How Thurstone’s Theory Differs from Spearman’s General Intelligence Model

Introduction: Overview of Thurstone’s and Spearman’s Models

Both Spearman and Thurstone made significant contributions to the field of psychometrics, particularly in the study of intelligence. Their work aimed to unravel the complexities of human cognitive abilities, yet they arrived at different conclusions regarding how these abilities should be measured and understood.

Spearman focused on a single, overarching factor of intelligence, known as general intelligence or *g*. Thurstone, however, argued for a more complex structure, proposing multiple independent abilities. These differing perspectives shape the way intelligence is measured and understood today.

Spearman’s General Intelligence (g) Model

Charles Spearman's theory is based on the concept of general intelligence, abbreviated as *g*. He developed this model using factor analysis, which showed that individuals who performed well on one cognitive task tended to excel in others. This observation led him to hypothesize that there must be a common factor influencing all cognitive abilities.

In Spearman's model, general intelligence represents the core cognitive energy or capacity that an individual uses to solve problems, reason, and process information. While specific skills, such as verbal or mathematical abilities, exist in his framework, they are seen as secondary to *g*.

Spearman's belief was that general intelligence dominates cognitive performance, and thus the variations in mental abilities across different tasks could be largely attributed to the influence of *g*.

Thurstone’s Theory of Primary Mental Abilities (PMA)

Louis Thurstone, on the other hand, rejected the idea of a single general intelligence. Through his own factor analysis, Thurstone identified seven distinct areas of cognitive skill, which he termed the Primary Mental Abilities (PMA). These included:

• Verbal comprehension
• Word fluency
• Numerical ability
• Spatial visualization
• Memory
• Perceptual speed
• Inductive reasoning

Thurstone argued that these abilities were relatively independent of one another. A person could excel in one area, such as verbal comprehension, but not necessarily perform as well in another, like numerical ability. His model emphasized the complexity of human cognition and suggested that intelligence was better understood through a diverse set of skills rather than a single, unified factor.

Key Differences Between Thurstone and Spearman

The primary difference between Spearman’s and Thurstone’s models lies in their views on the structure of intelligence. Spearman argued for a single general intelligence, while Thurstone emphasized the existence of multiple independent abilities. Here are the key distinctions:

1. Single Factor vs. Multiple Factors: Spearman believed in the dominance of a single general factor (*g*) in intelligence, whereas Thurstone proposed that intelligence is composed of several separate abilities.

2. Interdependence of Abilities: Spearman's model suggests that cognitive abilities are interconnected, with *g* influencing performance across all tasks. In contrast, Thurstone viewed these abilities as largely independent.

3. Focus on Cognitive Diversity: Thurstone’s model provides a more detailed understanding of cognitive diversity by recognizing multiple distinct abilities, offering a more nuanced picture of human intelligence compared to Spearman’s singular focus on *g*.

4. Implications for Testing: Spearman’s theory supports intelligence tests that yield a single score representing overall mental capacity. Thurstone’s model, however, encourages tests that provide a profile of strengths and weaknesses across different cognitive areas.

Conclusion: Comparison and Implications

While Spearman and Thurstone both used factor analysis in their studies of intelligence, their interpretations differed significantly. Spearman's general intelligence model emphasizes a single underlying factor driving all cognitive abilities, while Thurstone’s theory highlights a collection of independent mental abilities.

Each theory has had a lasting impact on how intelligence is measured and understood. Spearman’s focus on general intelligence has influenced the development of IQ tests that provide a singular score, while Thurstone’s model has encouraged assessments that explore a range of cognitive skills. The debate between these theories continues to shape discussions around intelligence testing and cognitive evaluation.

Back to Top

Return to Thurstone’s Primary Mental Abilities Main Section