Cover Image: November 2009 Scientific American Magazine See Inside

Smart Set: Exploring Intelligence in the Brain

Acting Editor in Chief Mariette DiChristina introduces the November/December issue of Scientific American MIND














Share on Tumblr

We’ve all seen the pretty pictures. Colored scans, produced by techniques that measure blood flow or the movement of a tracer chemical, reveal the activity of areas of the brain when we are thinking about something. The revolution in imaging in the past couple of decades has taught us a lot about what the brain is doing while we cogitate. One thing we’ve learned is that those more active areas aren’t always the same from brain to brain when considering a certain problem. Not all brains are the same size or shape, as you might expect, but they also think differently.

So where does intelligence arise? Neuroscientist Richard J. Haier poses that question in our cover story, “What Does a Smart Brain Look Like?” Just as occurs with other types of processing, how we think when we are solving tasks differs among individuals. “Two people with the same IQ may solve a problem with equal speed and accuracy, each using a very different network of brain areas,” Haier writes. It may be time for a new definition of intelligence, he proposes, based on the size of key brain areas and how efficiently they manage information flow. Could brain scans someday show our aptitude for a given subject, helping us figure out what topics to focus on for our best success?

Intelligence not only exists in various places in the brain, it’s variable as well. We all know people who seem perfectly smart and yet have made poor decisions at critical junctures. As it turns out, there’s a reason for that: it is possible to test high in IQ yet to suffer from a logical-thought defect known as dysrationalia. In “Rational and Irrational Thought: The Thinking That IQ Tests Miss,” neuroscientist Keith E. Stanovich provides two causes. One is that people are often cognitive misers—taking the easy way out when trying to solve problems, which leads them to make errors. Second, they may lack the specific knowledge, rules or strategies to handle a situation. Stanovich argues that tests that can measure dysrationalia should be conducted more often to identify the flaw, the better to manage it. Sounds smart to us.


This article was originally published with the title Smart Set.



Buy This Issue
If your institution has site license access, enter here.

3 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. brainboy 05:11 PM 11/6/09

    The latest research (http://www.pnas.org/content/105/19/6829.abstract) shows that intelligence can be improved. They have the training used in this study up here: http://www.lumosity.com/training_applications/dual-n-back.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. rightlyso 10:10 PM 11/11/09

    Keith Stanovich omits the irrationality of belief and its emotional influence over the rational and objective functions of the brain. Perception and the ability to interpret sense input as reality requires an objectivity free from the prejudgment of habituated behavioral response.
    Intelligence is the ability to perceive without belief distortions. Smart is the lack of prejudice or bias.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. verdai 07:10 PM 11/14/09

    yeah, and you aint seen nothing yet-

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

Follow Us:

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American MIND

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital

Latest from SA Blog Network

  SA Digital

Email this Article

Smart Set: Exploring Intelligence in the Brain: Scientific American Mind

X
Scientific American Mind

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X