problem solving and iq

Intelligence and Decision-Making: Do Smarter People Really Think Faster?

Summary Researchers made a startling discovery about intelligence and decision-making speed. Their findings indicate that those with higher IQs are quicker when solving simple tasks, but take more time to resolve complex problems compared to those with lower IQs.

Using personalized brain simulations of 650 subjects, they observed that brains with reduced synchrony between areas tend to “jump to conclusions,” whereas brains of higher-scoring individuals take longer but make fewer errors.

These findings could significantly impact our understanding of brain function and may be applicable in treating neurodegenerative diseases.

• Researchers discovered that people with higher IQs are quicker when solving simple tasks but slower when dealing with complex problems.
• The research was based on personalized brain simulations of 650 participants from the Human Connectome Project.
• The findings suggest a balance of excitation-inhibition in neurons influences decision-making and problem-solving capabilities.

Source: BIH

Do intelligent people think faster?

Researchers at the BIH and Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, together with a colleague from Barcelona, made the surprising finding that participants with higher intelligence scores were only quicker when tackling simple tasks, while they took longer to solve difficult problems than subjects with lower IQ scores.

In personalized brain simulations of the 650 participants, the researchers could determine that brains with reduced synchrony between brain areas literally “jump to conclusions” when making decisions, rather than waiting until upstream brain regions could complete the processing steps needed to solve the problem.

In fact, the brain models for higher score participants also needed more time to solve challenging tasks but made fewer errors.

The scientists have now published their findings in the journal  Nature Communications .

There are 100 billion or so neurons in the human brain. Each one of them is connected to an estimated 1,000 neighboring or distant neurons. This unfathomable network is the key to the brain’s amazing capabilities, but it is also what makes it so difficult to understand how the brain works.

Prof. Petra Ritter, head of the Brain Simulation Section at the Berlin Institute of Health at Charité (BIH) and at the Department of Neurology and Experimental Neurology of Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, simulates the human brain using computers.

“We want to understand how the brain’s decision-making processes work and why different people make different decisions,” she says, describing the current project.

Personalized brain models

To simulate the mechanisms of the human brain, Ritter and her team use digital data from brain scans like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as well as mathematical models based on theoretical knowledge about biological processes.

This initially results in a “general” human brain model. The scientists then refine this model using data from individual people, thus creating “personalized brain models.”

For the present study, the scientists worked with data from 650 participants of the Human Connectome Project, a U.S. initiative that has been studying neural connections in the human brain since September 2010.

“It’s the right excitation-inhibition balance of neurons that influences decision-making and more or less enables a person to solve problems,” explains Ritter. Her team knew how participants fared on extensive cognitive tests and what their IQ scores were.

Artificial brains behave like their biological counterparts

“We can reproduce the activity of individual brains very efficiently,” says Ritter.

“We found out in the process that these in silico brains behave differently from one another—and in the same way as their biological counterparts. Our virtual avatars match the intellectual performance and reaction times of their biological analogues.”

Interestingly, the “slower” brains in both the humans and the models were more synchronized, i.e., in time with one other. This greater synchrony allowed neural circuits in the frontal lobe to hold off on decisions longer than brains that were less well coordinated.

The models revealed how reduced temporal coordination results in the information required for decision-making neither being available when needed nor stored in working memory.

Gathering evidence takes time—and leads to correct decisions

Resting-state functional MRI scans showed that slower solvers had higher average functional connectivity, or temporal synchrony, between their brain regions.

In personalized brain simulations of the 650 participants, the researchers could determine that brains with reduced functional connectivity literally “jump to conclusions” when making decisions, rather than waiting until upstream brain regions could complete the processing steps needed to solve the problem.

Participants were asked to identify logical rules in a series of patterns. These rules became increasingly complex with each task and thus more difficult to decipher. In everyday terms, an easy task would consist of quickly braking at a red light, while a hard task would require methodically working out the best route on a road map.

In the model, a so-called winner-take-all competition occurs between different neural groups involved in a decision, with the neural groups for which there is stronger evidence prevailing.

Yet in the case of complex decisions, such evidence is often not clear enough for quick decision-making, literally forcing the neural groups to jump to conclusions.

“Synchronization, i.e., the formation of functional networks in the brain, alters the properties of working memory and thus the ability to ‘endure’ prolonged periods without a decision,” explains Michael Schirner, lead author of the study and a scientist in Ritter’s lab.

“In more challenging tasks, you have to store previous progress in working memory while you explore other solution paths and then integrate these into each other. This gathering of evidence for a particular solution may sometimes takes longer, but it also leads to better results.

“We were able to use the model to show how excitation-inhibition balance at the global level of the whole brain network affects decision-making and working memory at the more granular level of individual neural groups.”

Findings are interesting for treatment planning

Ritter is pleased that the results observed in the computer-based “brain avatars” match the results seen in “real” healthy subjects. After all, her main interest is in helping patients affected by neurodegenerative diseases like dementia and Parkinson’s disease.

“The simulation technology used in this study has made significant strides, and can be used to improve personalized in silico planning of surgical and drug interventions as well as therapeutic brain stimulation.

“For example, a physician can already use a computer simulation to assess which intervention or drug might work best for a particular patient and would have the fewest side effects.”

About this cognition and IQ research news

Author: Stefanie Seltmann Source: BIH Contact: Stefanie Seltmann – BIH Image: The image is credited to Neuroscience News

Original Research: Open access. “ Learning how network structure shapes decision-making for bio-inspired computing ” by Michael Schirner et al. Nature Communications

Learning how network structure shapes decision-making for bio-inspired computing

To better understand how network structure shapes intelligent behavior, we developed a learning algorithm that we used to build personalized brain network models for 650 Human Connectome Project participants.

We found that participants with higher intelligence scores took more time to solve difficult problems, and that slower solvers had higher average functional connectivity.

With simulations we identified a mechanistic link between functional connectivity, intelligence, processing speed and brain synchrony for trading accuracy with speed in dependence of excitation-inhibition balance.

Reduced synchrony led decision-making circuits to quickly jump to conclusions, while higher synchrony allowed for better integration of evidence and more robust working memory. Strict tests were applied to ensure reproducibility and generality of the obtained results.

Here, we identify links between brain structure and function that enable to learn connectome topology from noninvasive recordings and map it to inter-individual differences in behavior, suggesting broad utility for research and clinical applications.

Again… approach is wrong!

Excerpt: “Synchronization, i.e., the formation of functional networks in the brain, alters the properties of working memory and thus the ability to ‘endure’ prolonged periods without a decision,”

Quoted statement jumps ahead of the basic foundational aspect of [brain function]!

EVERYTHING IS ALREADY SYNCHRONIZED FOR THE MOST PART… not resolving any issues.

BASIC BRAIN FUNCTION BREAKDOWN: After high activity brain function at the end of the day… [SLEEP-STRESS-DISTRACTIONS]… REST!

KEY:REST After age of prime (50 – 60 years of age)… [HUMAN BRAIN] does not immediately deteriorate… (exceptions).

[SLEEP]… BRAIN WAVE SIGNALS – SLOWS… EKG CONFIRMS WAVE PATTERNS. LOW ENERGY-[BRAIN WAVES].

WHAT HAPPENS AT THIS POINT? Human body awakes and recovers biological activities… [NOT QUITE]!

BRAIN WAVE OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH NORMAL AWAKE BRAIN WAVES. TWO BRAIN WAVES: ONE CONSCIOUS – SUBCONSCIOUS. CONSCIOUS BRAIN WAVES: MENTAL FUNCTIONS. MEMORIES-LONG/SHORT TERM. PRIMARY ENERGY. SUBCONSCIOUS BRAIN WAVES: BODY FUNCTIONS. ENDOCRINES SYSTEMS, ETC. SECONCARY ENERGY.

CONSCIOUS MEMORIES… Signals brain to send out specific fuel requirement needs. – Food, water, medications. – Addicts: alcohol, drugs, sex, gambling, etc. – Performance schedule requirements for vital function needs… 24 hours.

CONSCIOUS MEMORIES:HUMAN BODY FUNCIONS. – WAKE UP-WASH-DRESS… [PREPARE FOR WORK]. – REQUIRES INFORMATION TO PERFORM DUTIES. – BODY PERFORMS CONSUMING ENERGY.

HUMAN ACTIVITIES: IN-PHASE MENTAL ERROR ALIGNMENT. – END OF DAY CORRECTIONS AND NOTES… WORK PLACE FACILITY.

HUMAN EXHAUSTION-STRESS-ANXIETIES AND FRUSTRATIONS. – MEMORY LAPSES AND WEAK PERFORMANCE. – Chemical exposure… accidents. – Layoffs… top of the list.

HUMAN YEARS OF WORK PERFORMANCE AND REVIEWS… GOOD OR BAD. – WORK CHANGE OR NEW JOB. – IDENTITY CRISES. – INCREASED MEDICATIONS, ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, SEX AND DRUGS.

HUMAN MENTAL RE-EVALUATION AND FINANCIAL STATE. – JOB RE-ENTRY. – ENTHUSIASM LOW. – MULTIPLE JOB RE-ENTRIES. – WEIGHT GAIN.

BRAIN WAVE OUT OF ALIGNMENT WITH NORMAL AWAKE BRAIN WAVES. – Subconscious decides to forget the past. – Habits are hard to forget. – Addiction and low resources now desperate. – Fears become a reality. – Brain fatigue.

AbNORMAL AWAKE BRAIN WAVES: – Abnormal sleep patterns. – Forgetfulness and hallucinations more frequent. – Divorce… depression… isolation… suicidal tendencies.

HUMAN NEGATIVITY DOMINANT. – Doctors refuse help based on patient temperament and no show appointments. – Patient memory weakens… disorganized, disoriented and delirious!

Neurologist diagnoses: Dementia, etc. Effectively labeled by… Hospital, Police and Adult Protective Services.

Hospital Admission: Automatic 10-day drug regimen with severe side effects. – Suddenly unable to walk, weak heart condition and massive confusion.

Neurologist diagnosis: – Something in the brain… Cholesterol! (?)! – Heart stops and revived with broken ribs. – Irregular heart wave pattern… permenant. – Heart sends weak signals to brain affecting human body performance!

HUMAN CONSCIOUS AND SUBCONSIOUS BRAIN WAVE PATTERNS DO NOT ALIGN!

MANY RETIREES GAMBLE WITH SLOT MACHINES… AUTOMATION ADDICTION! – Sleeping Zombies!

Majority of population affected by workplace hazards and lack of compensation. Lawyers fear working with these people.

Intelligence has yet to acquire a secure definition. There are too many synaptic connections that increase (not change)on a daily basis that cannot be tracked due to speed and change of cognitive tracings. Until then its best to calm down the sequence and let changes force their way by heiarchy.

Comments are closed.

Empathy in Kids Linked to Poorer Health Amid Parental Conflict

MDMA Variants Show Promise for Safer Psychotherapy

How The Brain Predicts Music

AI Model Predicts Alzheimer’s Using Speech Analysis

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Dialogues Clin Neurosci
• v.12(4); 2010 Dec

Language: English | Spanish | French

Human intelligence and brain networks

Inteligencia humana y redes cerebrales, intelligence humaine et réseaux cérébraux, roberto colom.

Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain

Sherif Karama

McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

Rex E. Jung

The MIND Research Network, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA

Richard J. Haier

University of California, Irvine, California, USA

Intelligence can be defined as a general mental ability for reasoning, problem solving, and learning. Because of its general nature, intelligence integrates cognitive functions such as perception, attention, memory, language, or planning. On the basis of this definition, intelligence can be reliably measured by standardized tests with obtained scores predicting several broad social outcomes such as educational achievement, job performance, health, and longevity. A detailed understanding of the brain mechanisms underlying this general mental ability could provide significant individual and societal benefits. Structural and functional neuroimaging studies have generally supported a frontoparietal network relevant for intelligence. This same network has also been found to underlie cognitive functions related to perception, short-term memory storage, and language. The distributed nature of this network and its involvement in a wide range of cognitive functions fits well with the integrative nature of intelligence. A new key phase of research is beginning to investigate how functional networks relate to structural networks, with emphasis on how distributed brain areas communicate with each other.

La inteligencia se puede definir como una capacidad mental general para razonar, resolver problemas y aprender. Dada su naturaleza general, la inteligencia integra funciones cognitivas como perceptión, atención, memoria, lenguaje o planificatión. De acuerdo con esta definitión la inteligencia se puede medir confiablemente mediante pruebas estandarizadas en que los puntajes obtenidos predicen algunas repercusiones sociales generales como éxito educacional, rendimiento laboral, salud y longevidad. Una comprensión detallada de los mecanismos cerebrales a la base de esta capacidad mental general podría entregar significativos beneficios individuales y sociales. Los estudios de neuroimágenes estructurales y funcionales en general le han dado soporte a una red frontoparietal como relevante para la inteligencia. Esta misma red se ha encontrado a la base de las funciones cognitivas relacionadas con la perceptión, el almacenamiento de la memoria de corto plazo y el lenguaje. La forma en que se distribuye esta red y su participatión en una amplia gama de funciones cognitivas se ajusta bien con la característica integradora de la inteligencia. Se está iniciando una nueva fase clave de la investigatión para estudiar cómo se relacionan las redes funcionales con las redes estructurales, con un énfasis en cómo las áreas cerebrales dispersas se comunican unas con otras.

L'intelligence peut se définir comme une capacité mentale générale de raisonnement, de résolution de problèmes et d'apprentissage. Sa nature généraliste lui permet d'intégrer des fonctions cognitives comme la perception, l'attention, la mémoire, le langage ou l'organisation. Selon cette définition, l'intelligence peut être mesurée de façon fiable par des tests standardisés dont les scores prédisent plusieurs données sociales importantes comme le niveau d'éducation, la performance professionnelle, la santé et la longévité. Une compréhension précise des mécanismes cérébraux sous-tendant cette aptitude mentale générale pourrait bénéficier de façon significative à l'individu et à la société. Des études de neuro-imagerie structurale et fonctionnelle sont dans l'ensemble en faveur d'un réseau frontopariétal pour l'intelligence. Ce même réseau est également à la base des fonctions cognitives liées à la perception, à la mémorisation à court terme et au langage. La nature multifocale de ce réseau et son implication dans de nombreuses fonctions cognitives cadre bien avec la démarche d'ensemble de l'intelligence. Une nouvelle phase clé de la recherche commence à s'intéresser aux rapports entre les réseaux fonctionnels et les réseaux structuraux, en insistant sur la façon dont les différentes aires cérébrales communiquent entre elles.

Human intelligence: definition, measurement, and structure

Reasoning, problem solving, and learning are crucial facets of human intelligence. People can reason about virtually any issue, and many problems may be solved. Simple and highly complex behavioral repertoires can be learned throughout the lifespan. Importantly, there are widespread individual differences in the ability to reason, solve problems, and learn which lead to human differences in the general ability to cope with challenging situations. These differences: (i) become more salient as the cognitive complexity of the situation becomes greater 1 - 3 ; (ii) are stable over time 4 ; and (iii) are partially mediated by genetic factors. 5

Various definitions of intelligence tend to converge around similar notions designed to capture the essence of this psychological factor. Jensen 6 notes Carl Bereiter's definition of intelligence: “what you use when you don't know what to do” (p 111). After their extensive survey, Snyderman and Rothman 7 underscored reasoning, problem solving, and learning as crucial for intelligence. The “mainstream science on intelligence” report coordinated by Gottfredson 8 highlights reasoning, planning, solving problems, thinking abstractly, comprehending complex ideas, learning quickly, and learning from experience. The American Psychological Association (APA) report on intelligence acknowledges that “individuals differ from one another in their ability to understand complex ideas, to adapt effectively to the environment, to learn from experience, to engage in various forms of reasoning, to overcome obstacles by taking thought” (p 77). 9

Humans perceive the environment, attend to relevant stimuli, memorize episodic and semantic information, communicate, and so forth. However, these activities must be integrated in some way for: (i) adapting our behavior to the environment; (ii) selecting the most appropriate contexts; or (iii) changing the world when adaptation and selection are not an option. 10 In our view, the integration of cognitive functions and abilities is dependent on the very general mental ability we call “general intelligence” or g for short. This integration is consistent with g as ability 11 or as an emergent property of the brain. 12

Any cognitive ability refers to variations in performance on some defined class of mental or cognitive tasks ( Figure 1 ). Abilities reflect observable differences in individuals' performance on certain tests or tasks. However, this performance involves the synthesis of a variety of abilities: “spatial ability,” for instance, can be regarded as an inexact concept that has no formal scientific meaning unless it refers to the structure of abilities that compose it. The problem of defining (and measuring) intelligence is the problem of defining the constructs that underlie it and of specifying their structure. 13 - 15

For more than a century, psychologists have developed hundreds of tests for the standardized measurement of intelligence with varying degrees of reliability and validity 16 The resulting measures allowed for the organization of taxonomies identifying minor and major cognitive abilities. J. B. Carroll, 17 , 18 for example, proposed a threestratum theory of intelligence after the extensive reanalysis of more than 400 datasets with thousands of subjects from almost 20 different countries around the world. Figure 2 . shows a simplified depiction of the taxonomy of cognitive abilities.

This survey of factor analytic studies supports the view that intelligence has a hierarchical structure (ie, like a pyramid). There is strong evidence for a factor representing general intelligence (g) located at the apex of the hierarchy (stratum III). This g factor provides an index of the level of difficulty that an individual can handle in performing induction, reasoning, visualization, or language comprehension tests. At a lower order in the hierarchy (stratum II), several broad ability factors are distinguished: fluid intelligence, crystallized intelligence, general memory, visual perception, auditory perception, retrieval, or cognitive speed. Lastly, stratum I is based on specific abilities, such as induction, lexical knowledge, associative memory, spatial relations, general sound discrimination, or ideational fluency.

Factor analytic surveys reveal two main findings: (i) the g factor constitutes more than half of the total common factor variance in a cognitive test or task in samples representative of the population; and (ii) various specific cognitive abilities can be identified, including the cognitive domains of language, memory, and learning, visual perception, information processing, knowledge and so forth, indicating certain generalizations of abilities; actually, there are more than 60 specific or narrow abilities. Available test batteries (a good example would be the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - WAIS) measure g in addition to several cognitive abilities and specific skills. We know how to separate these influences over cognitive performance by means of statistical analyses. There are some measures which are highly g-loaded (eg, the Vocabulary subtest of the WAIS), while others are less g-loaded (eg, the Digit Symbol Subtest of the WAIS). ( Figure 3 ). shows how gray matter correlates become more prominent with increased g loadings of the intelligence measures. Moreover, the same measure can load differently on general and specific cognitive factors/abilities depending on the sample analyzed. 19 , 20

Human intelligence and the brain

Exploring the relationships between human intelligence and the brain requires a careful consideration of the structure of human intelligence. As evident from above, when researchers state that they are measuring intelligence by means of the Standard Progressive Matrices Test (SPM - as another example) they are telling an imprecise story because the SPM measures g plus spatial and reasoning abilities plus SPM specificity. The exact combination of these “ingredients” for the analyzed sample must be computed before saying something clear about the measured performance. This requires that studies use a battery of tests rather than just one test. Although this was not usually done for the early functional imaging studies of intelligence, 21 - 25 it is now more common. 26 - 29 Results from the older and the newer studies, however, point to the importance of both whole brain and specific brain networks.

Brain size and human intelligence

Wickett et al 30 state:

“There is no longer any doubt that a larger brain predicts greater intelligence. Several research teams, using differing scan protocols, populations, and cognitive measures, have all shown that IQ and brain volume correlate at about the 0.40 level ( ...) obviously replication of this effect is no longer required. What is required now is a more fine-grained analysis of why it is that a larger brain predicts greater intelligence, and what it is about intelligence that is most directly related to brain volume” (p 1096, emphasis added).

The meta-analysis by McDaniel 31 studied the relationship between in vivo brain volume and intelligence. Thirty-seven samples comprising a total of 1530 participants were considered simultaneously. These were the main findings: (i) the average correlation is 0.33; (ii) subsets of the 37 studies that allow partitioning by gender revealed that the correlation is higher for females (0.40) than for males (0.34); and (iii) the correlation does not change across age (0.33). The report concludes that these results resolve a 169-year-old debate: it is clear that intelligence and brain volumes are positively related.

Going one step further, several studies measured the volume of regions of interest (ROIs) showing the most significant correlations (controlling for total brain volumes) in frontal, parietal, and temporal brain regions, along with the hippocampus and the cerebellum. 32 , 33 Nevertheless, regional correlations are moderate (ranging from 0.25 to 0.50) which implies that measures of total or local brain size are far from telling the whole story.

From this perspective, gray and white matter must be distinguished. In keeping with this, voxel-by-voxel (a voxel is a volume element analogous to a pixel) analyses also showed specific areas where the amount of gray and white matter was correlated with intelligence scores. 24 , 25 The amount of gray matter is considered to reflect number and density of neuronal bodies and dendritic arborization, whereas the amount of white matter is considered to capture number and thickness of axons and their degree of myelination. Gray matter could support information processing capacity, while white matter might support the efficient flow of information in the brain. Available reports are consistent with the statement that both gray and white matter volumes are positively related to intelligence, but that the latter relationship is somewhat greater (unweighted mean correlation values =.27 and .31 respectively). 34 It is noteworthy that new studies using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), which is the best method to date for assessing white matter, have reported DTI correlations with intelligence scores (see white matter section below).

A distributed brain network for human intelligence

Jung and Haier 35 reviewed 37 structural and functional neuroimaging studies published between 1988 and 2007. Based on the commonalities found in their analysis, they proposed the Parieto-Frontal Integration Theory (PFIT), identifying several brain areas distributed across the brain. These P-FIT regions support distinguishable information processing stages ( Figure 4 ).

This is a summary of the proposed stages.

• Occipital and temporal areas process sensory information in the first processing stage: the extrastriate cortex (Brodmann areas - BAs - 18 and 19) and the fusiform gyrus (BA 37), involved with recognition, imagery and elaboration of visual inputs, as well as Wernicke's area (BA 22) for analysis and elaboration of syntax of auditory information.
• Integration and abstraction of the sensory information by parietal BAs 39 (angular gyrus), 40 (supramarginal gyrus), and 7 (superior parietal lobule) correspond to the second processing stage.
• The parietal areas interact with the frontal lobes in the third processing stage and this interaction underlies problem solving, evaluation, and hypothesis testing. Frontal BAs 6, 9, 10, 45, 46, and 47 are underscored by the model.
• The anterior cingulate (BA 32) is implicated for response selection and inhibition of alternative responses, once the best solution is determined in the previous stage.

White matter, especially the arcuate fasciculus, is thought to play a critical role in reliable communication of information across the brain processing units. Nevertheless, note that the “Geschwind area” (underlying the angular gyrus) within the arcuate fasciculus may be even more important than the entire track. 36

Frontal, parietal, temporal, and occipital areas are depicted in Figure 4. However, Jung and Haier 35 suggest that not all these areas are equally necessary in all individuals for intelligence. Discrete brain regions of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (BAs 9, 45, 46, and 47) and the parietal cortex (BAs 7 and 40) could be considered most important for human intelligence.

A frontoparietal network may be relevant for intelligence, but also for working memory. 37 A study by Gray et al 38 tested whether fluid or reasoning ability (Gf) was mediated by neural mechanisms supporting working memory. Sixty participants performed verbal and nonverbal working memory tasks. They had to indicate if a current item matched the item they saw 3 items previously (3-back). Brain activity was measured by event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The demand for working memory varied across trials. Results showed that: (i) participants scoring higher on the Progressive Matrices Test (a measure related to fluid g - Gf) were more accurate in the 3-back task; and (ii) only lateral prefrontal and parietal regions mediated the correlation between Gf and 3-back performance.

These fMRI results are consistent with the voxel-based morphometry (VBM) study reported by Colom et al (N = 48). 39 In agreement with the well established fact that the g factor and working memory capacity are very highly correlated, 40 - 45 these researchers predicted that g and working memory would share significant common neural networks. Therefore, using a VBM approach they quantified the overlap in brain areas where regional gray matter was correlated with measures of general intelligence and working memory, finding a common neuroanatomic framework supported by frontal gray matter regions belonging to BA 10 and by the right inferior parietal lobule (BA 40). Of note, this study also showed: (i) more gray matter recruitment for the more cognitively complex tasks (= more highly g loaded); and (ii) the complex span task (backward digit span) showed more gray matter overlap with the general factor of intelligence than the simple span task (forward digit span, ( Figure 5 ). These results were interpreted after the theory proposed by Cowan, 46 namely that parietal regions support “capacity limitations,” whereas frontal areas underlie the “control of attention.”

A similar commonality between intelligence and working memory was found in animal studies. Matzel and Kolata 47 reviewed several reports in which performance of laboratory mice was measured in a variety of attention and learning tasks. These are their most prominent conclusions:

• The “positive manifold” (eg, scores on cognitive tasks of various kinds are positively correlated) found in humans also applied to mice
• Storage and processing components of working memory accounted for the strong relationship between this cognitive function and g
• Networks involved in working memory overlap with those relevant for intelligence. These findings support an evolutionary conservation process of the structure and determinants of intelligence beyond humans. 48

Giftedness has been also investigated with related findings. Lee et al 49 used an fMRI approach to investigate the neural bases of superior intelligence. Eighteen gifted and 18 nongifted adolescents were analyzed. They solved reasoning problems, having high (complex) and low (simple) loadings on g. Increased bilateral frontoparietal activations (lateral prefrontal, anterior cingulate, and posterior parietal cortices) were found for both groups, but the gifted subjects showed greater activations in the posterior parietal cortex. Furthermore, activations in BAs 7 and 40 (superior and intraparietal cortices) correlated with intelligence differences. Therefore, high intelligence was associated with increased involvement of the frontoparietal network through preferential activation of the posterior parietal regions.

Gläscher et al 28 investigated the neural substrates of g in 241 patients with focal brain damage, using voxel-based lesion-symptom mapping. Statistically significant associations between g and damage within a distributed network in frontal and parietal brain regions were found. Further, damage of white matter association tracts in frontopolar areas was also shown to be associated with differences in g. They concluded that g draws on connections between regions integrating verbal, visuospatial, working memory, and executive processes.

Going one step further, Gläscher et al 28 asked whether or not there was a neural region whose damage uniquely impacts g beyond subtests contributing to the general score. They examined this question by analyzing the nonoverlap between a disjunction of subtests and the reported lesion pattern for g. A single region was found in the left frontal pole (BA 10) showing a significant effect unique to g. This result complements the distributed nature of g and suggests a hierarchical control mechanism. This unique area for g may be involved in the allocation of the working memory resources necessary for successful performance on specific cognitive tasks. However, this finding should be placed within context since there are studies showing no decline in intelligence associated with prefrontal lobotomy, presumably including the frontopolar cortex. 35 Therefore, future studies are necessary to determine the specific necessity of the frontal poles to g. The comparison between lesion cohorts and normal cohorts must be done carefully.

The structural studies reported by Colom et al 27 and Karama et al 50 are also consistent with the P-FIT model. In the first study (N =100) the general factor of intelligence was estimated after nine tests measuring reasoning, verbal, and nonverbal intelligence. Their VBM approach revealed several clusters of voxels correlating with individual differences in g scores. The main regions included the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, Broca's and Wernicke's areas, the somatosensory association cortex, and the visual association cortex. The design matrix in this study controlled for sex, but when total gray matter was controlled for instead of sex, significant correlations were concentrated in frontal and parietal areas only ( Figure 6 ): superior, middle, and frontal gyrus, along with the postcentral gyrus and the superior parietal lobule.

Karama et al 50 used an automated cortical thickness protocol (CIVET51) to analyze a large sample of children and adolescents representative of the population (N=216). The most consistent areas of association between g scores and cortical thickness were found in lateral prefrontal, occipital extrastriate, and parahippocampal areas. Similar to the study reported by Colom et al, 27 Karama et al 50 identified more brain regions related to g than those in the P-FIT model, likely resulting from the synthesizing nature of the P-FIT approach (ie, if all regions implicated in intelligence across all 37 studies were included, they would have numbered in the hundreds) as opposed to the experimental/exploratory approach employed by these studies.

There are three other studies applying a cortical thickness approach (the third will be discussed later). Shaw et al 52 analyzed the trajectory of change in the thickness of the cerebral cortex on a sample of 307 children and adolescents. Intelligence was measured by four subtests from the Wechsler scales (vocabulary, similarities, block design, and matrix reasoning). They found that changes in thickness are more related to intelligence than thickness itself: negative correlations were found in early childhood, whereas the correlation was positive in late adolescence (these positive correlations were identified in frontal BAs 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 44-46, in parietal BAs 1-3, 5, 39, 40, in temporal BAs 21, 37, and in occipital BAs 17, 18, and 19). Further, intelligence differences were associated with the trajectory of cortical development in frontal brain regions. Finally, children with higher scores on intelligence showed more change in estimated cortical thickness along the developmental process.

Narr et al 53 studied a sample of 65 participants. They found positive associations between cortical thickness and intelligence bilaterally in prefrontal BAs 10/11 and 47, as well as in posterior temporal BAs 36/37. These researchers also analyzed males and females separately, finding that males showed correlations in temporaloccipital association cortices, whereas females exhibited correlations in prefrontal and temporal association cortices. These results are not entirely consistent with the parietofrontal framework and emphasize the importance of separate analyses for males and females. 25 , 54 , 55

Functional networks and neurotransmitters

Using an fMRI approach, Bishop et al 56 reported a study based on previous evidence showing that a polymorphism (val158met) in the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene regulates catecholaminergic signaling in prefrontal cortex. The val158 allele is associated with higher COMT activity than the met158 allele-therefore, a lesser conten of dopamine. Twenty-two participants, genotyped for the COMT val158met polymorphism, performed verbal and spatial fluid intelligence (Gf) items, classified according to their cognitive complexity, as estimated from the loadings on g (see ref 57). These researchers were particularly interested in the analysis of the frontoparietal network related to fluid intelligence (the lateral prefrontal cortex, the presupplementary motor area/anterior cingulate cortex, and the intraparietal sulcus).

Findings revealed a positive effect of COMT val allele load upon the BOLD signal in regions belonging to this brain network when items showing distinguishable cognitive complexity were compared. This result suggests that the COMT val158met polymorphism impacts on the neural network supporting fluid intelligence. The finding is a demonstration that the effect of single genes can impact blood oxygen level dependent signal as assessed by fMRI. Further evidence linking catecholamine modulation within the identified network may help explain individual differences in the neural response to high levels of cognitive complexity, irrespective of the content domain (verbal or nonverbal).

White matter

The relationship between human intelligence and the integrity of white matter has been much less investigated, although this trend is changing rapidly. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) is based on the diffusion of water molecules in the brain and provides information about the size, orientation, and geometry of myelinated axons. DTI can produce measures that include fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), radial diffusivity (RA), and axial diffusivity (AD), which allow for the assessment of myelin and axonal integrity (see Figure 7 ).

DTI is useful for fine-grained deterministic and probabilistic tractography to capture underlying cortical connectivity patterns. This can be used for the quantitative analysis of local and global network properties using graph-theoretical approaches (eg, analysis of small-world properties). 58 , 59

Using DTI, Schmithorst et al 60 analyzed the relationship between intelligence and white matter structure. The sample comprised 47 children and adolescents (age range 5 to 18). White matter structure was studied using fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) indices. These indices were correlated with intelligence scores obtained from the Wechsler scales. These researchers found positive correlations bilaterally for FA in white matter association areas (frontal and parietooccipital areas). These correlations were thought to reflect a positive relationship between fiber organization-density and intelligence.

Also using a DTI approach, Yu et al 61 computed correlations between the integrity of several tracts (corpus callosum, cingulum, uncinate fasciculus, optic radiation, and corticospinal tract) and intelligence. On the basis of their scores on the Wechsler scales, 79 participants were divided in two groups: average and high intelligence. White matter integrity was assessed by fractional anisotropy (FA). The results showed that high intelligence participants display more white matter integrity than average intelligence participants only in the right uncinate fasciculus. Therefore, the right uncinate fasciculus might be an important neural basis for intelligence differences. A sample of 15 participants with mental retardation was also analyzed. These participants were compared with the 79 healthy controls and they showed extensive damage in the integrity of several white matter tracts: corpus callosum, uncinate fasciculus, optic radiation, and corticospinal tract.

Tang et al 62 used both DTI and fMRI during an n-back memory task in 40 young adults who had also completed a battery of intelligence tests. Correlations between the BOLD signal obtained from the n-back task and intelligence were mainly concentrated in the right prefrontal and bilateral parietal cortices. These correlations were negative (the higher the intelligence, the lower the activation during the n-back task) which supports the efficiency model of brain function. Further, white matter tracts connecting these areas also showed correlations to g. Specifically, integrity of interhemispheric connections was positively correlated to some intelligence factors in females but negatively correlated in males.

Chiang et al 63 have reported the first study combining a genetic informative design and a DTI approach for analyzing the relationships between white matter integrity and human intelligence. Intelligence was assessed by the Multidimensional Aptitude Battery, which provides measures of general intelligence, verbal (information, vocabulary, and arithmetic), and nonverbal intelligence (spatial and object assembly). The sample comprised 23 pairs of identical twins and 23 pairs of fraternal twins. White matter integrity, quantified using FA, was used to fit structural equation models (SEM) at each point in the brain. Afterwards three-dimensional maps of heritability were generated. White matter integrity was found to be under significant genetic control in bilateral frontal, bilateral parietal, and left occipital lobes (values ranging from .55 to .85). FA measures were correlated with the estimate of general intelligence and with nonverbal intelligence in the cingulum, optic radiations, superior fronto-occipital fasciculus, internal capsule, the isthmus of the corpus callosum, and the corona radiata. Further, common genetic factors mediated the correlation between intelligence and white matter integrity which suggests a common physiological mechanism and common genetic determination.

Networks for human intelligence

As noted above, gray matter supports information processing capacity and white matter promotes efficient flow of information across the brain. Connections are relevant for intelligence and these connections might be organized in networks. From this perspective, Li et al 64 reported a study testing the hypothesis that high levels of intelligence involve more efficient information transfer in the brain. 21 , 65 , 66 Studying a sample of 79 participants, brain anatomical networks were constructed by means of diffusion tensor tractography. These networks included intrahemispheric and interhemispheric connections. Six white-matter tracts were further constructed: the genu of the corpus callosum, the body of the corpus callosum, the splenium of the corpus callosum, the cingulum, the corticospinal tract, and the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus. Thereafter, they calculated the topological properties of the networks for every participant. The sample was divided between average and high intelligence according to scores on the Wechsler scales. Higher global efficiencies were revealed for the latter group: higher intelligence was found to display shorter characteristic path length and a higher global efficiency of the networks. This was interpreted as a characteristic of a more efficient parallel information transfer in the brain anatomy. Therefore, the efficiency of brain structural organization could be an important biological basis for human intelligence, as originally proposed by Haier et al. 21 , 66

Song et al 67 analyzed 59 adults for studying the relationships between spontaneous brain activity at rest and individual differences in intelligence. Intelligence was assessed by the Wechsler scales. Using fMRI, the bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortices were the seed regions for investigating the correlations across subjects between individual intelligence scores and the strength of the functional connectivity between the seed regions and the remaining brain regions. These researchers found that brain regions in which the strength of the functional connectivity significantly correlated with intelligence scores were distributed in the frontal, parietal, occipital and limbic lobes. Furthermore, functional connectivity within the frontal lobe and between the frontal and posterior brain regions predicted differences in intelligence. These results are consistent with the relevance of a network view for human intelligence.

van den Heuvel et al 68 used resting state fMRI and graph analysis for exploring the presumed organization of the brain network. Functional connections of this brain network were analyzed computing correlations among the spontaneous signals of different brain regions during rest. The sample comprised 19 subjects and intelligence was measured by the Wechsler scales. They found associations between global communication efficiency - more long-distance connections - and scores of intelligence. This was interpreted as suggesting that a difference in the efficiency with which the brain integrates information between brain regions is related to differences in human intelligence. The strongest effects were found in frontal and parietal regions. Furthermore, intelligence differences were not related to the level of local information processing (local neighborhood clustering) and to the total number of functional connections of the brain network.

Beyond these specific studies, the so-called “connectome project” deserves close attention. 69 There is strong agreement regarding the fact that the human brain comprises a wide variety of functional systems. Obtaining brain images during rest shows large-amplitude spontaneous low frequency fluctuations in the fMRI signal. These fluctuations are related across areas sharing functions and the correlations show up as an individual's functional connectome. Biswall et al 69 report findings obtained from 1414 participants from 35 laboratories. Their main results were: (i) there is a universal functional architecture; (ii) there are substantial sex differences and age-related gradients; and (iii) it is possible to establish normative maps for the functional boundaries among identified networks.

Integration of intelligence and cognitive findings

The frontoparietal network is relevant for intelligence, but also for other cognitive functions. 70 Thus, for instance, Wager and Smith 71 reported a meta-analysis of 60 positron-emission tomography (PET) and fMRI studies of working memory. The effect of three content domains (verbal, spatial, and object), three executive functions (updating, temporal order, and manipulation) along with their interactions were analyzed. Brain areas most involved in all these cognitive facets were located in the frontal and parietal lobes: (i) spatial and nonspatial contents were separated in posterior, but not anterior areas; (ii) executive manipulation evoked more frontal activations, but with some exceptions; and (iii) the parietal cortex was always implicated in executive processing. The meta-analysis by Wager, Jonides, and Reading 72 after 31 PET and fMRI studies of shifting attention also highlights this fronto-parietal network (medial prefrontal, superior and inferior parietal, medial parietal, and premotor cortices).

Similarly, Marois and Ivanoff 3 analyzed the capacity limits of information processing in the brain. Three basic limitations for perception, working memory, and action were explicitly considered. Their revision was based mainly on fMRI evidence and these were the basic conclusions: (i) perception and action limitations are related to fronto-parietal brain networks; and (ii) working memory capacity limitations are associated to parieto-ccipital brain networks. The lateral prefrontal cortex may support general target consolidation and response selection, using a flexible coding system for processing relevant information in any given task. In contrast, the lateral parietal cortex might provide support to more specific processing goals. This brain region is more sensitive to perception than to action.

Thus, core cognitive functions (especially working memory) and intelligence share a frontoparietal brain network. If this network is involved for most individuals, it could be possible to predict individual differences in intelligence based on brain data. 74 This was attempted by Choi et al 75 using structural (cortical thickness) and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Their regression model explained 50% of the variance in IQ scores. Even when this figure may be questioned on several grounds, the main approach underscores that brain images might be employed for estimating intelligence levels in some instances using a neurometric approach.

Finally, experimental confirmatory approaches should be welcomed to increase refinement of ongoing research efforts. In this regard, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) may help test hypotheses aimed at determining whether or not specific brain regions are really important for understanding individual differences in human intelligence. TMS induces transient changes in brain activity noninvasively. It does this by producing changes in a magnetic field that, in turn, evoke electric currents in the brain which promote depolarization of cellular membranes. Cognitive neuroscience often relies on a correlation approach, whereas TMS allows studying (almost) causal brain-behavior relationships in higher cognitive functions. 76 , 77 The study reported by Aleman and van't Wout 78 exemplifies this approach using a working memory task (forward and backward digit span). Working memory (and intelligence) performance is partially supported by the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Using repetitive TMS (rTMS) - adapted in the Hz band for suppressing cognitive processing - over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, a significant decrease of performance in the forward and backward digit span test was found. Thus, regional suppression (or enhancement) might be produced to experimentally test specific predictions.

Regardless of the use of exploratory (correlation) or confirmatory (experimental) approaches, we do agree with Kennedy 79 : “as with more _eras', it is the underlying technology that makes the era possible [...] new advances in acquisition, analysis, databasing, modeling, and sharing will continue to be necessary.” This is especially true for analyzing human intelligence because this psychological factor is undoubtedly rooted in widely distributed regions in the brain. Frontal and parietal lobes likely comprise crucial processing areas for intelligence, but integrity of hard connections across the entire brain or spontaneous harmonic coactivation among distant regions appear also to be relevant. Creating a comprehensive picture for what can be called “neuro-intelligence” 80 should prove as challenging as it is exciting.

Acknowledgments

RC was partly supported by grant PSI2010-20364 from the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (Spain).

Last updated 20/06/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > Cognition and Intelligence
• > Complex Problem Solving and Intelligence: Empirical Relation and Causal Direction

Book contents

• Frontmatter
• 1 Information Processing and Intelligence: Where We Are and Where We Are Going
• 2 Mental Chronometry and the Unification of Differential Psychology
• 3 Reductionism versus Charting: Ways of Examining the Role of Lower-Order Cognitive Processes in Intelligence
• 4 Basic Information Processing and the Psychophysiology of Intelligence
• 5 The Neural Bases of Intelligence: A Perspective Based on Functional Neuroimaging
• 6 The Role of Working Memory in Higher-Level Cognition: Domain-Specific versus Domain-General Perspectives
• 7 Higher-Order Cognition and Intelligence
• 8 Ability Determinants of Individual Differences in Skilled Performance
• 9 Complex Problem Solving and Intelligence: Empirical Relation and Causal Direction
• 10 Intelligence as Smart Heuristics
• 11 The Role of Transferable Knowledge in Intelligence
• 12 Reasoning Abilities
• 13 Measuring Human Intelligence with Artificial Intelligence: Adaptive Item Generation
• 14 Marrying Intelligence and Cognition: A Developmental View
• 15 From Description to Explanation in Cognitive Aging
• 16 Unifying the Field: Cognition and Intelligence
• Author Index
• Subject Index

9 - Complex Problem Solving and Intelligence: Empirical Relation and Causal Direction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2009

INTRODUCTION

The breadth of human problem solving is truly striking. On the one hand, human problem solving makes possible the most wondrous achievements, such as “an 800-seat airliner with wings that blend smoothly into the fuselage instead of protruding from its sides that is scheduled to be in the air by 2006” (AP news from February 9, 2001). Yet, on the other hand, errors in problem solving can lead to catastrophic and near-catastrophic disasters, such as, for instance, the nuclear reactor accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, in 1979. Whatever “problem solving” is, and scientists disagree vehemently on the proper meaning of the term, there can be little doubt that it has shaped human culture to an extent that is almost unrivaled by any other human ability.

From the inception of the concept of “intelligence,” the ability to solve problems has featured prominently in virtually every definition of human intelligence (e.g., Sternberg & Berg, 1986). In addition, intelligence has often been viewed as one of the best predictors of problem-solving ability (e.g., Putz-Osterloh, 1981; Putz-Osterloh & Lüer, 1981). Thus, whatever the causal relation between the two concepts, prevailing theoretical positions strongly suggest that intelligence and problem solving are related. In this chapter we concentrate on complex rather than on simple problem solving. Our main goal is to review the extent to which the ability to solve complex problems is indeed tied, empirically, to intelligence and to discuss which causal direction holds between the two concepts.

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Complex Problem Solving and Intelligence: Empirical Relation and Causal Direction
• By Dorit Wenke , Peter A. Frensch , Joachim Funke
• Edited by Robert J. Sternberg , Yale University, Connecticut , Jean E. Pretz , Yale University, Connecticut
• Book: Cognition and Intelligence
• Online publication: 23 November 2009
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607073.010

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

What is the difference between problem solving and intelligence?

All I know is that the tower of hanoi is thought of as a problem solving test, perhaps due to its lack of automation, I don't know. I'd assume that "intelligence" is broader, measured by iq tests and reflected in skills etc..

Is it just that intelligence is learnt ?

• intelligence
• $\begingroup$ One is a somewhat measurable skill and the other is a theoretical construct. Or something like that. $\endgroup$ –  got trolled too much this week Commented Apr 7, 2018 at 8:22
• $\begingroup$ The definition of intelligence I like the best is "the ability to increase the probabilities of survival". In such case, we humans are excellent problem-solvers, but non intelligent, due to we're going on a path where our probabilities of survival are decreasing. In addition, this definition includes emotional, rational, spiritual and physical intelligence, as known in classical literature. $\endgroup$ –  RodolfoAP Commented Aug 14, 2018 at 20:39

First, intelligence (as a notion in psychology) is a theoretical construct ... with numerous definitions. Wikipedia's article on intelligence lists a lot of them . Just going with the fist one there (which comes from an op-ed signed by many intelligence researchers), intelligence is defined as

A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems , think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings—"catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do.

So, at a theoretical level, problem solving is seen a specific (but pretty important) aspect of intelligence. In practice, the way intelligence is usually tested in IQ tests , involves solving some types of problems (assuming a generous defintion of "problem"). Which essentially entails operationalizing intelligence. It's fair to say IQ tests test some specific types of problem solving . Of course the hope is that these correlate well enough with "problem solving anything".

There have also been some definitions proposed in psychology literature for what "problem solving" should mean . I'm not sure any of them has gained enough acceptance to be worth mentioning here.

IQ tests are however not the only investigated paradigm covering problem solving. There's a lesser known one that talks about CPS ("complex problem solving") , proposed in one definition to be:

“(…) the successful interaction with task environments that are dynamic (i.e., change as a function of the user's interventions and/or as a function of time) and in which some, if not all, of the environment's regularities can only be revealed by successful exploration and integration of the information gained in that process.”

However it's not terribly clear how that is different from the theoretical notion of intelligence. What is different is how [C]PS is operationalized, i.e. the tests used to measure it... and that actually affects the level of correlation:

This theoretical ambiguity is reflected in empirical findings on the relation between CPS and intelligence. Multiple early studies indicated that, while performance in CPS tasks varied tremendously among individuals, psychological assessments of general intelligence were unable to explain this variability (Brehmer, 1992; Rigas & Brehmer, 1999). Kluwe,Misiak, and Haider (1991) summarized 11 of these early studies on the relation between CPS and intelligence and concluded that most of them failed to show a close relation between intelligence scores and CPS performance measures. This led several researchers to suggest CPS to be a cognitive construct mostly independent from intelligence (Putz-Osterloh, 1985). Rigas and Brehmer (1999) summarized this view in the different-demands hypothesis. To explain the weak correlations that researchers observed between measures of general intelligence and CPS performance, this hypothesis suggests that CPS tasks demand the performance of more complex mental processes than intelligence tests [and they mean IQ tests] do, such as the active interaction with the problem to acquire knowledge on the problem environment, which, in turn, results in low empirical correlations between the constructs. [...] In reaction to these problems, Funke (2001) introduced Linear Structural Equation systems (LSE) and Finite State Automata (FSA) as formal frameworks that allowfor the description of underlying task structures. Both of these frameworks enabled the creation of single complex systems [SCS], which are independent of any semantic embedment (Greiff, Fischer, Stadler, &Wüstenberg, 2014) as they only specify an underlying system that can be clad in multiple semantic contexts. In particular, the LSE formalism has been widely adopted by CPS research and has led to the development of a considerable number of single complex systems (e.g., Multiflux, Kröner, 2001; FSYS,Wagener, 2001). In a further advancement, after Leutner, Klieme, Meyer, and Wirth (2004) had used a combination of two single complex systems for measuring CPS, Greiff, Wüstenberg, and Funke (2012) used the LSE framework for the development of the multiple complex systems (MCS; Greiff et al., 2014) approach, which was featured in the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012, the arguably most important large-scale assessment worldwide. [...] The comprehensive answer to the question on the relation between CPS and intelligence however, appears to depend on the operationalization of CPS.Whereas themoderator analyses did not indicate significant differences between measures of general intelligence and measures of reasoning in respect to their relation to measures of CPS, there are substantial differences inmean effect sizes found for studies using different operationalizations of CPS. The smallest average effect size for the relation of CPS and intelligence was found for classical measures of CPS, M(g) = .339, followed by single systems based on LSE, M(g) = .471. CPS scores gained from MCS tests are related most strongly to intelligence, M(g) = .585 [...] However, unlike classical measures of CPS or SCS, current MCS tests do not feature some highly complex elements of problem solving such as the recognition and handling of time-delayed effects. Thus, the cognitive demands posed by MCS tests are likely to be relatively closer to those posed by intelligence measures. Following the different-demands hypothesis (Rigas & Brehmer, 1999), this might be causing the high correlations of intelligence and CPS scores obtained from MCS tests. In order to test this hypothesis, it would be necessary to develop MCS tests that feature highly complex elements while simultaneously maintaining high levels of reliability.

The bottom line is that there are problem solving abilities not entirely captured in basic IQ tests. Whether that tells us anything about "intelligence" vs "problem solving" is a matter of how one construes these notions theoretically.

Also asking if "Is [it just that] intelligence [is] learnt?" is a pretty different question, and I will not devote too much space to that here to that.

Of course intelligence (as usually measured, IQ) develops over time in adolescence, and according to some empirical stuedies the more schooling a child has, the better the outcome for IQ tests as well .

But this raises the question: what allows one to learn (better)? The answer, according to some is that there's no distinguishable factor between intelligence and learning ability . So basically, the question is circular in this view: you learn (better) because you are (more) intelligent, which make you (even more) intelligent. And that seems a pretty widely held view :

However, if we think of IQ as prediction devices, there is no better predictor of future learning than past learning. Furthermore, past learning does not just predict future learning—it often enables it.

But that hinges on the definition of intelligence as being this whole encompassing thing, which includes learning ability. Just going back to the opening definition of intelligence, but emphasizing a different portion of it should be enough to illustrate this:

A very general mental capability that, among other things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience . It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings—"catching on," "making sense" of things, or "figuring out" what to do

It would make a good separate question whether learning ability and problem solving (rather than intelligence) can be substantially differentiated in cognitive tests... and whether assuming such a testing separation is possible, are the results highly correlated anyway?

Your Answer

Sign up or log in, post as a guest.

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .

• Featured on Meta
• Upcoming sign-up experiments related to tags

Hot Network Questions

• What is the safest way to camp in a zombie apocalypse?
• Why am I unable to distribute rotated text evenly in Adobe Illustrator 2024?
• What's the role of the transistor on power input in this schematic?
• What are some plausible means for increasing the atmospheric pressure on a post-apocalyptic earth?
• How fast would unrest spread in the Middle Ages?
• WORD REQUEST: A class for students who want to get better at a subject, aside from their public education
• Is FDISK /MBR really undocumented, and why?
• Meaning of あんたの今 here
• Proving for n+1 and n-1 at the same time using induction.
• Does USCIS require spouses being sponsored for Permanent Residency to leave the United States?
• What does "the dogs of prescriptivism" mean?
• Mōnstrō and mōnstrum - how exactly are they related?
• Transpose these notes!
• Comprehensive Guide to saying Mourners' Kaddish
• Is teaching how to solve recurrence relations using generating functions too much for a first year discrete maths course?
• A TCP server which uses one thread to read while writing data with another thread
• Designing Optocoupler circuit
• Apply for Swiss residence permit: some non-EU nationals related points
• Hard-to-find historical grey literature - any tips?
• Visiting every digit
• proper way to write C code that injects message into /var/log/messages
• Identifying the order of the output
• Short story about a group of astronauts/scientist that find a sentient planet that seems friendly but is not
• Can apophatic theology offer a coherent resolution to the "problem of the creator of God"?

Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.

Problem Solving and Intelligence

DOI link for Problem Solving and Intelligence

Get Citation

Originally published in 1985, Problem Solving and Intelligence was the result of the author’s efforts to understand the nature of human intelligence and the differences in the cognitive functioning of individuals which we observe again and again.

The book contains two types of material. First it presents an overview of major contributions to the conceptualization and investigation of problem solving and intelligence, which was derived from the extensive, largely non-cumulative literature at the time. Second it reports a comprehensive, empirical study of the manifestation of intelligence in problem solving.

The subject matter was at the interface of three traditional areas of psychological inquiry: namely, the study of cognitive processes, individual differences, and the characteristics of the stimulus. What was innovative is that intellectual performance is investigated in relation to the simultaneous operation of variables from these dimensions.

The book was intended, primarily, as a contribution to the understanding and investigation of the nature of intelligent behavior, as well as an introduction to intelligence and problem solving. Today it can be read and enjoyed in its historical context.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part | 78  pages, frame of reference, chapter 1 | 17  pages, preliminary considerations, chapter 2 | 17  pages, the conceptualization and measurement of intelligence, chapter 3 | 28  pages, theoretical frameworks of problem solving research, chapter 4 | 14  pages, the implications of previous research and the empirical study, part ii | 83  pages, methods and organization of the study, chapter 5 | 18  pages, the tasks and the sample, chapter 6 | 19  pages, the “thinking aloud” methodology, chapter 7 | 31  pages, the development of a classification system of problem solving strategies, chapter 8 | 13  pages, definition of terms and general procedure of data collection and analysis, part iii | 157  pages, presentation of results and discussion of findings, chapter 9 | 45  pages, global observations relating to the outcome of problem solving performance, chapter 10 | 41  pages, structural components of the problem solving process, chapter 11 | 42  pages, the utility of the strategy variables in the identification of individual and group differences, chapter 12 | 27  pages, contingencies and interdependencies of sequential problem solving behaviors, part iv | 27  pages, conclusions, chapter 13 | 25  pages, conclusions and implications.

• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Taylor & Francis Online
• Taylor & Francis Group
• Students/Researchers
• Librarians/Institutions

Connect with us

Registered in England & Wales No. 3099067 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG © 2024 Informa UK Limited

• Brain Development
• Childhood & Adolescence
• Diet & Lifestyle
• Emotions, Stress & Anxiety
• Learning & Memory
• Thinking & Awareness
• Alzheimer's & Dementia
• Childhood Disorders
• Immune System Disorders
• Mental Health
• Neurodegenerative Disorders
• Infectious Disease
• Neurological Disorders A-Z
• Body Systems
• Cells & Circuits
• Genes & Molecules
• The Arts & the Brain
• Law, Economics & Ethics
• Neuroscience in the News
• Supporting Research
• Tech & the Brain
• Animals in Research
• BRAIN Initiative
• Meet the Researcher
• Neuro-technologies
• Tools & Techniques
• Core Concepts
• For Educators
• Ask an Expert
• The Brain Facts Book

Test Your Problem-Solving Skills

Personalize your emails.

Personalize your monthly updates from BrainFacts.org by choosing the topics that you care about most!

Find a Neuroscientist

Engage local scientists to educate your community about the brain.

Image of the Week

Check out the Image of the Week Archive.

SUPPORTING PARTNERS

• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Manage Cookies

Some pages on this website provide links that require Adobe Reader to view.

IQ vs EQ: Why Emotional Intelligence Matters More Than You Think

Sara Viezzer

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc in Applied Neuropsychology

Sara Viezzer is a graduate of psychological studies at the University of Bristol and Padova. She has worked as an Assistant Psychologist in the NHS for the past two years in neuroscience and health psychology. Sara is presently pursuing a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology at the South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

On This Page:

Human intelligence is extraordinarily complex. It represents a multifaceted construct that involves both our ability to reason and our ability to understand emotions (Gardner, 2008).

IQ, or intellectual quotient, is our ability to think logically, comprehend and assimilate new information, and problem-solve. Individuals with high IQs can easily make connections between abstract concepts to aid generalizations, and they can apply knowledge to a range of skill sets. 

EQ, or emotional quotient , refers to our ability to recognize and manage our own emotions and the emotions of others (Goleman, 1996).

Understanding how emotions drive our behaviors is crucial, allowing us to develop greater self-awareness, adopt more functional responses to our environment, and develop more empathetic relationships with others.

EQ and IQ Functions

Some key functions and skills of EQ include:

• Self-awareness – Being aware of and understanding one’s own emotions. This involves recognizing how one’s feelings affect one’s actions, having self-confidence, and being open to feedback.
• Emotional self-regulation – Managing one’s emotions appropriately instead of suppressing them. This allows one to thoughtfully respond rather than just react. Skills include flexibility, stress management, and taking accountability.
• Social empathy – Perceiving and understanding the emotions of others. This enables one to respond compassionately and understand social power dynamics. Skills include perspective-taking, listening, and sharing emotions.
• Social skills – Using emotional awareness to communicate effectively and build relationships. This requires verbal and nonverbal communication skills, leadership abilities, persuasiveness, and conflict management.
• Cognitive ability – IQ tests measure various cognitive skills like verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed. High IQ indicates a greater ability to understand complex ideas, adapt, reason, and problem-solve.

In comparison, some of the key functions and skills of IQ include: 

• Academic performance – IQ correlates with academic achievement, as intelligence helps students learn, retain information, and apply knowledge. High IQ is linked to better grades and test scores.
• Abstract thinking – People with high IQs tend to be better at solving novel problems, deducing relationships, recognizing patterns, and thinking conceptually beyond just concrete details.
• Quick learning – Higher IQ is associated with quicker acquisition of knowledge and skills. Intelligent people tend to pick up new information and grasp new concepts more rapidly.
• Memory – IQ tests often measure short-term and working memory span and ability, which are tied to better recall and application of learned material.
• Spatial abilities – Many IQ tests gauge visual-spatial skills like mental rotation and spatial perception, allowing for proficient manipulation of images and shapes.
• Logic – Standard intelligence tests assess logical reasoning capacities, including inductive and deductive reasoning, which intelligent people use to discern rules and make valid conclusions.

Differences between emotional intelligence (EQ) and IQ

Both EQ and IQ are important forms of intelligence that help people succeed in their personal and professional lives. However, there are some key differences between the two constructs (Figure 1) .

The main difference is that EQ involves the ability to recognize, understand, and manage emotions effectively, while IQ focuses purely on cognitive intelligence and academic problem-solving abilities.

Which is more important?

At one point in time, IQ was considered the prime determinant of success in life. The book “Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ” was written by Daniel Goleman and was first published in 1995. It played a significant role in popularizing the concept of emotional intelligence in the mainstream.

According to the author, people with well-developed emotional skills are “more likely to be content and effective in their lives, mastering the habits of the mind that foster their own productivity”, while people who lack control over their emotional life “fight battles that sabotage their ability for focussed work and clear thought” (Goleman, 1996).  

Since then, emotional intelligence (EI) has been extensively researched and linked to positive life outcomes, including job success (Papoutsi, Drigas, and Skianis, 2019), relationship satisfaction (Malouff, Schutte and Thorsteinsson, 2014) and stress tolerance (Lea et al., 2019).

Due to its trainability, EI has also been considered an important skill to develop in school environments, and there is now a growing demand for teachers to implement behaviors informed by EI principles in classrooms (Mortiboys, 2013).

At the same time, a new body of research recognized an overemphasis on the benefits of EI, which in some individuals can lead to an excessive focus on emotions and hinder performance in high-pressure situations.

For example, a study showed how individuals with greater sensitivity to emotions had greater difficulty delivering a speech in front of judges assessing their performance (Bechtoldt and Schneider, 2016).

In some situations, an excess of EI can also impact the consideration of rational aspects in decision-making or result in increased susceptibility to others’ negative emotional states (Chamorro-Premuzic and Yearsley, 2017). 

Additional studies highlighted how cognitive ability remains the most significant predictor of performance in jobs requiring the adoption of analytical and technical skills, like engineering, accounting, or science.

By contrast, EI appears more relevant in jobs that involve more direct interactions with people, such as sales, real estate, and counseling (Grant, 2014).

In school environments, it has been recognized that high intelligence and a conscientious personality are the most important psychological traits associated with academic success, while emotional intelligence represents a third significant factor (MacCann et al., 2020).

Overall, it seems that IQ and EQ are important to different degrees in relation to the contexts in which they are applied.

Nurturing both aspects of intelligence, making them operate in harmony with each other, can help us lead a balanced life where both cognitive abilities and emotional well-being are prioritized.

IQ vs EQ in the workplace

It is recognized that traditional intelligence (IQ) supports critical thinking and problem-solving skills, which are crucial in determining employees’ adaptability to a work environment. However, a person’s EQ is just as important.

People who have difficulty managing their own emotions and struggle to acclimatize to a team are more likely to leave their jobs and not progress in their careers (Papoutsi, Drigas, and Sianis, 2019).

In addition, although IQ is associated with leadership success, EQ allows for a better understanding of employees’ needs and priorities, which can enhance team trust and cohesion. Ultimately, this leads to improved performance within an organization (Sadri, 2012). 

In general, both IQ and EQ are considered essential abilities in the workplace. Balancing logical thinking with emotional intelligence and empathy can result in greater versatility, which represents a highly valued attribute in today’s workforce.

On the one hand, IQ allows us to maintain focus, analyze problems with accuracy, and respect deadlines, which can be advantageous in fast-paced work environments.

On the other hand, applying emotional intelligence skills in everyday work situations promotes more constructive relationships between co-workers, leading to successful group outcomes (Zeidner, Matthews, and Roberts, 2004).

Which do employers prefer?

Traditionally, hiring decisions are made based primarily on a candidate’s professional background (i.e., university attended, grades obtained, status of previous jobs) and their intelligence potential.

This is because a high IQ can ensure a candidate will learn the most technical aspects of the role more quickly and use assimilated knowledge to suggest improvements in an organization.

However, a high IQ does not guarantee a person’s success in the longer term, and now hiring managers have started to value the importance of soft skills, including EI (Ashaye et al., 2023). 

In today’s scenarios, the ability to work under pressure and adapt to changing circumstances is required by most workplaces, and therefore, handling one’s emotions effectively becomes increasingly important to reach the desired outcomes.

In addition, people with EI tend to be more open to critical feedback, which allows them to continuously identify areas of improvement and grow professionally, ultimately leading to better quality of work (Zeidner, Matthews, and Roberts, 2004). 

In the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs 2023 report , cognitive skills were ranked at the top of the list of abilities considered important for companies, with ‘analytical thinking’ coming in first place.

However, attributes associated with EI, such as ‘resilience, flexibility, and agility’ and ‘motivation and self-awareness’ also resulted in the top five (Di Battista, Grayling, and Hasselaar, 2023).

This again suggests how an integration between cognitive and emotional skills is crucial for a person’s success in the workplace.

Are IQ and EQ related to each other?

Although IQ and EQ represent distinct aspects of human intelligence, there is emerging evidence suggesting a relationship between the two constructs.

A recent meta-analysis found that people who have been classified as gifted also tend to be more emotionally intelligent, specifically when this is measured as an ability rather than a trait (Ogurlu, 2021).

There might be different explanations as to how people with high IQ also present with above-average levels of emotional competency. For example, it has been revealed that gifted children score higher on measures of ‘overexcitability,’ which is characterized by intense emotionality and empathy.

This can in turn make them more sensitive to what happens around them (Winkler and Voight, 2016). Similarly, gifted individuals might have greater cognitive abilities, including verbal skills, that allow them to more effectively cope with emotional and social problems (Eklund et al., 2015).

Additional research highlighted how both IQ and EQ are essential to human cognitive processes that involve problem-solving, decision-making, and the ability to control impulses.

For example, a study found that both IQ and EQ were positively related to more effective inhibition of interfering information on a cognitive control task (Checa and Fernández-Berrocal, 2015). 

This might mean that people with higher EI are able to generate a mood that allows them to more adaptively respond to environmental demands and make better use of their cognitive resources.

Overall, it appears that when IQ and EQ coexist and complement each other, they are most effective.

This association has important implications for various life domains, as a combination of cognitive and emotional skills allows people to more easily succeed in academic and job environments, maintain healthy relationships with others, and improve their general well-being.

Do IQ tests measure EQ?

IQ tests measure a person’s ability to use logical skills, solve problems, and understand and communicate complex ideas. They represent standardized tests in which the final score is compared to the results obtained by people of the same age group.

As a person’s IQ score tends to be quite consistent over time, it does not capture elements of knowledge that are learned through later life experiences, such as emotional skills or other forms of intelligence.

EQ is generally measured through ability-based and trait-based tests (Schutte et al., 1998). Since it taps into a more flexible group of skills, people’s scores on EQ tests might change over time.

Are people with high EQ more successful than those with high IQ?

IQ and EQ should be viewed as co-factors in determining a person’s success in life. They both directly affect accomplishment and ambition, allowing people to flourish in different areas of life.

At the same time, research points out that while IQ contributes to greater access to opportunities, for example, the likelihood of securing a job, EQ allows us to sustain it in the longer term.

Indeed, people with high EQ can establish more collaborative relationships with others and are more capable of adapting to challenging environments, which can ultimately help them grow faster within an organization.

Can both IQ and EQ be improved?

Although EQ appears more susceptible to change than IQ, there is evidence suggesting that both can be trained and improved with consistent practice.

Some ways to boost IQ include practicing memory games, such as jigsaw puzzles, concentration games, and sudokus, reading books, which can expose you to a variety of new vocabulary and phrases, and learning new skills, such as a foreign language or playing an instrument.

To improve EQ, strategies focus on developing greater self-awareness, which can be achieved through keeping a journal or practicing mindfulness and making a more conscious effort to attune to other people’s emotions to increase empathy and establish healthier interpersonal relationships. 

Ashaye, O. R., Mahmoud, A. B., Munna, A. S., & Ali, N. (2023). The role of social media engagement and emotional intelligence in successful employment. Higher Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning , 13 (2), 315-337.

Bechtoldt, M. N., & Schneider, V. K. (2016). Predicting stress from the ability to eavesdrop on feelings: Emotional intelligence and testosterone jointly predict cortisol reactivity. Emotion , 16 (6), 815.

Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Yearsley, A. (2017). The Downsides of Being Very Emotionally Intelligent. Harvard Business Review . 

Checa, P., & Fernández-Berrocal, P. (2015). The role of intelligence quotient and emotional intelligence in cognitive control processes. Frontiers in Psychology , 6 , 1853.

Cotruş, A., Stanciu, C., & Bulborea, A. A. (2012). EQ vs. IQ which is most important in the success or failure of a student?.  Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences ,  46 , 5211-5213.

David, S. (2016).  Emotional agility: Get unstuck, embrace change, and thrive in work and life . Penguin.

Di Battista, A., Grayling, S., & Hasselaar, E. (2023). Future of jobs report 2023. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland.

Eklund, K., Tanner, N., Stoll, K., & Anway, L. (2015). Identifying emotional and behavioral risk among gifted and nongifted children: A multi-gate, multi-informant approach. School Psychology Quarterly , 30 (2), 197.

Gardner, H. (2008). A multiplicity of intelligences. In  Neuropsychological research  (pp. 26-32). Psychology Press.

Grant, A. (2014). Emotional intelligence is overrated. LinkedIn (September 30), https://www. linkedin. com/pulse/2014093 , 0125543-69244073.

Freedman, J., & Fariselli, L. (2016). Emotional intelligence and success. Six Seconds (6sec. org/success) .

Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ . Bloomsbury Publishing.

Goleman, D. (2020).  Emotional intelligence . Bloomsbury Publishing.

Lea, R. G., Davis, S. K., Mahoney, B., & Qualter, P. (2019). Does emotional intelligence buffer the effects of acute stress? A systematic review. Frontiers in psychology , 10 , 810.

MacCann, C., Jiang, Y., Brown, L. E., Double, K. S., Bucich, M., & Minbashian, A. (2020). Emotional intelligence predicts academic performance: A meta-analysis.  Psychological bulletin ,  146 (2), 150.

Malouff, J. M., Schutte, N. S., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2014). Trait emotional intelligence and romantic relationship satisfaction: A meta-analysis. The American Journal of Family Therapy , 42 (1), 53-66.

Ogurlu, U. (2021). A meta-analytic review of emotional intelligence in gifted individuals: A multilevel analysis. Personality and Individual Differences , 171 , 110503.

Papoutsi, C., Drigas, A., & Skianis, C. (2019). Emotional intelligence as an important asset for HR in organizations: Attitudes and working variables. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning , 12 (2), 21.

Sadri, G. (2012). Emotional intelligence and leadership development. Public Personnel Management , 41 (3), 535-548.

Schutte, N. S., Malouff, J. M., Hall, L. E., Haggerty, D. J., Cooper, J. T., Golden, C. J., & Dornheim, L. (1998). Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and individual differences , 25 (2), 167-177.

Winkler, D., & Voight, A. (2016). Giftedness and overexcitability: Investigating the relationship using meta-analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly , 60 (4), 243-257.

Zeidner, M., Matthews, G., & Roberts, R. D. (2004). Emotional intelligence in the workplace: A critical review. Applied Psychology , 53 (3), 371-399.

Related Articles

Critical Discourse Analysis

What Is Masking?

How To Stop Being Passive-Aggressive

Neurodiversity , Emotions

Managing Emotional Dysregulation In ADHD

ADHD Emotional Dysregulation: When Emotions Become Too Much

Dating Tips , Self-Care

How To Stop Being Insecure In A Relationship

IQ Questions With Answers and Explanations | Intelligence Quotient Questions for Students

Intelligence Quotient questions are amongst one of the most popular methods to assess one’s cognitive abilities and problem solving skills. We design these test to challenge various aspects of intelligence, such as logical reasoning, pattern recognition, verbal comprehension, and mathematical skills. Therefore, we have crafting this article that contains 55 IQ questions with answers and explanations which can be used to test the students’ general mental ability. Also, you can use the following IQ test to measure how quickly and accurately your students can solve problems.

IQ Questions With Answers and Explanations

1. You are in a dark room with a candle, a wood stove, and a gas lamp. If you only have one match, what do you light first?

• The Match Explanation : The match must be lit before anything else can be lit.

2. You answer me although I never ask you questions. What am I?

• Your Telephone Explanation : When your telephone rings, you answer it.

3. The capital of Turkey is a strange word. Would you please spell “it”?

• I-T Explanation : The question asks you to spell the word, “it.”

4. Your mother’s brother’s only brother-in-law is asleep on your couch. Who is asleep on your couch?

• Your Father Explanation : Your mother’s husband (aka your father), is your mother’s brother’s(aka your uncle’s) brother-in-law.

5. Bob’s father has four Mom, Meme, and Mumu is three of them. Who’s the fourth?

• Bob Explanation : BOB’s father. In other words, Bob is also his kid.

6. Some months have 31 days. Some have 30. How many have 28?

• 12 Explanation : All months have at least 28 days.

7. I have three apples. If you take away two from me, how many do you have?

• 2 Explanation : If YOU take two apples, YOU have two

8. Which is greater: six dozen or half a dozen?

• Six Dozen Explanation : Six Dozen = 6 x 12 x 12 is greater than Half a Dozen = 0.5 x 12 x 12

9. An electric train is traveling SW at 60mph. The wind is blowing from the NE at 10mph. Which way is the smoke blowing?

• It’s not blowing OR What smoke? Explanation : Electric trains don’t give off smoke.

10. A plane crashes on the United States/Canada border. Where are the survivors buried?

• They aren’t Explanation : You don’t bury survivors.

General Knowledge Questions with Answers

11. How can 2 and 2 make more than 4?

• Place them side by side Explanation : If you place 2 and two next to each other, you get 22 (twenty-two).

12. If I dig 3 feet by 10 feet by 20 feet holes at a rate of 5 holes per day, how much dirt will be in the holes on the 3rd day of digging?

• 0 feet cubed Explanation : Holes have nothing inside them.

13. What would you have to add to the Roman Numeral, IX, to make “six”? Add on an S Explanation : Adding an S to the front of IX gives you SIX.

14. The day before yesterday, Suzie was 17. Next year, she will be 20. What day is her birthday?

• December 31 Explanation : You’re speaking on January 1st. On December 30th, she was 17. The next day was her 18th birthday. She’s turning 19 on the last day of THIS YEAR, so she’s turning 20 on the LAST DAY of NEXT YEAR.

15. I am greater than God and more evil than the devil. The poor have me, the rich need me, and if you eat me, you will die. What am I?

• Nothing Explanation : Nothing is greater than God and nothing is eviler than the devil. The poor have nothing, the rich need nothing, and if you eat nothing, you will die.

16. There was an evergreen tree in the dark, ugly forest where ghosts, witches, and even Frankenstein lived. All of a sudden, a great gust Of wind flew through the forest. Which way did the leaves on the tree fall?

• It is a pine tree. It doesn’t have leaves.

17. There once was a lady who liked pink. In her cozy, little one-story house, everything was pink. Even her dog was pink. Her hair, her carpet, everything.  What color are her stairs?

• She didn’t have stairs. It was one story.

18. How many two-cent stamps are there in a dozen?

19. A clerk in the butcher shop is 5’10” tall. What does he weigh?

20. A farmer has 17 sheep; all but nine die. How many are left?

21. A doctor gives you three pills telling you to take one every half hour. How long would the pills last?

•  1 hour.

22. Divide 30 by 1/2 and add 10. What is the answer?

23. Is it legal for a man in California to marry his widow’s sister? Why?

• He’s dead.

24. Why can’t a man living in the U.S. be buried in Canada?

• He can’t be buried if he isn’t dead.

25. A woman gives a beggar 1 dollar and 32 cents; the woman is the beggar’s sister, but the beggar is not the woman’s brother. How come?

• The beggar is her sister.

26. In a year, some months have 30 days, while some have 31. Guess which month has 28 days?

• All months have 28 days!

27. If a peanut falls from a tree when the wind is blowing north, where will it land?

• North for sure!
• On the ground?
• Peanuts don`t grow on trees!

28. Even though it belongs to you, usually others use it, what?

29. What is taken from you before it is given to you?

30. There were six apples in a basket and six girls in the room. Each girl took one apple, yet one apple remained in the basket how?

• The first five girls each took an apple. The sixth girl took the basket as well as the apple in it.

10 Best Role-Play For General Speaking Class With Exercises

31. Men were playing tennis. They played five sets, and each man won three sets. How did they do this?

• The two men were partners playing doubles.

32. I’m a male. If Albert’s son is my son’s father, what is the relationship between Albert and me?

• He is my brother
• He is my uncle
• He is my father
• He is my sister
• I am Albert

33. You are my son, but I’m not your father. Who says that?

• The mother.

34. & Mrs. Smith has five children. Of these five, half are boys. How is this possible?

• All of them are boys. Then half of them must be boys, too.

35. Farmer Black came to town with some watermelons. He sold half of them plus half a melon and found that he had one whole watermelon left. How many melons did he take to town?

• Three watermelons.

36. What fruit has its seeds on the outside?

37. Is half of two plus two equal to two or three?

38. What is the beginning of eternity? The end of time and space. The beginning of EVERY END? And the end of EVERY PLACE?

• The letter E

39. Where is the only place in the world, where Friday comes before Thursday?

• In dictionary.

40. Seven is an odd number. How can it be made even?

• Alphabet “s.”

41. Which letter of the English alphabet flies, sings, and sings?

• ‘B’ (bee).

42. You have a cup placed on a table. You are pointing towards the North, and the cup is facing towards the South. On which side is the cup’s handle?

• No matter in which position the cup is, its handle will always be on the outside!

43. Name all the numbers from 1 – 100, that have the letter ‘An’ in their spellings.

44. Which one is correct? “Penguins flies” or “A Penguin flies.”

• Penguins don’t fly.

45. What gets wetter the more it dries?

What to Do After a Failed Test | Actionable Tips

46. What would you have to add to the Roman numeral, IX, to make “six”?

• (Add on an S)

47. Some months have 30 days, some months have 31 days, and how many months have 28 days?

• All of them, every month have at least 28 days.

48. If a doctor gives u three pills and tells u to take one pill every half hour, how long would it be before all the pills had been taken?

• 1 hour, if you take a pill at one o clock then another at 1:30 and the last at two o clock, they will be taken in one hour.

49. I went to bed at eight o’clock in the evening, wound up my clock, and set the alarm to sound at nine, how many hours of sleep would get before being awoken by the alarm?

• 1 hour, is the wind-up alarm clock which cannot discriminate between am and p.m.

50. Divide 30 by half, and add ten. What do you get?

• Dividing by half is the same as multiplying by 2

51. A farmer had 17 sheep. All but 9 died, how many live sheep were left?

52. A man builds a house with four sides of rectangular construction, each side having a southern exposure. A big bear comes along. What color is the bear?

53. Take 3 apples from three apples. What do you have?

54. How many animals of each species did Mosses take with him in the Ark?

• It is Noah, not Mosses

55. If u drove a bus with 43 people on the board from Chicago and stopped at Pittsburgh to pick up seven more people and drop off five passengers at Cleveland to drop off eight more people and pick up 4 and eventually arrive at Philadelphia 20 hours later, what’s the name of the driver?

• You are the driver

IQ Questions List 2

Write the answers to the following IQ questions in the comment section below.

• Forward I am heavy, but backward I am not. What am I?
• I speak without a mouth and hear without ears. I have no body, but I come alive with the wind. What am I?
• I am taken from a mine, and shut up in a wooden case, from which I am never released, and yet I am used by almost every person. What am I?
• The more you take, the more you leave behind. What am I?
• I am always hungry, I must always be fed. The finger I touch will soon turn red. What am I?
• What has keys but can’t open locks?
• The person who makes it, sells it. The person who buys it never uses it. What is it?
• What has a heart that doesn’t beat?
• I am not alive, but I can grow; I don’t have lungs, but I need air. What am I?
• The more you cut, the bigger I grow. What am I?

Share this:

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)

Related posts

6 ways to improve school culture and climate for all students, newscasting script for the introduction | how to begin the news, 10 best ways to become successful in life, 12 comments.

what is your 15 number Question????

This is a common sense question.

what is the answer for fruit with seed outside

Question 54 should be “Moses” not “Mosses.”

Do not worry

This is dumb. question about your moms brothers only brother in law. Assumes your mom is married. Your uncle could be married to a woman with a brother and mom divorced, therefore your father would not be the brother in law.

no.15 is Strawberries, right?

If the previous day was Monday, then what will be the day after the coming day?

B) Saturday

D) Thursday

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Intelligence

IQ, Giftedness

Reviewed by Psychology Today Staff

Reading a road map upside-down, excelling at chess, and generating synonyms for "brilliant" may seem like three different skills. But each is thought to be a measurable indicator of general intelligence or "g," a construct that includes problem-solving ability, spatial manipulation, and language acquisition that is relatively stable across a person's lifetime.

IQ—or intelligence quotient—is the standard most widely used to assess general intelligence. IQ tests seek to measures a variety of intellectual skills that include verbal, non-verbal and spatial. Any person from any walk of life can be highly intelligent, and scoring high on one sub-test tends to correlate with high scores in other tests, though this is not always the case. IQ tests compare a person's performance with that of other people who are the same age—what’s known as a normative sample.

Research has shown that IQ is generally strongly correlated with positive life outcomes, including health and longevity, job performance, and adult income. It is also protective in ways that are not fully understood: People with high IQs seem to be at an advantage in coping with traumatic events—they are less likely to develop full-blown PTSD and more capable of overcoming it when they do—and may experience less rapid decline during the course of Alzheimer's Disease.

• The Roots of Human Intelligence
• Boosting Intelligence
• Who’s Smarter?
• Intelligence and Relationships

There may be. Research suggest that people who are high in the personality trait of openness tended to be more mentally flexible and verbally fluent and more likely to take creative, unconventional approaches to solving problems. Extraverted people were also more likely to score higher on test of verbal fluency because they tended to talk more, and be less concerned about mistakes. And people higher in the trait of conscientiousness tend to perform better on memory tasks because they’re generally better organized and willing to work harder.

No, not even close. This pervasive pop-culture myth—one survey found that 50 percent of science teachers believed it was true—has no basis in reality. We use 100 percent of our brains every day, as is clearly shown by functional magnetic resonance imaging scans. Neurons only make up 10 percent of the cells in our brains but the other 90 percent work full-time, maintaining homeostasis, providing structural support, and removing pathogens. The source of the famous notion is pioneering psychologist William James, who once write that “we are making use of only a small part of our possible mental and physical resources,” and he was right—but our untapped potential has little to do with our brain cells.

No, a larger brain does not make a person more intelligent . Some studies have suggested, for example, that a larger brain may contribute as much as 6 percent boost to one’s intelligence, but this research has come into question, and some experts doubt that a larger brain would bring any advantages because it would necessarily demand greater energy consumption, potentially contributing a drag on a person’s resources. Considering all animals, including humans, there is a theory that the size of a creature’s brain relative the size of their body may confer a higher level of intelligence, though—and human brains constitute up a higher ratio of our body size than do the brains of many other animals.

The theory known as “the Flynn effect” maintains that average IQ scores have and will continue to rise over time, primarily due to changes in our environment—better diet and greater access to education and information, for example. But in recent years, IQ scores appear to declining —one-half to two points per decade—possibly a reflection of a decline in those same environmental factors.

In the early 1980s, Harvard researcher Howard Gardner proposed that, along with IQ, there may be multiple kinds of intelligence that people possess in varying quantities, including visual-spatial, logical-mathematical, and interpersonal (emotional) intelligence. According to this theory, someone high in interpersonal intelligence would likely excel at cooperating within a group, while someone with high levels of logical-mathematical intelligence would have a heightened capacity to understand numbers, patterns, and logic. But while the concept has gained much public attention — and is often used as part of personality or employment tests—many researchers dispute the idea of different intelligences and have criticized Gardner's theory, criteria, and research designs. For example, emotional intelligence cannot be reliably measured through testing as general intelligence can, the critics argue, and so it lacks the power to explain differences between people.

For more, see Emotional Intelligence .

A critical prerequisite for intellectual growth is the idea that one can gain mastery and improve on native ability. While one can indeed improve memory and problem-solving abilities over time via practice or environmental pressure, this does not mean that one is becoming "more" intelligent. IQ scores do not fluctuate markedly over the course of a person's lifetime, and they tend to consistently correlate with other tests, such as the SAT. Many supplements and computer programs are marketed as brain boosters, but there is little long-term evidence to support those claims.

One reason people attend, and stay in, school through high school, college, and beyond, is to become more intelligent. And while additional years of schooling should increase one’s store of general knowledge and career prospects, until recently research had not concluded that formal education also increased one’s IQ. But then a meta-analysis determined that each additional year of schooling appeared to raise IQ by one to five points. Exactly how schooling boosts IQ is not clear, though, nor is whether or how the effect accumulates over many years of education. But experts point to the study as a sign of a more crucial truth: that an individual’s intelligence can change over time.

The right ones seem to be able to. Successful players of games requiring strategy, creativity , and teamwork , research finds, tend to have a higher IQ than others. A similar connection between IQ and gaming success was not found in studies of first-person shooter-type games that rely on hand-eye coordination. But other studies find that playing certain games can actually help boost IQ. Studies that involved popular puzzle-based strategy games, particularly those involving complex, changing environments, led to gains in problem solving, spatial skills, and persistence. Significantly, such results were not found in studies of so-called “brain-training” games marketed as cognitive boosters.

A growing body of research supports the idea that exercise can help boost cognition, especially moderate-to-vigorous aerobic exercise. In one example, researchers found that, for older people, time spent in moderate-to-vigorous cardiovascular exercise was positively correlated with increases in “fluid” intelligence—processing speed, memory, and reasoning. In the same study, sedentary time was correlated with boosts in “crystallized” intelligence, such as vocabulary development. Light physical activity, however, provided little cognitive benefit.

Stimulants like methylphenidate ( Ritalin ) and mixed amphetamine salts ( Adderall ) deliver proven benefits for many people with ADHD. But the question of whether such stimulants could improve cognitive ability is highly controversial. Recent research, however, suggests that the drugs do not deliver any cognitive enhancement—aside from an increase in confidence , interest, and energy in people’s tasks. A boost in optimism when tackling a difficult assignment is not the same as a boost in intelligence, but it can help deliver better results by motivating people to deploy their existing cognitive resources more vigorously.

While most research finds very little difference in the mean IQ between men and women,  men are overrepresented at the tails of the distribution. This means that more men than women have scores that reflect severe retardation, and more men than women score in the profoundly gifted or "genius" range. Research shows that men are a lot more likely than women to overstate their intelligence. In one example, 71 percent of men claimed to be smarter than the average person, compared to just 59 percent of women.

There’s a persistent stereotype that people high in the trait of psychopathy are smarter than most others because they are skilled at both presenting a false façade to potential victims and at manipulating targets into doing what they want those people to do. But research shows that this is not the case. In fact, some studies find, psychopaths are generally less intelligent than others, particularly so when it comes to capabilities like recognizing emotions in others. So why do they seem so intelligent and devious? Researchers suggest that it’s because they constantly target people with schemes, to the point that even if their percentage of success is quite low, they do occasionally rope in a target.

No, but many become obsessed with the idea that they could be. Studies of narcissism have found that a belief in their intellectual superiority is often crucial to their identity . Narcissists of the type known as grandiose are highly likely to believe they are smarter than other people; some place an especially high value on IQ testing. Vulnerable narcissists, on the other hand, who tend to be more introverted, insecure, and neurotic , are not as likely to believe that they are smarter than others, but they are more likely than others to find taking intelligence tests to be highly stressful .

It has long been believed that left-handed people are smarter than right-handers, but research does not support the notion. In fact, a meta-analysis of studies including more than 20,000 people found that right-handers had a slightly higher IQ, on average, than left-handers, but the difference was not significant.

This is emerging as a core philosophical question as AI systems increase in power and humans become more concerned about how many aspects of work, decision-making , and even creative production could eventually be turned over to computer intelligence. But there are some tasks humans perform far better, such as image recognition, and humans can also be seen as more flexible and adaptive learners. Some argue that the human propensity to ask original questions sets us apart from machine intelligence, along with the ability to leverage others people’s intelligence while solving problems together.

The vast majority of people claim that they find intelligence to be among the most desirable traits in a potential romantic partner. As with other favorable traits, though, this appeal most strongly influences initial interest in a new partner. Once people begin dating, other factors like personality and conflict style play important roles in determining whether a couple will stay together. But for a certain group, intelligence is their primary erotic turn-on . Some research suggests that these individuals, known as sapiosexuals , may represent a distinct sexual orientation . Interestingly, whether one finds intelligence to be a turn-on does not seem to be determined by one’s own level of intelligence. But for sapiosexuals, looks and even gender may not be as vital a factor in sexual attraction as intelligence.

Generally, yes. Studies of adolescents found that more intelligent individuals were more well-liked by peers than others—although other research finds that more intelligent people tend to like fewer people than others, and to prefer being with other intelligent people. In the dating pool, smarter people may be at an advantage because others’ preference for being with smart people is strongest at the beginning of relationships.

Generally, it’s an advantage, although some research suggests that the most intelligent people may be at a disadvantage . When people were asked to consider whether they would want to date people in different percentiles of intelligence, the favorability rankings increased steadily from the 50th percentile to the 90th, at which point interest declined. This research is consistent with other findings that even the most appealing traits tend not be desired in the extreme.

In surveys, men and women both claim that they are at least as attracted to intelligence as they are to good looks. In practice, especially for men, that is not always the case. The idea that highly intelligent women may be at a disadvantage in the dating pool , research suggests, is no myth: Men tend to shy away from women who are clearly more intelligent than they are. (Women are less likely to have the same reaction to intelligent men.) Experts suggest that intelligent women avoid dumbing themselves down to attract a partner or going out of their way to support a partner’s ego, as in the end those strategies are likely to lead to unfulfilling relationships.

Future machines will be smarter than us and may revolutionize mental healthcare. Is this an “Oppenheimer moment”?

Researchers conducted a meta-analysis to resolve mixed findings on extraversion and intelligence.

A new AI machine-learning method uses concepts from human developmental psychology and childhood learning to achieve nearly 15 percent greater accuracy.

Research is proving that the extraordinary cognitive abilities of tiny creatures are not science fiction.

Relational intelligence is more important than being quick-witted. Many people who process slower than the norm can be both wiser and deeper than the verbal virtuoso.

Much of the hype and controversy surrounding large language models revolves around how we define words like intelligence, mind, and thinking.

Cognition and intelligence create a common background. This is in tension with the radically private nature of consciousness.

An AI model helps explain why some images make a lasting impact while others are filtered out by the brain.

Uncover the disturbing truth about how our looks shape our lives. From courtroom biases to the unexpected downside of beauty, this post reveals it all.

We seem to be speeding toward the first artificial superintelligence. If it happens, according to AI expert Darren Mckee, it will be a profound, exciting, and dangerous moment.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Share Podcast

How to Solve Your Company’s Toughest Problems

A conversation with Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei on how to solve any problem in five clear steps.

• Apple Podcasts

You’ve likely heard the phrase, “Move fast and break things.” But Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei says speed and experimentation are not enough on their own. Instead, she argues that you should move fast and fix things. (That’s also the topic and title of the book she coauthored with Anne Morriss .)

In this episode, Frei explains how you can solve any problem in five clear steps. First, she says, start by identifying the real problem holding you back. Then move on to building trust and relationships, followed by a narrative for your solution — before you begin implementing it.

Key episode topics include: leadership, strategy execution, managing people, collaboration and teams, trustworthiness, organizational culture.

HBR On Leadership curates the best case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, to help you unlock the best in those around you. New episodes every week.

• Learn more about HBR’s “ Future of Business” virtual conference (November 2023)
• Find more Harvard Business Review live events
• Discover 100 years of Harvard Business Review articles, case studies, podcasts, and more at HBR.org

HANNAH BATES: Welcome to HBR on Leadership , case studies and conversations with the world’s top business and management experts, hand-selected to help you unlock the best in those around you.

Maybe you’ve heard the phrase, “move fast and break things.” It refers to a certain approach for rapid innovation that was popularized in Silicon Valley and invoked by many tech firms. But Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei says that speed and experimentation are not enough on their own. Instead, Frei argues that you should “move fast and fix things.” That’s the topic and title of the book she co-authored with Anne Morriss.

In this episode, Harvard Business Review’s editorial audience director Nicole Smith sits down with Frei to discuss how you can solve any problem in five quick steps. You’ll learn how to start by uncovering your true problem. Then, move on to build trust, relationships, and a narrative for your solution before you dive in on the actual work of implementing your fix.

This conversation was originally part of HBR’s “Future of Business” virtual conference in November 2023. Here it is.

FRANCES FREI: So, I would love to talk to you about how to move fast and fix things. And I’ll tell you the reason that Anne and I wrote this book – and it’s really a quest we’ve been on – is that Mark Zuckerberg, in his IPO for Facebook, famously said, “we’re going to move fast and break things.” And the problem with that is that it gave the world a false trade-off. It convinced so many of us that you could either move fast and break things or you could take care of people, one or the other. And we have found that there is a third, much better way. And that is, we can move even faster if we fix things along the way. And so, that’s what I’d love to talk to you about right now. And the way that we think about this is that if you want to move fast and fix things, we have to do it on a foundation of trust. And so, the first thing to do is to experience high trust. And we’re going to talk about how to build trust. But the way we see the world can be described in this grid. And in the presence of trust, we can move really fast. That’s how we move fast and fix things. We call it accelerating excellence. It’s only when we’re in the presence of low trust that we move fast and break things, or what we call being reckless disruption. And as I said, so many organizations are afraid of reckless disruption that they actually end up in this state of responsible stewardship, which is really just going slowly. And so, we wrote the book to get those that are in responsible stewardship to realize that we could go across the way to accelerating excellence. And we didn’t have to go down to reckless disruption. So, the way that we think about this, and it’s the way we wrote the book, is that there’s a five-step plan to do it. We organized the book for days of the week. We think that the metabolic rate of organizations can be improved significantly and that many, many hard problems can be solved in just one week. So, we wrote the book in the structure of a week. Step one is we have to find our real problem, that if we’re… for far too many of us, we’re addressing the symptom and not the cause. At any problem, there’s going to be trust broken at the bottom of it. And we’re going to solve for trust. We’re then going to learn how to get more perspectives to make our plans even better. Learn how to tell a narrative that works. And then, and only then, on Friday, do we get to go as fast as we can. And what typically happens in the move fast and break things is that we move Friday too forward in the week. So, our goal is to put ourselves in a position to move fast. And you have to wait till Friday to do that. So, what do I mean by finding the real problem? Most of us, a problem gets presented as a symptom. So, I’ll give you a recent example that got presented to me and Anne. We got called by a company. And they said, we’re having a gender problem. Will you come in and help us? And we’ve been able to help many organizations solve gender problems. So, we go in there. And we just wanted to make sure that they really did have a gender problem. The symptoms were super clear. There were no women at the top of the organization. Not very many women were coming into the organization. And great women were leaving the organization. So, they had… it looked like a gender problem. But it took, I don’t know, an hour. It took 60 minutes, certainly not even all of Monday, to uncover that their actual problem was not a gender problem. Their actual problem was a communication problem. And if we did all of the things that we know exist in our gender tool kit on how to fix gender, that would have all been wasted effort. But instead, what we found out is that the founders of this organization, and they were two cofounders, and they were very similar to each other, and they’d worked together and known each other for decades. They had a really uncomfortably and aggressively direct communication style. That communication style repelled all women and most men. So yes, the symptoms were gender. But oh, my goodness, the cause was that the two founders were succumbing to a problem many of us succumb to, which is, we were treating others as we like to be treated. They loved to be treated with aggressively direct communication. But nobody else loved it. And when we simply confronted them with that and taught them that instead of treating others as you want to be treated, now it’s a puzzle. Find out how they want to be treated, and treat them that way. Gets fixed. And all of a sudden, women and lots of other men are flowing to the organization. So, Monday… and we take a whole day for this. Let’s make sure we’re solving the real problem. And symptoms are rarely the cause. So, we just want to do some due diligence, some due diligence there. Once we know we’re solving for the real problem, there’s going to be trust broken down somewhere in the… amidst the problem. Well, very fortunately, we now understand trust super well. If I’m going to earn your trust, you will have an involuntary reaction of trusting me if you experience my authenticity, logic, and empathy all at the same time. When these three things are present, you will trust me. But if any one of these three is missing, you will not trust me. And here’s the catch. If trust is broken, and we know it’s only ever broken for one of these three reasons, we need to know which of the three, because the prescriptions to solve a broken authenticity pillar versus logic pillar versus empathy pillar, they’re entirely different from one another. So, you can think about rebuilding trust. It’s just a matching game. Know which one is at stake. And then bring in the curated prescription for that. There is a myth about trust that it takes a lifetime to build and a moment to destroy. And then you can never rebuild it. None of those things are true, that we can actually build trust very quickly when we understand the architecture of it. We can rebuild it quickly and just as strong as it was before. So, this notion that trust is a Faberge egg, it’s catchy and not true. Trust is being rebuilt all the time. But we want to do it with a deep understanding of the stable architecture. So, Tuesday takes all day. We solve for trust. On Wednesday, we call Wednesday making new friends. And what we mean by that is whichever collection of people you bring to the table who are the people that maybe are on your senior team or the people that you bring to the table to solve problems. And here, I’ve represented a table. And there’s eight check marks for eight seats. I encourage you to bring four extra chairs to that table. If you have eight seats, bring four extra chairs. Point to the extra chairs and ask yourself, who’s not here? Who has a stake in our problem who’s not represented at the table? I was recently in a conversation with our senior colleagues at the Harvard Business School. And we were talking about how to do junior faculty development. And we came up with what we thought were great ideas. And then we looked around and we were like, Oh, my goodness, there’s no junior faculty here. How on Earth do we know if these are good ideas? So, we got the empty seats. We invited people in. And sure enough, the junior faculty helped improve our plans dramatically. The equivalent of that always happens. So, on Wednesday, we want to make new friends. So, one is inviting them into the room. But then the second part is, how do you make sure that their voices are heard? And what we need to do is that when someone comes to the room, they’re going to be awfully tempted to say things that they think we want to hear. They’re going to be awfully tempted to conform to what we’re already saying. So, what we need to do is learn how to be inclusive of their unique voices. And the way we do that is by going through this four-step progressive process, which is, first, we have to make sure they feel safe and that they feel… they’re going to feel physically and emotionally safe, I’m sure, but that they feel psychologically safe. And that’s a shout-out to Amy Edmondson and all of her beautiful work there. But we have to make sure that we feel safe. Once we feel safe, then it’s our job to make sure that the new voices feel welcome. You can think of that as table stakes. Then when we’re doing is we’re really trying to move people up the inclusion dial. And here, this is when it really starts to make a big difference. And now what we want to do is make sure that they feel celebrated for their unique contribution. And so, what we’re doing is moving them up the inclusion dial. Now, here’s why that’s kind of hard. Most of us tend to celebrate sameness. And here, I’m asking you to celebrate uniqueness. And what I mean by celebrating sameness is that for the most part, like, when I watch my students in class, if one student says something, and then another student was going to say that, after class, they go and seek out the first person. And they’re like, you’re awesome. You said what I was going to say. They didn’t realize this. They’re celebrating sameness. They’re encouraging sameness. So, what I do is I advise my students to not share that verbal treat, that what we playfully refer to as a Scooby snack. Don’t share that Scooby snack for when somebody says something you were going to say. Share it for when somebody says something you could never have said on your own, and that it comes from their lived experience and learned experience, and how they metabolize successes and failures, and their ambition, if they’re lucky enough to have neurodiversity, their worldview, all of that. It’s a beautiful cocktail. Wait till they say something that comes uniquely from all of that. Celebrate that. When we celebrate uniqueness, that’s when we get the blossoming of the perspectives. And what we want to do to make somebody really feel included is we celebrate them when they are in our presence. But if you really want somebody to feel included, and we bring folks into the room for this, make sure that you champion them when they’re in the absence. So, let’s not just ask the junior faculty to come along. Or if it’s a senior team, and it’s mostly men, and the board of directors is coming in, and we’re like, oh, goodness. Let’s make sure we can show some women too. So, we bring some women along. We celebrate them in our presence. Let’s make sure that we champion them in our absence as well, which is celebrate their uniqueness in our presence and champion them in rooms that they’re not yet allowed into in their absence. So that’s Wednesday. Let’s make new friends. Let’s include their voices. Let’s champion those new voices in their absence. Thursday, we tell a good story. And stories have three parts to it: past, present, and future. It is really important – if you’re going to change something, if you’re going to fix something, it is critical to honor the past. People that were here before us, if they don’t feel like we see the past, we see them, we’re honoring the past, I promise you, they’re going to hold us back. And they’re going to be like The Godfather movie and keep pulling us back. So, we have to honor the past with clear eyes, both the good part of the past and the bad part of the past. Then we have to answer the question, why should we change now? Like, why shouldn’t we change maybe next week, maybe the week after, maybe the month after, maybe next year? So, it’s really important that we give a clear and compelling change mandate that answers the question, why now? Why not in a little while? I find that if you’re a retailer, and you have the metaphor of Walmart just opened up next door, clear, compelling. We have to… that should be our metaphor. How can we be, with as crisp of a language, clear and compelling about why now? And then we’ve honored the past. We have a clear and compelling change mandate. You want people to follow us in the improved future, we have to have a super rigorous and a super optimistic way forward. We have seen so many people be optimistic without rigor. Nobody’s going to follow. And similarly, rigor without optimism, also, nobody’s going to follow. So, it’s our job to keep refining and refining and refining until we can be both rigorous and optimistic. Now, how do we know when our plan is working? Well, here are the four parts of storytelling that we know. Our job is to understand this plan so deeply that we can describe it simply. When we describe it, we want to make sure if I describe it to you, and you describe it to the next person, that the next person understands it as if I described it to them. So, our job is to understand so deeply that we can describe simply that it’s understood in our absence. And the ultimate test is it’s understood when they go home and share it with their family. They have the same understanding we want. We find this to be the four-stage litmus test to make sure we have been effective in our communication. And when people understand it this well, then they can act on it in our absence. And that’s when we’re now in the position to go as fast as we can. And when all of that infrastructure is in place, well, then we can go super fast. And there are all kinds of clever ways that we can do that. So, I look forward to opening this up and having a conversation with you.

NICOLE SMITH: That was excellent. Professor, we got several questions. I want to just dive right into it. Tessa asked, what tools, practices, and skills do you use to uncover the underlying superficial problems? It sounded like you talked a lot about questions and asking questions.

FRANCES FREI: Yeah, it’s right. So, the Toyota production system would famously refer to the five whys. And they had… and that was root cause analysis, which we all know. But essentially, what they found is that it’s about five… why does this exist? Well, why does that exist? Well, why does that exist? Like, if you ask why five times, they found that that’s how you got to the root cause. We find, in practice, the answer is closer to three. It’s rarely one. So, it would be, the symptom and the cause are usually a few layers. And you want to keep asking why. So, that’s the first thing I would say, is that we want to have… make sure that you’re doing root cause analysis. But the second thing on a specific tool, the tool that we like the most, we call the indignities list. And what you do is that… and the way we found out the symptom is we went to women in this company, because that’s what… they said they were having a gender problem. And we asked the women, is there anything that’s going on at work that just… it feels like it’s just nicking your dignity? And it occurs for… is it happening to you, or you observe it happening to other women? So, you go in search of the indignities list. Every time we do this, you’ll get a list of issues. Often, they will sound trivial. When you start to get convergence on those indignities, we then ask you to convert those indignities to the dignity list. And in this case, it was the communication style. And you know what the awesome thing about that was? It was free.

NICOLE SMITH: Wow.

FRANCES FREI: You can’t beat free.

NICOLE SMITH: Monique asks, can you speak more about how to amplify others’ ideas and perspectives, especially when they’re from underrepresented stakeholders?

FRANCES FREI: Oh, I love that question. Thank you very much. And so, I’m going to go to… here is my favorite visual on the amplification part, which is the team I’ve drawn in the middle, it’s a three-person team. And each circle represents a person on the team. And I’m showing that there’s three circles in the middle, that those folks are very similar to one another. And then on either side, we have a team where there’s difference among us. And this is where the underrepresented might come in. If we’re not careful, when we have underrepresented voices, we’re only going to be seeking from them the parts that overlap with us. So, this is when we’ve invited them to the table, but we’re not inclusive of their voices. What we want to do is make sure that everybody feels comfortable bringing all of their richness to the table, not just the part that overlaps. And so, what we find we need to do is be very solicitous about… and same with questions. From your perspective, how does this sound to you? What else are we missing? What I’m trying to do is get you off the scent of saying what you think I want to say or even asking you to say what I want to say because it makes me feel better. But I want to be inclusive of all of the gorgeous uniqueness. And this, of course, ties to diversity, equity, and inclusion, which I know has gotten a rocky go of things in the press. But what I’ll tell you is, if I got to rewrite diversity, equity, and inclusion, I would have written it as inclusion, equity, and diversity, because I have seen teams bring… I have seen organizations bring in diverse and underrepresented talent and not get the benefit from it.

NICOLE SMITH: Yeah.

FRANCES FREI: So, diversity may or may not beget inclusion. But I have never, ever seen an organization that was inclusive that didn’t beget gorgeous diversity.

NICOLE SMITH: Right.

FRANCES FREI: So, be inclusive first.

NICOLE SMITH: I appreciate you saying that, not just sitting at the table, but actually including and giving lift to people’s voices. I also want to talk about this friends thing you keep talking about, making new friends. First of all, how do I identify who’s a friend?

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. So, in this case, I want the friend to be someone who is as different from you as possible. So, the new friends. Like, who’s worthy of friendship? Not someone who you’re already attracted to, not somebody who you’re already hanging out with. So, here’s the thing about humans. We really like people who are really like us. It doesn’t make us bad people. But it just makes us human. And so, what I want you to do is seek difference. Find people from different perspectives. And that will be demographic difference, different lived experience, different learned experience. And so, if we’re senior faculty, let’s invite in junior faculty. If we’re all women, let’s invite in a man. If we’re all engineers, let’s make sure we’re bringing in the perspective of marketing. So, what I would say is my guiding principle is seek difference. Those are your potential new friends.

NICOLE SMITH: OK, so Steve wants to hone in on Friday, right? And Steve asks, can you paint a quick sketch of what’s going fast after this being slower – a slower, more thoughtful process?

FRANCES FREI: I sure can. Thank you, Steve. And so, here’s how I would think about Friday. We need ruthless prioritization. And what I mean by that is that for the most part, organizations have… that we work equally on everything. We think everything is equally important. But what we know is that organizations that win, they have ruthless prioritization. And they know, this is what I’m designed to be great at. And this is what I’m designed to be bad at. Not bad for sport, bad in the service of great. And if an organization can’t discern between these two, they’re going to end up with exhausted mediocrity. And so, what we have to do for our employees and the rest of the organization is, here’s what we’re going to optimize on. That’s half the story. And here’s what we’re not. So, I’ll give you an example of this. And the example is from Steve Jobs. And if those of you that are a bit techie, and you remember 20 years ago, when Steve Jobs walked out on that Worldwide Developer Conference stage with a manila envelope, and it had a MacBook Air in it. And he slid out that MacBook Air. And the crowd and the world went crazy, because it was the lightest-weight laptop in the world. Well, he very, very openly said, we are best in class at weight because we are worst in class at physical features. We could have been best in class at physical features. But then we would have been worst in class at weight. Or we could have chosen to be average at both. But then we would have had to rename our company. And then he made fun of another company that I won’t say here. So, we will end up… if we aren’t deliberate, we’re going to end up with exhausted mediocrity, constantly getting better at the things we’re bad at, which, without realizing it, means we’re getting worse at the things we’re good at. So, the most important thing we can do on Friday is to articulate, this is what we want to be disproportionately good at. And thus, this is what we want to be disproportionately bad at. And there’s a whole other series of things. But that’s the most important one.

NICOLE SMITH: Mm-hmm. Speaking of Steve Jobs, we have a question where they ask, do you think that the culture in Silicon Valley is changing from break things to fix things, particularly as it pertains to not only their own companies, but broader societal problems?

FRANCES FREI: Yeah, so I – not in all of Silicon Valley. So, I think we can famously see, it’s not clear to me that Twitter is moving fast and fixing things. But what I will say is that, look at Uber today. And I had the pleasure of going and working with Uber back in 2017, when they were going to move fast and break things. They are moving fast and fixing things now, and going at a catapulting speed. Or ServiceNow didn’t ever even go through move fast and break things. It’s just moving fast and fixing things. Stripe is doing the same thing. Airbnb is now moving fast and fixing things. So, what I would say is that Silicon Valley can now choose to move fast and fix things, whereas, in the past, I think they only thought they had the choice of going slow or moving fast and breaking things. Today, we have the choice. And more and more companies are making that choice.

NICOLE SMITH: Mm-hmm. And so, Bill asked, which one of these steps do you find the most commonly in need of… that companies need the most help with? So, you laid out Monday through Friday. Is there something that sticks out often?

FRANCES FREI: Well, I’ll tell you that if companies are really pressed for time, they skip Thursday. And that’s to their peril, because if we skip Thursday, that means we have to be present. And we’re a bottleneck for everything. That means people need us to translate why this is important. So, I would say that Thursday is the one that’s most often skipped. And I encourage you not to. And then I would say that Tuesday is the one that’s most often misunderstood because of all of the myths I mentioned that we have about trust. And we just think, oh, if trust is broken, we have to work around it, as opposed to going right through it and rebuilding trust.

NICOLE SMITH: So, Thursday, that’s the storytelling, honoring the past, describing it simply, right? So why do we struggle to describe things simply?

FRANCES FREI: Oh, I don’t know what your inbox looks like on your email. But you tell me how many long emails you have.

NICOLE SMITH: I refuse to deal with my inbox. I’ll deal with it later.

FRANCES FREI: So, Mark Twain was right. I apologize for sending you a long letter. I didn’t have the time to send you a short letter. It’s the metaphor for all of this, that when we understand something in a complicated way, we want to benefit people from the entirety of our knowledge. And we just throw up all of it on people, as opposed to realizing the beautiful curation and skill that’s required to go from understanding it deeply to understanding it elegantly in its simplicity. So, I think it takes time. It’s also… it takes skill. Like, this is… there are professional communicators for a reason. They’re really good at it. But if you’re on your second draft of something, you have no chance of describing it simply. So, I would say, unless you’re on your 10th draft, you’re probably describing it in too complicated of a way.

NICOLE SMITH: Yeah. So, can I ask you a little bit more of a personal question, Professor?

FRANCES FREI: Yeah, anything.

NICOLE SMITH: So, Abby asks, how do you apply the essential steps to moving fast and fixing things in your own consulting role? So, Uber and all the places that you go.

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Yeah, so I’ll tell you, when we’ve been successful, it’s when organizations come to us, and they say, here’s our problem. Will you help us? When we’ve been unsuccessful is when we go to the organizations, and we’re like, we think you’re having a problem. So, pull works. Push doesn’t. So, the only thing we can’t provide is the desire to change. And so, I would say personally, make sure there’s an opening. And then you can be super helpful in fixing a problem. And I also would say that all of this applies to yourself. I mean, that ruthless prioritization – so many of us are trying to be good at as many things as possible – at work, at home, daughter, sister, cousin, parent, friend – as opposed to, I’m going to kill it at work, kill it at home. And I am not going to be good… not now. I’m not going to be as good at all of these other things. So, you can either choose exhausted mediocrity, or you can have the nobility of excellence. These things are choices. So, I think all of this applies to ourselves.

NICOLE SMITH: So, let’s go back to Tuesday, where you drew that triangle with logic, and empathy, and authenticity. So, Hung asks, between logic and empathy, which one would you say an individual should develop first? And Hung really describes just having a left foot and right foot and not knowing which one to go forward.

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. So, here’s what I would say, Hung, is, ask yourself… I bet you’re trusted most of the time, which means people are experiencing your authenticity, logic, and empathy most of the time. But ask yourself, the last time, or the most recent times you had a skeptic, you had someone who was doubting you, who they were wobbling on your trust, ask yourself, what is it that they doubted about you? And if it’s that they doubted your logic, double click there. If they doubted your empathy, double click there. And that is, each of us has what we call a wobble. Each one of us has a pattern where the distribution of these is higher for one or the other. That’s the sequence I would go in. There’s not some generic sequence that is better. All three of these pillars are equally important. But I bet, for each one of us, one tends to be more shaky than the other. And that’s what I would go after. Now, I will just tell you the distribution in the world. The vast majority of us have empathy wobbles, then logic wobbles, then authenticity wobbles. But that doesn’t help any of us specifically. It just tells us we have lots of company.

NICOLE SMITH: OK. So, we got a lot more questions and a little time. I want to get as many as I can in, but…

FRANCES FREI: OK, I’ll go super quick. Yeah.

NICOLE SMITH: No, take your time. But I just want to let you know, you’re pretty popular in this conversation. Rock star, as Allison said. Tara asks, how can company leadership make sure that their messaging is actually heard and understood? I feel like you touched on this a bit with simplicity.

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Yeah, and I think that the way to do it is, talk to people about your message that didn’t hear it directly from you. And see how well they understood. That tells you whether or not it’s reaching. So, don’t ask the people that were in the room. Ask the people that were spoken to by other people in the room. That will tell you how well it’s there. And if it took you a long time to describe it, I promise you, it’s not going to be heard.

NICOLE SMITH: Mm. Oh, wow. Yeah, thinking about it, probably need to shorten my own stories a little bit here. So, Karen asks you, how do you handle employees who are not willing to accept others’ points of view and be open minded? I mean, you described this uniqueness and diversity. But there are people who are holdouts that don’t see the advantage of that.

FRANCES FREI: So, I often find those folks are an education away, because if I can let you know that if I get to benefit from everyone’s point of view, and you only get to benefit from some people’s point of view, I will competitively thump you. So, let’s say you don’t have the moral imperative wanting to do it. Well, the performance imperative… we have found that organizations that are inclusive get a 200% to 500% boost on employee engagement and team performance with no new people, no new technology, simply the act of being inclusive. So, the person who doesn’t want to be inclusive, I’m going to ask them, can they afford… can their career afford performing so suboptimally?

NICOLE SMITH: Mm. And so, we have a question. The person didn’t leave their name, so I don’t have a name. But how much time do you spend on each stage? Some folks like to spend more time on stages than others. Does the team not move forward until everyone’s satisfied with the current step? What do you do when you hit a roadblock on each stage, and not everyone is in agreement?

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. Well, I don’t like consensus, so I’ll just… I’ll say there. And so, what I try to do is work on momentum, which is that I want to make sure that everybody’s voices have been heard. But then you have to leave the decision to someone else. So, we want to do is make sure everybody’s voices are heard, and they had a chance to do it. But we don’t hold out until the very last person. We move forward. And then we can retrace and see if the momentum can bring people forward. So, not consensus. I would consider it not consensus, and we have to make sure that everybody gets to air out what their problems are.

NICOLE SMITH: OK. Well, Christopher asks our last question. How does transparency fit into this model, specifically this trust, authenticity, logic model? Does it have a place?

FRANCES FREI: Yeah. It sure does. And I find that the most important part for transparency is on the logic side. So, if you’re going to say… if you’re going to inspect whether or not I have good rigor, and I have a good plan, I could say, oh, just have faith. I did all of this hard work. Or I could give you a glimpse inside so that you can see the inner workings. Now, I often call it a window of transparency, because there’s actually a cost of full transparency that I’m not always willing to take. But a window of transparency, I think we always need. So, to me, the transparency part is, let’s be transparent about our logic so people can see it for themselves, and they don’t have to do it in too much of a faith-based way.

NICOLE SMITH: Professor, that was all dynamic. And thank you for the illustrations. You made it simple with the illustrations.

FRANCES FREI: Yeah, all right. Awesome. Thanks so much.

NICOLE SMITH: Thank you for your time.

FRANCES FREI: OK.

HANNAH BATES: That was Harvard Business School professor Frances Frei in conversation with HBR’s editorial audience director Nicole Smith at the “Future of Business” virtual conference in November 2023.

We’ll be back next Wednesday with another hand-picked conversation about leadership from Harvard Business Review. If you found this episode helpful, share it with your friends and colleagues, and follow our show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. While you’re there, be sure to leave us a review.

When you’re ready for more podcasts, articles, case studies, books, and videos with the world’s top business and management experts, you’ll find it all at HBR.org.

This episode was produced by Anne Saini, and me, Hannah Bates. Ian Fox is our editor. Music by Coma Media. Special thanks to Dave Di Iulio, Terry Cole, and Maureen Hoch, Erica Truxler, Ramsey Khabbaz, Nicole Smith, Anne Bartholomew, and you – our listener. See you next week.

• Subscribe On:

Latest in this series

This article is about leadership and managing people.

• Strategy execution
• Managing people
• Collaboration and teams
• Trustworthiness
• Organizational culture
• Change management

Partner Center

• Bihar Board

James Dyson Award

Sanskriti university, srm university.

• Education News
• Web Stories
• Current Affairs
• Short Videos
• School & Boards
• College Admission
• Govt Jobs Alert & Prep
• GK & Aptitude
• general knowledge

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Only 1% With Sharpest Vision Can Spot A Piano Among Zebras In 8 Seconds!

Do you possess high observational skills, attention to detail, and superior problem-solving abilities put your iq and observation skills to the test and see if you can uncover the elusive piano among the zebras.

Optical illusions are a powerful tool for assessing intelligence and visual prowess. IQ, or Intelligence Quotient, is often linked to one’s ability to solve complex problems quickly and accurately. What better than to take on a mind-boggling optical illusion challenge to test your IQ?

Personality Test: Your Way Of Holding Your Phone Reveals Your Hidden Personality Traits

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Only Top 1% With Sharpest Vision Can Spot A Piano Among Zebras In 8 Seconds!

Do you possess high observational skills, attention to detail, and superior problem-solving abilities?

Why do we ask this? Well, high IQ individuals often show remarkable proficiency in solving visually challenging optical illusion puzzles due to their enhanced visual-spatial reasoning.

Optical Illusion IQ Test: Can You Spot The Whale Among Elephants In 8 Seconds?

To successfully spot the piano, you must stay focused and scan the image systematically. Start from one corner and move methodically across the image.

Focus on breaking down the image into smaller sections to avoid being overwhelmed by the chaotic zebra stripes in this perplexing puzzle!

Picture Puzzle IQ: Can Your Sharp Eyes Find The Hidden Cap In This Busy Scene In 8 Seconds?

Optical Illusions With Answers

If you could not find the piano hidden among the zebras in this picture, do not worry. Check the optical illusion answer below.

You Might Also Be Interested In...

Personality Test: Your Foot Shape Reveals Your Hidden Personality Traits

Personality Test: Your Nail Shape Reveals Your Hidden Personality Traits

Get here current GK and GK quiz questions in English and Hindi for India , World, Sports and Competitive exam preparation. Download the Jagran Josh Current Affairs App .

• Important Days in June 2024
• Yoga Day Quotes, Wishes in Hindi
• Yoga Day 2024 Theme
• India T20 World Cup Squad 2024
• Yoga Day Quotes
• T20 World Cup 2024 Points Table
• MS Dhoni Quotes
• India PM List 2024
• Lok Sabha Election 2024 Stats
• Cabinet Ministers List 2024

Latest Education News

UP Cabinet's Decision: Tata Sons to Build ₹650 Crore 'Museum of Temples' in Ayodhya

China's Chang'e-6 Makes History with Moon's Far Side Samples; What Did They Discover?

AKTU Result 2024 OUT at aktu.ac.in; Direct Link to Download Semester UG Marksheet PDF

Parliament to Witness India's First Lok Sabha Speaker Elections; Know Every Angle on Matter

Personality Test: Your Standing Position Reveals Your Hidden Personality Traits

Only eagle eyes can spot 0 among O’s in 5 seconds!

SAMS Odisha Merit List 2024 OUT: Download SAMS Odisha +3 Selection List PDF at samsodisha.gov.in

Find the Animal Weights: A Fun Brain Teaser That'll Test Your Logic in 25 Seconds

UP BEd Result 2024 OUT: यूपी बीएड जेईई रिजल्ट bujhansi.ac.in पर जारी, अलीगढ़ के मनोज ने किया टॉप, ये रहा Direct Link

MJPRU Result 2024 OUT at mjpruiums.in; Download UG and PG ODD Semester Marksheet

Only the sharpest pair of eyes can spot the cherry in the forest in 6 seconds!

UKPSC Cut Off 2024: Check Category-Wise Previous Year Cutoff Marks

DRDO Recruitment 2024: डीआरडीओ में विभिन्न पदों पर निकली भर्ती, जानें डिटेल्स

Durg University Result 2024 OUT at durguniversity.ac.in: Direct Link to Download UG, PG Marksheet

T20 World Cup 2024 Semi Final Schedule: भारत बनाम इंग्लैंड, दक्षिण अफ्रीका बनाम अफगानिस्तान, किसे मिलेगा फाइनल का टिकट

ANU Result 2024 OUT at nagarjunauniversity.co.in: Direct Link to Download UG, PG Marksheet

Only genius eyes can find 3 differences between the coffee table pictures in 8 seconds!

RSMSSB Junior Accountant Result 2024: आज जारी हो सकता है जूनियर अकाउंटेंट परीक्षा का परिणाम

PRSU Result 2024 OUT at prsu.ac.in; Direct Link to Download UG and PG Marksheet

94 Clever Riddles for Kids, From the Easy to the Seriously Tricky

We bet some adults will even be stumped by these brainteasers.

Animal Riddles for Kids

Funny riddles for little kids, food riddles for kids, math riddles for kids.

And getting loads of laughs isn't just one benefit of solving riddles with your kids. Riddles, known as a statement or question that has multiple meanings and needs to be solved, have been credited with helping kids work on their logic and critical thinking skills , practice their vocabulary, stretch their problem-solving muscles and sometimes even give them a good laugh or an a-ha moment when they've reached the solution.

Our list, which has a good mix of easy-to-answer options as well as head-scratchers that even adults might struggle to figure out, not only can keep the young ones occupied on their own when you're stuck in line somewhere or need a quick fix to keep the kid's busy, but they also provide the opportunity for collaboration and quality time if you decide to take the list together.

Tricky Riddles for Kids

Q: Grandpa went for a walk, and it started raining. He forgot to bring an umbrella and didn’t have a hat. When he got home, his clothes were soaking wet, but not a hair on his head was wet. How was this possible? A: Grandpa is bald.

Q: I speak without a mouth and hear without ears. I have nobody, but I come alive with the wind. What am I? A: An echo.

Q: What is full of holes but still holds water? A: A sponge.

Q: What can you catch but not throw? A: A cold.

Q: What can run but never walks, has a mouth but never talks, has a head but never weeps, and has a bed but never sleeps? A: A river.

Q: In a one-story house at the corner of the road, the bedrooms were yellow, the kitchen was orange, the living room was red, the garage was blue, the entry hall was green, and the sitting room was purple. What color were the stairs? A: There’s no color because there are no stairs — it’s a one-story house.

Q: What starts with a ‘P’, ends with an ‘E’, and has thousands of letters? A: A post office

Q: Give me a drink, and I will die. Feed me, and I'll get bigger. What am I? A: A fire.

Q: What word begins with E and ends with E, but only has one letter? A: Envelope.

Q: What appears once in a minute, twice in a moment, but not once in a thousand years? A: The letter "M."

Q: What has many rings but no fingers? A: A telephone.

Q: What goes up but never comes back down? A: Your age.

Q: I go all around the world, but never leave the corner. What am I? A: A stamp.

Q: If you drop a yellow hat in the Red Sea, what does it become? A: Wet.

Q: I’m always on the dinner table, but you don’t get to eat me. What am I? A: Plates and silverware.

Q: What goes in a birdbath but never gets wet? A: The bird's shadow.

Q: What two things can you never eat for breakfast? A: Lunch and dinner.

Q: If you drop me, I’m sure to crack, but smile at me and I’ll smile back. What am I? A: A mirror.

Q: What has hands and a face, but no arms or legs? A: A clock.

Q: You’ll find me in Mercury, Earth, Mars and Jupiter, but not in Venus or Neptune. What am I? A: The letter “R.”

Q: I’m light as a feather, yet the strongest person can’t hold me for five minutes. What am I? A: Your breath.

Q: I have cities, but no houses. I have forests, but no trees. I have water, but no fish. What am I? A: A map.

Q: What can you break, even if you never pick it up or touch it? A: A promise.

Q: What is yours but mostly used by others? A: Your name.

Q: Which question can you never answer "yes" to? A: "Are you asleep?"

Q: What's something that, the more you take, the more you leave behind? A: Footsteps.

Q: I have no sword, I have no spear, yet rule a horde which many fear, my soldiers fight with a wicked sting, I rule with might, yet am no king. What am I? A: A queen bee.

Q: I have arms that are longer than my legs. I have been taught sign language to communicate. Who am I? A: A gorilla.

Q: I like to stay awake at night and sleep during the day. What am I? A: An owl.

Q: My skin is green and slipper, I have four legs and webbed feet, I hop on land and swim underwater, I love bugs and little fish to eat. What am I? A: A frog.

Q: The alphabet goes from A to Z, but I go Z to A. What am I? A: A zebra.

Q: A rooster is sitting on the roof of a barn facing west. If it laid an egg, would the egg roll to the north or to the south? A: It's impossible — roosters don't lay eggs.

Q: A cowgirl road into town on Friday. Three days later, she left on Friday. How is that possible? A: Friday is the name of her horse.

Q: What kind of lion never roars? A: A dandelion.

Q: What has a thousand needles but cannot sew? A: A porcupine.

Q: Without me Thanksgiving and Christmas are incomplete, when I’m on the table everyone tends to overeat. What am I? A: Turkey.

Q: What’s bright orange with green on top and sounds like a parrot? A: A carrot.

Q: Why do bees have sticky hair? A: Because they use their honeycombs.

Q: What do you call a bear with no teeth? A: A gummy bear.

Q: What’s black, white and blue? A: A sad zebra.

Q: I jump when I walk and sit when I stand. What am I? A: Kangaroo.

Q: I grow down as I grow up. What am I? A: A goose. Goose feathers are called down.

Q: I’m the father of fruits. What am I? A: A papa-ya.

Q: Why are teddy bears never hungry? A: Because they are always stuffed.

Q: Cats have four, bugs have four, but school has six. What are they? A: Letters.

Q: Sam's parents have three kids. Their names are Huey, Dewey, and _____? A: Sam!

Q: Nobody empties me, but I never stay full for long. What am I? A: The moon.

Q: What do you get when you cross a snowman and a vampire? A: Frostbite.

Q: What’s really easy to get into, and hard to get out of? A: Trouble.

Q: What animal can jump higher than a building? A: Any animal that can jump — buildings don’t jump, silly!

Q: Where would you take a sick boat? A: To the dock.

Q: What did the zero say to the eight? A: “Nice belt!”

Q: What gets wet while drying? A: A towel.

Q: I’m tall when I’m young, and I’m short when I’m old. What am I? A: A candle.

Q: What room do ghosts avoid? A: The living room.

Q: I can be cracked or played; told or made. What am I? A: A joke!

Q: What has a head and a tail but no body? A: A coin.

Q: I sometimes run, but I cannot walk. What am I? A: Your nose.

Q: What has four fingers and a thumb but isn’t alive? A: A glove

Q: What has no beginning, end or middle? A: A doughnut.

Q: Although I may have eyes, I cannot see. I have a round brown face with lots of acne. What am I? A: A potato.

Q: What kind of dog has no tail? A: A hot dog.

Q: I am a bird, I am a fruit and I am a person. What am I? A: Kiwi.

Q: What fruit never ever wants to be alone? A: A pear.

Q: I can be bitter or sweet, but I'm always a treat; in a bar or a cake, I'm something to eat. What am I? A: Chocolate.

Q: I can be yellow or blue, soft or hard; on a burger or mac, I’m often starred. What am I? A: Cheese.

Q: First, you throw away my outside and cook the inside. Then you eat my outside and throw away the inside. What am I? A: Corn.

Q: What kind of cheese is made backwards? A: Edam. Made is M-A-D-E, Edam is E-D-A-M, or "made" backwards.

Q: What has a head but no eyes, nose or mouth? A: Lettuce.

Q: I'm red and small, and I have a heart of stone. What am I? A: A cherry.

Q: When I’m ripe, I’m green, when you eat me, I’m red, and when you spit me out, I’m black. What am I? A: A watermelon.

Q: What fruit can you never cheer up? A: A blueberry.

Q: What has to be broken before you can use it? A: An egg

Q: What kind of foods are the most fun at parties? A: Fungi.

Q: What is the richest nut? A: A cash-ew.

Q: Why did the citrus tree go to the hospital? A: Lemon-aid.

Q: You cut me, slice me, dice me, and all the while, you cry. What am I? A: An onion.

Q: What kind of room has no doors or windows? A: A mushroom.

Q: What kind of apples do computers prefer? A: Macintosh.

Q: What kind of cup doesn’t hold water? A: A cupcake.

Q: If there are seven oranges and you take three away, how many oranges do you have? A: Three, since that's how many you took.

Q: How many seconds are in a year? A: Twelve — January 2nd, February 2nd, March 2nd...

Q: How many letters are there in the alphabet? A: There are 11: three in "the" and eight in "alphabet."

Q: Ms. Smith has four daughters. Each daughter has a brother. How many kids are there in total? A: Five, there are four daughters and one son. Each daughter has the same brother.

Q: When things go wrong, what can you always count on? A: Your fingers.

Q: What did the triangle say to the circle? A: You are pointless.

Q: You have a basket that's one foot in diameter and one foot deep. How many apples can you fit in the empty basket? A: Only one, because then it's not empty anymore.

Q: If two’s a company, and three’s a crowd, what are four and five? A: Nine!

Q: Why was 6 afraid of 7? A: Because 7, 8 (ate), 9!

Q: Four legs up, four legs down, soft in the middle, hard all around. What am I? A: A bed.

Q: A word I know, six letters it contains, remove one letter and 12 remains, what is it? A: Dozens.

Q: What month of the year has 28 days? A: All of them!

Q: The more you take, the more you leave behind. What am I? A: Footsteps.

Christina Montoya Fiedler is a Los Angeles-based freelancer with over 15 years of experience writing for online publications. Her work can be seen in Good Housekeeping and Woman's Day, where she covers everything from gift guides to personal essays. She holds a B.A. in English from Chapman University and is working toward her Early Childhood Education teaching credentials. She is proud to be of Native American (Ohkay Owingeh) and Mexican American descent.

@media(max-width: 64rem){.css-o9j0dn:before{margin-bottom:0.5rem;margin-right:0.625rem;color:#ffffff;width:1.25rem;bottom:-0.2rem;height:1.25rem;content:'_';display:inline-block;position:relative;line-height:1;background-repeat:no-repeat;}.loaded .css-o9j0dn:before{background-image:url(/_assets/design-tokens/goodhousekeeping/static/images/Clover.5c7a1a0.svg);}}@media(min-width: 48rem){.loaded .css-o9j0dn:before{background-image:url(/_assets/design-tokens/goodhousekeeping/static/images/Clover.5c7a1a0.svg);}} Parenting Tips & Advice

The Ultimate Back-to-School Supplies List

Unique Ways to Announce Your Pregnancy

Empty Nesters Need Support, Too

How to Stay Connected to Your Screen-Addicted Teen

50 Simple Fall Crafts for Kids

How a Play Helped My Disabled Son Find Community

How to Raise Moral Kids

200+ Indian Baby Boy Names

100+ Beautiful Indian Baby Girl Names

The 1,000 Most Popular Baby Girl Names Right Now

The 1,000 Most Popular Baby Boy Names Right Now

You're reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool's Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More

Forget Nvidia: I Just Doubled Down on Another Unstoppable Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stock. Here's Why

• Nvidia has seen a parabolic rise over the past five years.
• As a result of its significant growth, it has now become a significant portion of my portfolio.
• I'm looking for additional AI opportunities, and I think Palantir has a great deal of upside.
• Motley Fool Issues Rare “All In” Buy Alert

Palantir Technologies

I have a problem with the chipmaker -- but it's a high-class problem.

First, let's address the elephant in the room: It's highly unlikely that investors, least of all me, are going to forget Nvidia . The company has forged a path years in the making and has become the gold standard for graphics processing units (GPUs) used to underpin artificial intelligence (AI). In fact, I am as bullish on the company and its future as I have ever been, and I continue to believe the company has a bright future.

So, why would I "forget Nvidia" and double down on another AI stock instead? It comes down to portfolio management. I began accumulating Nvidia shares more than six years ago and continued adding to my position until earlier this year. Nvidia stock has gained 800% since early last year (as of this writing) and more than 3,300% over the past five years.

As a result of the stock's parabolic move, Nvidia is now one of the dominant stocks in my portfolio. It has become a 10-bagger and now represents more than 12% of my total holdings. From here on out, I expect Nvidia to do the heavy lifting, and I don't need to add any more capital to a stock that already represents so much of my portfolio.

For investors looking for another stock with significant potential, I recommend taking a look at Palantir Technologies ( PLTR 1.66% ) . I've owned the stock for some time, but earlier this week, I more than doubled my position in this AI pioneer. Here's why.

Image source: Getty Images.

AI before AI went viral

Investors might not know that Palantir has a long history of developing AI and has been doing so long before the technology went viral last year. The company was founded more than 20 years ago with the idea that AI could help the U.S. intelligence community and our allies make better use of existing data.

Intelligence agencies had reams of data but no way to extract the most useful and important tidbits. Palantir developed sophisticated algorithms and data mining solutions that could follow the trail of breadcrumbs left by aspiring terrorists and piece together details to form a picture that might otherwise be missed.

Palantir serves a broad cross-section of the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities, including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and National Security Agency (NSA), but that's just the beginning. It also works with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), various branches of the U.S. military, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and many more.

Once Palantir had established itself with government agencies, it turned its attention to enterprise businesses, as its data mining and AI solutions were just as useful to corporations. This broad client base and range of experience give Palantir an AI pedigree that's hard to match.

Ready to strike

Palantir's vast experience in the field enabled it to pounce when advancements in generative AI burst onto the scene last year. The company was already providing data mining and analytics services to corporate customers, sifting through mounds of information and providing actionable intelligence.

Beyond its existing services, Palantir quickly developed its artificial intelligence platform (AIP), which "powers real-time, AI-driven decision-making." For example, AIP can scan through reams of sales data to prioritize customers most likely to buy. Another example provided by Palantir illustrates how AIP helps a manufacturer in the path of an oncoming hurricane decide which orders to speed up, cancel, or delay before the storm hits and the resulting financial impact of those decisions.

A great many businesses would love to harness the power of AI but simply don't know where to start. For those companies, Palantir devised the AIP Bootcamp. "These immersive, hands-on-keyboard sessions allow new and existing customers to build live alongside Palantir engineers, all working toward the common goal of deploying AI in operations," the company said.

Demand has been off the charts, and the success of these workshops has been phenomenal, leading to huge contract wins. Chief Revenue Officer Ryan Taylor explained:

As one example, a leading utility company signed a seven-figure deal just five days after completing the boot camp. Another customer immediately signed a paid engagement after just one day of their multi-day boot camp and then converted to a seven-figure deal three weeks later.

Palantir has seen a big uplift in its U.S. commercial revenue, which grew 70% and 40% year over year in the fourth and first quarters, respectively. The company can barely keep up with the surging demand for its boot camps, leading to more robust business results.

A bit of context

As I pointed out at the start, I still believe Nvidia has a long road ahead. That said, the opportunity represented by AI software is intriguing. The market is expected to grow from $1.49 billion in 2022 to $280 billion by 2032, or a total growth of 18,647%. Palantir is one of just a few companies with the resources and experience to tap into that opportunity right now  while the competition is left scrambling.

Palantir recently delivered its sixth consecutive quarter of profitability. The most commonly used valuation metrics suggest the stock is overpriced at 212 times earnings and 25 times sales, but those metrics fail to take into account the company's impressive growth rate. When measured using the price/earnings-to-growth (PEG) ratio , Palantir's multiple clocks in at less than 1, the standard for an undervalued stock.

These aren't just empty words. I put my money where my mouth is and doubled down on my position in Palantir Technologies. Because, in my book, it's a compelling opportunity .

Danny Vena has positions in Nvidia and Palantir Technologies. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Nvidia and Palantir Technologies. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy .

Related Articles

Premium Investing Services

Invest better with The Motley Fool. Get stock recommendations, portfolio guidance, and more from The Motley Fool's premium services.

McCracken County High School Future Problem-Solving team brings back trophy from International World Finals

Pilot dead after plane crash

Cape Girardeau Police Chief Wes Blair leaving department

Federal court rulings halt student loan relief program

Cape City leaders react to Wes Blair leaving police department

Shooting investigation in Martin, Tennessee

Remains of Vietnam veteran being escorted across the country