In contrast to Anderson's theory, Sternberg's triarchic theory considers individual experience and context, as well as the basic mechanisms of information processing. Sternberg's theory includes three parts, or sub-theories: the component theory, which considers thought processes; the experiential sub-theory, which considers the influence of individual experience on intelligence; and the contextual sub-theory, which considers environmental and cultural influences (Sternberg, 1988). The most developed of them is the component sub-theory.
Component theory considers the components of thinking. Sternberg identifies three types of components:
- Metacomponents used for planning, controlling, monitoring, and evaluating information processing in the process of solving problems.
- The Executive components are responsible for the use of problem-solving strategies.
- Knowledge acquisition components that are responsible for encoding, combining, and comparing information in the process of solving problems.
These components are interrelated; they all participate in the process of solving the problem, and none of them can function independently of the others.
Sternberg examines the functioning of intelligence components using the following analogy problem as an example:
a lawyer treats a client the way a doctor treats:
A series of experiments with such tasks led Sternberg to conclude that the coding process and the comparison process are critical components. The subject encodes each of the words of the proposed task by forming a mental representation of this word, in this case — a list of features of this word, reproduced from long-term memory. For example, the mental representation of the word "lawyer" may include the following attributes: College education, awareness of legal procedures, represents a client in court, and so on. After the subject has formed a mental representation for each word from the presented problem, the comparison process scans these representations in search of matching features that lead to the solution of the problem.
Other processes are also involved in analogy problems, but Sternberg showed that individual differences in solutions to this problem fundamentally depend on the efficiency of coding and comparison processes. According to experimental data, individuals with higher scores in solving analogy problems (experienced in solving) spend more time coding and form more accurate mental representations than individuals with low scores in such problems (inexperienced in solving). At the comparison stage, on the contrary, those experienced in the solution compare features faster than those inexperienced, but both are equally accurate. Thus, the best performance of experienced test subjects is based on the greater accuracy of their coding process, but the time required for them to solve the problem is a complex mixture of slow coding and fast comparison (Galotti, 1989; Pellegrino, 1985).
However, it is not possible to fully explain the individual differences between people observed in the intellectual sphere using the component sub-theory alone. An experimental theory was developed to explain the role of individual experience in the functioning of intelligence. According to Sternberg, differences in people's experience affect their ability to solve specific tasks. An individual who has not previously encountered a particular concept, such as a mathematical formula or analogy problems, will have more difficulty using this concept than an individual who has already used it. Thus, individual experience associated With a particular task or problem can range from complete lack of experience to automatic task completion (i.e., to complete familiarity with the task as a result of long-term experience of contact with it).
Of course, the fact that an individual is familiar with certain concepts is largely determined by the environment. This is where the contextual sub-theory comes into play. This sub-theory considers the cognitive activity required to adapt to specific environmental contexts (Sternberg, 1985). It focuses on the analysis of three intellectual processes: adaptation, selection, and formation of environmental conditions that actually surround the subject. According to Sternberg, the individual is primarily looking for ways to adapt or adapt to the environment. If adaptation is not possible, the individual tries to choose a different environment or shape the conditions of the existing environment in such a way that he can adapt to them more successfully. For example, if a person is unhappy in their marriage, it may be impossible for them to adapt to the circumstances around them. Therefore, he or she can choose a different environment (for example, if he or she is separated or divorced from his or her spouse) or try to shape the existing conditions in a more acceptable way (for example, by contacting a family consultation) (Sternberg, 1985).
Other theories of intelligence
- Gardner's theory of multiple intelligence см.→
- Anderson's theory of intelligence and cognitive development см.→
- Bioecological theory of Ceci см.→
The theory of intelligence: the results
Despite these differences, all theories of intelligence share a number of common features. All of them try to take into account the biological basis of intelligence, Whether it is a basic processing mechanism or a set of multiple intellectual abilities, modules, or cognitive potentials. см.→