual

  3. #3
    lump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    TIM
    Fi/Te 641 sp/sx
    Posts
    12,624
    Mentioned
    634 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    componential/analytical
    practical/contextual
    experiential/creative

  4. #4
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Probably

    Creative
    Analytical
    Practical

    However it depends on what we are talking about, in certain areas I have much more practical experience than other and in other area people completely outclass my knowledge, I'd imagine this principle could be applied across all three. But overall this is what I think I favor - Experience first, then analysis of a method, followed by practice.

  5. #5
    strangeling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,705
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I feel like I'm too retarded to really say I'm 'good' at any of these. I'm probably mediocre at all of them, quite honestly. But...um...yeah, interesting.

  6. #6
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,703
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gambit View Post
    I feel like I'm too retarded to really say I'm 'good' at any of these. I'm probably mediocre at all of them, quite honestly. But...um...yeah, interesting.
    Regardless of anyone's overall intelligence level or intelligence in any of these intelligences, we still tend to vary in strength between the three of them.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  7. #7
    strangeling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,705
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    Regardless of anyone's overall intelligence level or intelligence in any of these intelligences, we still tend to vary in strength between the three of them.
    Okay, I guess this sounds good then

    Experiential / Creative Subtheory
    Componential / Analytical Subtheory
    Practical / Contextual Subtheory

  8. #8
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1 Analytical
    2 Creative
    3 Contextual

    Quote Originally Posted by Samuel Goldwyn
    Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day.
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  9. #9
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Meh, most (let's exclude those who are borderline autistic and-or are extreme bookish types) "smart" people seem to have an equal amount of these "intelligences" imho.

    Anyway I think I am decent at all three, just looking at the examples.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #10
    ■■■■■■ Radio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,574
    Mentioned
    153 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Raver View Post
    I'd rank myself:

    1. Experiential / Creative
    2. Componential / Analytical
    3. Practical / Contextual
    Same here.

  11. #11
    the flying pig Capitalist Pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    5,936
    Mentioned
    122 Post(s)
    Tagged
    7 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm too retarded to rate myself. I like it better when other people do it.

    edit: or a test tells me which I can then discard the result as useless, but mildly entertaining

  12. #12
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,703
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Meh, most (let's exclude those who are borderline autistic and-or are extreme bookish types) "smart" people seem to have an equal amount of these "intelligences" imho.

    Anyway I think I am decent at all three, just looking at the examples.
    I agree that true smart people tend to be rather strong and balanced at all of them as opposed to being really good at one type of intelligence even if there are some slight variations. However, I find these types of people usually to be quite rare.

    Quote Originally Posted by Capitalist Pig View Post
    I'm too retarded to rate myself. I like it better when other people do it.

    edit: or a test tells me which I can then discard the result as useless, but mildly entertaining
    I tried to look for an online test, but I couldn't find one unfortunately.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •