Is Intelligence Just A Western Concept?

Many prominent scholars in intelligence research originate from Western societies, leading critics to argue that intelligence theories and assessments reflect an ethnocentric perspective. Some contend that Western conceptions of intelligence are either overly restrictive or entirely incompatible with non-Western perspectives, making it questionable whether intelligence can even be meaningfully studied or assessed in non-Western populations.

This skepticism is understandable given that various cultures conceptualize intelligence differently. Chinese cultures incorporate ethical use of knowledge into their understanding of intelligence. Certain East African and Indian cultures emphasize task persistence as a crucial cognitive ability. Zimbabwean perspectives include social competencies and family care as essential intelligence components. The Cree value deliberation and patience. Clearly, Western definitions exclude abilities that other cultures prize.

However, cultural beliefs about intelligence don't necessarily reflect its true nature. The same reasoning that treats folk beliefs as evidence about intelligence could justify using widespread cultural beliefs in supernatural beings as proof of their existence. Language-based definitions inevitably produce disagreement and ambiguity.

A more productive approach examines whether g—the general intelligence factor derived statistically through factor analysis—exists across cultures. This method avoids the limitations of verbal definitions.

My colleague and I conducted a comprehensive investigation using archival cognitive test data from non-Western, non-industrialized nations. We reasoned that if g were merely a Western cultural artifact, it would be least likely to appear in these populations. We identified 97 analyzable datasets from 31 countries across Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Asia, encompassing 50,103 individuals of varying ages.

The findings were compelling. Of the 97 samples, 71 produced g unambiguously. Among the remaining 26 datasets that initially yielded multiple factors, 23 produced g when those factors underwent secondary analysis. Overall, 94 of 97 samples (96.9%) demonstrated g. Furthermore, g's strength in non-Western samples matched that found in Western populations.

This consistency proved remarkable considering the samples' diversity in age, education, lifestyle, and Western cultural exposure. The datasets included various task types—translated Western tests, culturally adapted assessments, scholastic examinations, neurological evaluations, and tests developed by non-Western researchers. Notably, Western-style cognitive tests are widely used in non-Western countries, with indigenous psychologists rarely finding it necessary to add culturally specific components.

If g is universal, cultural differences apparently don't eliminate or substantially alter it. I theorize that g emerged early in human evolution as a fundamental aspect of brain function. Supporting this view, research demonstrates g factors in various mammal species including dogs, rodents, donkeys, and non-human primates. Perhaps g originated in early mammalian evolution, making it unlikely that human cultural variations could eliminate it from any population.

While g appears universal, this doesn't mean any intelligence test can be administered anywhere. Tests must remain culturally appropriate and comprehensible. Although intelligence manifestations—the specific skills and knowledge reflecting g—may be culturally specific, all humans possess intelligence. The challenge lies in developing culturally suitable methods for people to demonstrate their abilities.



From Chapter 4 of "In the Know: Debunking 35 Myths About Human Intelligence" by Dr. Russell Warne (2020)