<p>My impression is that the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model is the most established and well respected framework. I.e., the closest thing that we have to something like the &quot;Big Five&quot; in personality.</p>
<p>It incorporates the importance of g, which is arguably one of the most fundamental ideas in intelligence research.</p>
<p>But it also focuses quite a bit on the distinction between fluid and crystalised intelligence. It is a very developed taxonomy based on a lot of theoretical and empirical work.</p>
<p>Sternberg's model of practical intelligence and Gardner's model of multiple intelligences often seem to get mentioned in entry-level textbooks but I don't think they enjoy mainstream support in the intelligence community.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-21T12:12:05.877Z
Thanks a lot for your reply! From the literatures I've read I'd agree with you. The CHC-model (especially with the additions from Carroll) get the gist of all psychometric theories (g-Factor), displays them hierarchically (which is arguably standard nowadays) and takes fluid and crystallized intelligence (whereas fluid may decrease) into account. Though what I'd need is some review paper and/or literature confirming the hypothesis. A curriculum for universities or schools would be sufficient as well - I'd like to proof the statement that e.g. the CHC-model is the most accepted amongst experts
J. Doe
CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-21T10:13:31.293Z
2020-08-21T10:13:31.293Z
Jeromy Anglim
<p>What's the current scientific and schooled (university or alike) consens as far as Intelligence theories are concerned?
Which theory / model is currently (broadly) being taught? Please be specific and link corresponding sources.</p>
<p>I wasn't able to find anything besides a quote from Gottfredson, 1997 and Sternberg, 2003: &quot;Virtually all psychologists now believe that there is a generalized intelligence factor, g&quot; ... so is Spearman's two factor theory the current basis? Or in general that a general factor exists, which rules out a few theories like Thurstones or Gardners, but doesn't specify which to &quot;follow&quot;.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-08-18T06:00:49.063Z
Could anyone help me?
J. Doe
<intelligence>
What intelligence theory is being taught?
J. Doe
# What intelligence theory is being taught?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-08-17)

What's the current scientific and schooled (university or alike) consens as far as Intelligence theories are concerned?
Which theory / model is currently (broadly) being taught? Please be specific and link corresponding sources.

I wasn't able to find anything besides a quote from Gottfredson, 1997 and Sternberg, 2003: "Virtually all psychologists now believe that there is a generalized intelligence factor, g" ... so is Spearman's two factor theory the current basis? Or in general that a general factor exists, which rules out a few theories like Thurstones or Gardners, but doesn't specify which to "follow".

**Tags:** intelligence

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Could anyone help me?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2020-08-21. Score: 2

My impression is that the Cattell-Horn-Carroll model is the most established and well respected framework. I.e., the closest thing that we have to something like the "Big Five" in personality.

It incorporates the importance of g, which is arguably one of the most fundamental ideas in intelligence research.

But it also focuses quite a bit on the distinction between fluid and crystalised intelligence. It is a very developed taxonomy based on a lot of theoretical and empirical work.

Sternberg's model of practical intelligence and Gardner's model of multiple intelligences often seem to get mentioned in entry-level textbooks but I don't think they enjoy mainstream support in the intelligence community.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Thanks a lot for your reply! From the literatures I've read I'd agree with you. The CHC-model (especially with the additions from Carroll) get the gist of all psychometric theories (g-Factor), displays them hierarchically (which is arguably standard nowadays) and takes fluid and crystallized intelligence (whereas fluid may decrease) into account. Though what I'd need is some review paper and/or literature confirming the hypothesis. A curriculum for universities or schools would be sufficient as well - I'd like to proof the statement that e.g. the CHC-model is the most accepted amongst experts  

---

