Survey of expert opinion on intelligence and aptitude testing.

Abstract

Psychologists and educational specialists with expertise in areas related to intelligence testing responded to a questionnaire dealing with a wide variety of issues constituting the IQ controversy. Overall, experts hold positive attitudes about the validity and usefulness of intelligence and aptitude tests. Tests are seen as adequately measuring most important elements of intelligence, although the tests are believed to be somewhat racially and socioeconomically biased. There is overwhelming support for a significant within-group heritability for 1(2, and a majority of respondents feel that black-white and socioeconomic status 1(2 differences are also partially hereditary. Problems with intelligence tests are perceived in the influence of nonintellectual characteristics on test performance and in the frequent misinterpretation and overreliance on test scores in elementary and secondary schools. Despite these difficulties, experts favor the continued use of intelligence and aptitude tests at their present level. Variation in responding to substantive questions on testing is largely resistant to prediction by a host of demographic and background variables, including within-sample variation in expertise. Intelligence tests have been under attack practically since their inception (Cronbach, 1975; Haney, 1981). Critics have claimed, among other things, that intelligence and aptitude tests measure nothing but test-taking skills, have little predictive power, are biased against certain racial and economic groups, are used to stigmatize low scorers, and are tools developed and fostered by those in power in order to maintain the status quo (see Block & Dworkin, 1976, and Houts, 1977, for collections of such critiques). Though perhaps not as apparent as 10 (or 60) years ago, such criticisms remain prevalent (e.g., Gould, 1981; Lewontin, Rose, & Kamin, 1984; Owen, 1985). Moreover, critics of testing appear to have much influence in such organizations as the National Education Association, the news media, the New York State Legislature, and the courts (Bersoff, 1981; Herrnstein, 1982; Lerner, 1980). It is not surprising, of course, in light of the important role intelligence and aptitude tests play in the allocation of valued resources and opportunities, that testing has been a topic of concern in the popular press and in all three branches of government. What is surprising is that much of the public controversy seems to be uninformed. Those who must reach policy decisions about Harvard University Smith College testing often seem more influenced by political considerations than by the empirical literature. There is, of course, no shortage of appeal to expertise. Public opinion and policy are influenced by the perception of opinion: Witness the standard procedure in Congressional hearings and news media stories on technical issues. In public forums, the impression is often given by those who attack tests (e4;., CBS News, 1975; Larry P. v. Wilson Riles, 1979) that many of the longaccepted facts about intelligence tests are subjects of great dispute within the community or that most experts actually agree, for example, that tests are culturally biased, meaningless as anything but predictors of success in school, and unrelated to an individual's genetic endowment. These claims may very well be true, but they are rarely made with sufficient supporting evidence. It is important, therefore, to try to assess the veracity of assertions that there is substantial controversy about, and even animosity toward, testing among those most familiar with the empirical evidence. Surveys of opinion on intelligence testin~ and related issues, among any group, have been scarce since the advent of the most recent wave (post 1969) of testing criticism (see Brim, Glass, Neulinger, & F'trestone, 1969, for an earlier comprehensive survey of public opinion, and Lerner, 1981, for a review of more recent public opinion surveys). One group that has been particularly ill served by survey research is testing experts. Those who conduct research on the nature of intelligence and test use and those who design and validate tests, and who therefore are most qualified to evaluate criticisms of testingin the context of the body of psychometric and cognitive ability literature have rarely been asked their opinions about the most important issues of public contention surrounding intelligence tests. To date, there are no comprehemive polls of this sort. Such a survey is needed, but not because it will resolve any of the various controversies surrounding testing; issues of fact are not settled via consensus. A comprehensive survey of opinion about intelligence testing is necessary because the use of intelligence and epfitude testing represents an important public policy issue. A survey of opinion will not settle this issue, but it will allow a clearer picture of informed opinion to enter the public debate. In a way, it is a method of pooling expert testimony for