SINGLE TESTS AND SERIES OF TESTS 21 



(judging, criticizing, deliberating, and deciding), 

 etc. 



These functions of intelligence must, then, be con- 

 sidered in their totality; and the actual testing of 

 them ought not to be omitted unless we were certain 

 that they had already been examined by implication 

 along with some other tested function. Suppose 

 that in a group of persons it had been possible to 

 show that X had the best ability to combine; is it 

 then certain that he would also take first place in 

 other forms of activity involving intelligence and 

 that he might, accordingly, be ranked first in total 

 intelligence? 



To ask this question is enough to insure a nega- 

 tive reply. I feel, I admit, that Spearman (75, 77, 

 80) is right in asserting that intelligence does really 

 signify a general capacity which colors in a definite 

 way the whole mental behavior of an individual. 

 But we must not force this idea nor does Spear- 

 man so far as to assume that all the separate con- 

 stituent functions of intelligence in the different 

 fields are mechanically of equivalent degree. Such 

 a view is, indeed, contradicted by the circumstance 

 that there is operative in each individual bit of be- 

 havior not only a given quantity of intelligence, but 

 also the special quality of intelligence of the person 

 tested, and besides these a varied number of other 

 mental traits. Thus, there are persons who have a 

 pretty high grade of general intelligence, but who 

 manifest it much better in analytic and critical than 

 in synthetic work ; again, there are persons in whom 

 the receptive activities of intelligence (apprehend- 

 ing and understanding) are superior to the more 

 spontaneous activities, and so on. 



