Image: Bart Coenders/iStockPhoto
In Brief
- Smarter brains tend to be bigger—at least in certain locations. Researchers have fingered parts of the parietal and frontal lobes as well as a structure called the anterior cingulate as important for superior cognition.
- Some studies suggest that the brains of brighter people use less energy to solve certain problems than those of people with lower aptitudes do. But under certain circumstances, scientists have also observed higher neuronal power consumption in individuals with superior mental capacities.
- People often overestimate the importance of intellectual ability. Practice and perseverance contribute more to accomplishment than being smart does.
More In This Article
-
Sidebar
Coaching the Gifted Child
Within hours of his demise in 1955, Albert Einstein’s brain was salvaged, sliced into 240 pieces and stored in jars for safekeeping. Since then, researchers have weighed, measured and otherwise inspected these biological specimens of genius in hopes of uncovering clues to Einstein’s spectacular intellect.
Their cerebral explorations are part of a century-long effort to uncover the neural basis of high intelligence or, in children, giftedness. Traditionally, 2 to 5 percent of kids qualify as gifted, with the top 2 percent scoring above 130 on an intelligence quotient (IQ) test. (The statistical average is 100. See the box on the opposite page.) A high IQ increases the probability of success in various academic areas. Children who are good at reading, writing or math also tend to be facile at the other two areas and to grow into adults who are skilled at diverse intellectual tasks [see “Solving the IQ Puzzle,” by James R. Flynn; Scientific American Mind, October/November 2007].
This article was originally published with the title High-Aptitude Minds.
See what we're tweeting about
31 Comments
Add Commenti have always been interested in the way mind works and the way it can be controlled for the benifit ,specially controlling fear , restlessness , tension etc.this magazine has covered very interesting areas.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article doesn't mention the difficulty of defining "intelligence." What is it exactly? Are there more than one type of intelligence? Rather than being a persistent trait, could it be contextual and contingent?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs in all psychological topics, research into a question has to feed back into the semantics of the question itself. Research into the causes of depression, for instance, may show that what we call "depression" is really several different disorders. And so on.
IQ tests are still the best way of finding those in groups who best the rest in reasoning ability. Even though the groups may come from different culture, the top individuals in the group can be spotted.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisthis article is wonderful in its conclusion. regardless of one's mind capacity, the hard-working worth a million
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt the end of the day, what is more important: to be intelligent or to have a sound character? I think the answer is the latter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRe Einstein: Minkowski, one of his instructors Zurich Federal Institute of Technology described him as a "lazy dog" who "never bothered about mathematics at all." And I've heard that Einstein tended to leave the mathematical details to others.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe "lazy dog" who never bothered about mathematics was no bonehead.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Since the mathematicians have invaded the theory of relativity, I do not understand it myself any more." Einstein
"To the extent that the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not true; and to the extent that they are true, they do not refer to reality." Einstein
"I do not deny the importance of math, however, it's just that I think that science should come first! Abstract math seems to be the lubricant for hammering square pegs into round holes." Einstein
"My point is basically that math should be subordinate to empiricism, and that the current crisis in cosomology has resulted, in no small part, from this role reversal!" Einstein
That last quote is still accurate today.
So, smarter people need to use less energy to solve certain problems than others who may accomplish as much using more energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThat's not really true, is it? Problems for some are not problems for others. The need to solve a problem for some is not the same for others. And then, of course, some problems are not understood until they are explained by others.
Intelligence may be the ability not to believe, to be able to see not a problem, but an adventure, to invent possibilities. When the brain is fixated on convictions it has been wired to an emotional anchor and the amount of cognitive ability is limited by belief and behavior responses that are socially acceptable.
Einstein never had "spectacular success" as a mathematician. Actually he never produced any piece of original mathematics. His spectacular success was in physics only.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEinstein never had any "spectacular success" as a mathematician. Indeed, he never had any contribution to mathematics. His spectacular success was as a physicist.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHuman Imagination is the key to human intelligence. The ability of a person to visualize within their brain gives a person with a stronger imagination a better chance to solve a problem. Some people are better at visualizing math problems, some are better a visualizing spacial prolems, etc., etc.. Imagination comes in all forms and strengths. Humans are all part of the "homo imaginative sapiens" species. Imagination is what makes us human.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe article upheld the importance of practice and perseverance for accomplishment besides relating size of the brain with smarter lot. Isn't it a bit more cautious approach just not to get wrong like astrologers? The article is more like Heads you lose, Tails I win.--Mrs. Anindita Dey
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe article upheld the importance of practice and perseverance for accomplishment besides relating size of the brain with smarter lot. Isn't it a bit more cautious approach just not to get wrong like astrologers? The article is more like ‘Heads’ you lose, ‘Tails’ I win.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGood point on bringing to the table of discussion the definition of "intelligence". I would invite all here in this forum to focus on intelligence and tell what you think it is?..
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs to me, intelligence can be put briefly (being of course a very vast concept) as the ability to solve problems. Now what type of problem solving is really intelligent?..in my opinion people who are really intelligent are the ones who have long term solutions that also apply to vast systems and not only to the directly solve. In few words. A real good solution not only solves what initially the problem was, but goes onto other problems not accounted for. Or more simply, when you discover a real solution, you discover many problems have been solved by that same solution.
Now certain so called "intelligent" individuals may get this solution and apply it to something else and causing another problem. Like scientist using Einstein solutions for a bomb..(!). Anyway, keeping in mind the quest for intelligence is a good subject to medidate in. Now that we have computers all over we can maybe see some dfferences between real intelligence or closer to that than other type of intelligences like the computer intelligence. One is based in memory basically and the other integrate millions of variables like feelings, intuition and information availibility (memory). Good subject.
This article should not have used Einstein as an example. After all Einstein did something which perhaps one other human being, Newton has done something similar to. The explanation for this cannot possibly come in neurological terms alone .All that the neurological evidence can do is group Einstein with certain kinds of people who have certain kinds of brain- patterns and structure. It cannot in any way begin to explain the uniqueness of Einstein. To do that different kinds of explanation involving factors of many different kinds must be brought in. And they must to make sense put into not a study, but a story.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne critical question is not asked in most of the studies cited here. And that is if application, or increasing activity changes the overall- efficiency of the brain's operation. i.e. Are those disciplined learners and students benefiting not only from their longer period of application, but also from an increased efficiency of operation which results from it?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe question not asked as I understand it in most of the surveys is whether or not increased application transforms fundamentally the efficiency of brain- operation i.e. whether or not the reward for diligence is double in increasing probability of success at a particular task.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAn interesting and incisive article-a very human effort from a pragmatic group of scientist. All these scientest and their studies shed no more light on"intelligence" than what was studied in the last two centuries.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow about this idea- the human brain is a conduit . A conduit from the universal ,collective knowledge that has been accumulated in our history as humans. For example , we are smarter than animals, why. The animals are set in their frequencies of their evolution-they will evolve in their own plane of knowledge. Man is in the same game-we evolve in our own plane of knowledge. As our knowledge and experiences grow from generaion to generation, more receptive people tap into that great stored universal bank of knowledge.
How does this work?
well my point of view comes from my ability to recognize that I am a creative genius. I can analyse ,create and basically out think any one I know. This ability isn'd god-sent . The key is that I recognize the fact as a man I am not just stick and mud. Inside this shell of a body is an energy , a soul if I must, that seeks knowledge. This energy merely fires up my imagination to solve a problem. The imagination is part energy(soul) and part brain matter , a recptor that is sensitive to all that has followed before. The younger a child the quicker the receptors and the appearence of genius. Relaxed children or even adults with a young receptive minds are first considered creative , than with training become recognized as genius.
Think about it -I am saying what most of the scientist that participated in this article are afraid to say- there is a relationship between mind and soul. Thecenergy in our frames is an old friend- we know it ,but for some reason are afraid to admit it.
We die and we come back perhaps with the knowledge of many souls,the energy of several souls that lights up our minds-we evolve with every generation.
The evolutionary precedent for intelligence may have been more primitive than what current thinking postulates such that the same only promulgaes academic success. Personal survival and survival of the group may have provided the basis for the same concommitant with the development of language and abstract thinking which facilitated the same.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith regard to the same and a personal note, after I arrived in Vietnam as an Infantry soldier in the US Army, the men in my squad quickly came to the conclusion that I was the most intelligent person amongst them.
They, almost immediately, voted to make me their squad leader.
It is clear that in their minds, my intelligence would both better assure their survival and the accomplishment of the military mission.
They all survived without injury while I was squad leader. One did not take his malaria tablet for the purpose of getting out of the field and avoiding combat. Within nature, including human nature, intelligence is a deceisive factor in personal and group survival.
The article asserts that "practice and perseverance" are more important in achievement than intellect. What about the cerativity involved in problem-solving? All the practice in the world cannot overcome limited perspective and scientific bias. Practice and perseverance without imagination has profound limitations. I have two gifted children. There are many keys to their successes. They include intellect, creativity, hard work, perseverance, ability to learn from failure, support from family and friends, endless curiosity, inability to settle for less than their best effort, and more. To distill all of this to trite statement like "Practice and perseverance contribute more to accomplishment than being smart does" is to tell the readers (us) that human intelligence is easy to understand if we just accept a few grand generalizations and ignore that each of us is unique. It also suggests that working in non-challenging careers is acceptable because achievement is about repetition and "sticking with it".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf there were no "dreamers" where would we be today?
What about the fact that the brain is plastic and is constantly being molded and changed by how it is utilized? The area of einsteins brain that focuses on solving mathimatical functions and complexities is larger because that is the part of the brain he used more so than the average individual, thus having it develop larger. Its why blind individuals are better able to use there other senses like hearing and feeling than people that can see. Practice and experience are the factors that truly distinguish intelligence or any other trait for that matter.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The ability of a person to visualize within their brain gives a person with a stronger imagination a better chance to solve a problem. ... Imagination is what makes us human."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRavens and crows are known for thier ability to solve problems by thinking them through first not a trail and error method. For example, haveing a piece of wire as a tool and so food as the goal, the bird will conptimplate the situation first than use the tool in the correct manner. They don't use the tool in different ways untill they find the correct method. Imagination is definatly a trait of intelligence, it isn't neccesarily limited to humans.
Einstein never made solutions for the "bomb" development. His notable work was the photoelectric effect for which he was awarded the nobel prize. The "bomb" was developed by Enrico Firmi and J Robert Oppenheimer. Einstein only lended his name as a source of credibility to fund the Manhattan project.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI see intel as the ability to solve or create. As a behavior or ability, one of the criteria for the performance standard is time. I am not very quick like a trial lawyer, but I am creative. Because I continually think about the problem, I have solved mechanical design issues is fewer weeks than those with PhDs. Now that I have children, I'm not that smart anymore.
They are good comments, however in this article there is not mention to Corpus Callosum size. It is well known that in adults musicians and children that practice music for two years the coupus callosum is 25% bigger. This will account for faster velocity of interchange between both hemispheres.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJs. Gilberto
There is a misrepresentation of the work by Shaw and colleagues about the size of the cortex and IQ in children. They did find that children with higher IQ grew a thicker cortex, but this was followed by more loss of cortical tissue during adolescence, a natural phenemenon that occurs in adolescents of all IQs. This resulted in NO DIFFERENCE in cortical thickness between the various IQ groups as adults. This important study shows that it is the pattern of development, not the size, that is indicative of IQ.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDMPag
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSimplifying the size of a brain and intelligence sounds anthropological. Things are not always as they appear. Neural connections in the brain are constantly changing based upon repitition and experience. Are you sure that the size of certian brain structures aren't changed because they are used more often, or because life experiences have altered them? Dolphins have bigger brains,but I wouldn't want them doing my taxes.
Simplifying the size of a brain and intelligence sounds anthropological. Things are not always as they appear. Neural connections in the brain are constantly changing based upon repitition and experience. Are you sure that the size of certian brain structures aren't changed because they are used more often, or because life experiences have altered them? Dolphins have bigger brains,but I wouldn't want them doing my taxes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI disagree with what this article is inferring. First of all, the experimenters are not deriving the data from a controlled environment. Consider the subjects; the experiment moves quickly to the consequent, comparing A (Higher IQ) to B (Lower IQ) individuals. And then, throughout the article uses words like bright and genius. These words describe nothing as they are vague interpretations of intelligence. A reputable experiment would consider how these individuals were raised (interaction, education, interests, etc), from the suckling stages to the adult stages. Can they consider a way to isolate the set of conditions that make person A or B? Why should the premise and consequent of this article mean anything? Especially since the answer is so blatantly obvious! When person B doesnt have the information, the brain must work harder to find the answer because it lacks the memory/information or algorithm to attain the result quickly. So if person A already has worked with those types of memories or algorithms in the past, should we be surprised that they solve the problem more efficiently? Therefore, intelligence is contextual/relational. If we take person A, and put them along side an advanced spacecraft from an alien civilization and ask them to reverse engineer it; all the sudden their brains are going to work just as inefficiently as Person B did during those tests. It seems to me this article (like so many academically related materials), are putting the pseudo-genius on this prolific pedestal. To me, I see right through it as a residual reptilian/mammalian programming where species who depend on each other are seeking approval and status from others. With this current societal paradigm pervading all of our media and institutions, its no wonder I dont have a car that uses no fuel.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisis there other ways to deal with it?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEinstein's basis of mathematics is excllent,which guide him achieve great in Physics
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis is very interesting. I and 17 and have an IQ over 140. But I wonder, to this day why I go to school and fail tests. Whatever the reason for that, I have felt like sometimes I didn't have to work as hard as other people to make it. Like how others had to study for two days and I only for ten minutes. Oh, and I have a big head. (smile)This all makes some sense now. But indeed this is interesting: because I thought that brain size correlating to intelligence had been rejected for a long time. Hmph. Maybe not.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this