Part 7 (2/2)

Judgment Trait

of

of

Trait

of

of

Others

Self

Others

Self ------------+--------+--------++------------+--------+-------- Neatness

.22

.45

Vulgarity

-.24

-.37 Intelligence

.49

.59

Sn.o.bbishness

.33

-.27 Humor

.59

.87

Conceit

.19

-.22 Beauty

.23

.15

Refinement

.38

.83

Sociability

.48

.47

--------------------------------------------------------------

In the cases of the definitely ”undesirable” traits, vulgarity, sn.o.bbishness and conceit, the coefficients tend to be negative, and although none of them is very high, they suggest that the possession of these traits to a given degree tends to disqualify the individual to that degree as a judge of those traits, whether in herself or in others. These results also confirm the results in the case of certain of the ”desirable”

traits, since vulgarity and sn.o.bbishness, with low or negative coefficients, are, grammatically at least, the opposites of refinement and sociability, which have high and positive coefficients.

In general, then, our results suggest that, in the case of ”desirable”

traits, ability to judge a quality accompanies possession of that quality, whereas in the case of the ”undesirable” traits the reverse of this is the case.

_IV. What relation exists between these estimated traits and the more objective measurements of the individuals concerned?_ On the basis of the mental tests we have secured measures which may be compared with these estimated traits. The same comparison may be made in the case of the academic records received by the individuals in their college courses. The following table shows the correlation of all the estimated traits with these two objective measurements.

TABLE 6

SHOWING THE RELATION BETWEEN ESTIMATED TRAITS AND (A) THE RESULTS OF MENTAL TESTS; (B) THE ACADEMIC RECORDS OF EACH INDIVIDUAL IN COLLEGE SUBJECTS

(All coefficients are positive unless otherwise indicated)

------------------------------------------------

Correlation

Correlation

Trait

with Mental

with Academic

Average

Tests

Record

------------+-----------+-------------+--------- Intelligence

.62

.52

.57 Humor

.55

.15

.35 Refinement

.34

.34

.34 Sn.o.bbishness

.53

.13

.33 Neatness

.36

.24

.30 Conceit

.54

.03

.28 Beauty

.40

.06

.23 Sociability

.25

-.07

.09 Vulgarity

.29

-.31

-.01 ------------------------------------------------

In the case of the mental tests all the coefficients are positive and fairly high in most cases. The correlation is highest of all with estimated intelligence, whatever that may mean. As we have used the term it perhaps means the impression of general capacity which an individual makes on her a.s.sociates. It is interesting to find that the mental tests, which can be administered in a few minutes, give us so close a measure of what this impression will be; a measure, it should be noted, which is higher than that afforded by the academic records, in spite of the fact that these academic records had been from term to term announced in a public way and might have been expected to contribute toward the general impression on the basis of which the judgments of intelligence were pa.s.sed. The high correlation between tests and estimates suggests that the abilities displayed in these tests correspond very closely to those characteristics on which our a.s.sociates base their estimates of our intelligence. This is an encouraging result for those interested in the vocational use of mental tests.

But it is equally interesting that the results of the mental test correlate to so high a degree with the estimates of various other traits, notably humor, sn.o.bbishness, conceit, beauty, neatness and refinement. This result suggests either or both of two interpretations. It may be, on the one hand, that these characteristics are only partial components of that more general trait, intelligence (with which the correlation of the tests is still higher), at least so far as the estimates of our a.s.sociates are concerned.

This would mean that a sense of humor, a tendency toward self-esteem, physical attractiveness and a gentle manner dispose one's a.s.sociates to think favorably of her general mental endowment. On the other hand the result may mean that an individual who has sufficient distinction to stand out prominently in any of the estimated traits here considered is possessed of a nervous system which enables her to accomplish the work of these mental tests with corresponding efficiency. Such a characteristic as ”general stand-out-ishness” may perhaps be a trait which calls for recognition, not only in daily life but also in the narrower categories of psychological cla.s.sification.

In the case of the academic records this general tendency toward positive correlation is not present. The only high correlation is with estimated intelligence. It is impossible to say how far this high coefficient is due to general knowledge of academic attainments on the part of the individuals composing the groups. Refinement and neatness are the only other traits which show any claim at all for correlation with academic records. The positive direction of these coefficients may afford some consolation to those who put their faith in the vocational significance of academic records of college students, but their low values const.i.tute a somewhat less encouraging commentary.

_V. How do the various measures of intelligence compare with one another, and what is the reliability of these various measures?_ Frequent studies have been made of the relation between teachers' estimates of the general intelligence of pupils and their intelligence as shown by their performance in psychological tests. The teacher's estimate is perhaps very likely to be based on that sort of intelligence which shows itself in academic performance only, since in many cases the acquaintance is limited to contact in cla.s.s room and laboratory. In our own case we have teachers'

estimates only in the form of the actual cla.s.s records. These are, then, not estimates of general intelligence in the strict sense, but are conditioned presumably for the most part by the student's performance in the cla.s.s room.

The academic marks were reported according to a letter system, in which A means ”very good,” B means ”good,” C means ”fair,” D means ”poor” and F means ”failed.” Having secured these marks for all the students in English, German, Logic, Psychology, Economics and History, we averaged the marks for each student, by giving A, B, C, D and F values of 90, 80, 70, 60 and 50.

This gave us final averages for all the students, on the basis of which averages they were arranged in order of merit, the two groups being separately treated.

We have now the three following measures of intelligence:

a. The results of the psychological tests.

b. The opinion of fellow students.

c. The academic records.

The correlations between these various measures are given in the following tabulation:

TABLE 7

SHOWING THE CORRELATIONS BETWEEN VARIOUS MEASURES OF INTELLIGENCE

--------------------------------------------------------

25

25

Juniors

Seniors ----------------------------------------+-------+------- Correlation of psychological tests with

estimated Intelligence

.70

.53 Correlation of psychological tests with

Academic Records

.42

.57 Correlation of Academic Records with

estimated Intelligence

.22

.37 --------------------------------------------------------

<script>