Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Identification, Testing & Assessment Processing Speed as a measure of intelligence

I agree with polarbear. Processing speed is only really useful in rote memory situations in school and would have little bearing on real world situations. My daughter has a rather slow processing speed and I have a relatively fast processing speed in comparison. However, she is a deep thinker and really delves deeply into what she is working on. She asks and answers the hard questions. Asking the hard questions is what drives discovery and invention! A fast processing speed may help you skip quickly through learning about what others have done, it doesn't help you arrive at original thought.

This is also assuming that someone who can quickly scan through large amounts of material is able to commit any of it to long term memory. I tend to think that processing speed is a very poor measure of intelligence. Can it help you fill in more bubbles on a scantron sheet? Yes...but it doesn't make you better able to understand the material presented.

I am chiming in a bit late, but I have a daughter with a very fast processing speed. DD11 has always been told to SLOW down by all her teachers because she goes through everything so fast. Her quality of work goes down a little by her speed, but not by much (careless mistakes). We had her tested 2x, once at 6 and once at 8. We saw a dip in the processing speed at 8, but it was still high. Her only relative weakness is implied comprehension, which tends to slow her down because she does not think the way everyone else does, and hates all the poorly worded and obscure questions. In our case, it seems like my DD's high processing speed ties more to achievement. For example, she had a 160 on both math and writing on the WIAT-II, but lower on reading comprehension.

On the achievement tests at school, she will typically be at the top of the district scores on anything math or writing related because she can process those items very quickly. Writing is very quick for her because spelling is memorized, so she just has to concentrate on ideas. She has both speedy typing and handwriting skills, so that helps. Math is high because she can process information quickly and intuitively. She went through three grades in math last year in school.

Therefore, I think her processing speed really works to her advantage in school, so she gets through assignments quickly, and then has time to work on other things. The fast/accurate profile = a perceived higher intelligence and a definite advantage in school.

Well, let's be fair. Some real world situations (and jobs) require a great deal of rote memory. For example, a physician needs great rote memory, as I mentioned earlier.

I don't think so. Life is too short to memorise six formulae when one would do.

Just pointing out that we are talking about faster acquisition of facts or processing speed, and not overall knowledge. Assuming that a fast processing speed medical school student and a slow processing speed medical student both learn the same material, they both would be doctors at the end of the day. Rote memorization can be accomplished by both sets of students.

To respond to the original post, I think it makes a difference in certain situations and not others. I would rather go to a doctor or lawyer that has good abstract reasoning ability than one who is speedy. I would rather go through the checkout line at Target with the person who has fast processing speed than good abstract reasoning ability, unless I'm arguing about whether something is really on clearance or not or whether my manufacturer's coupon is valid. Ideally, a person has both, but in some situations or professions it doesn't matter too much. A person with fast processing speed might read 5 books in a day, but if they are not thinking as deeply as the person who is reading slowly, or drawing as many meaningful conclusions, it's not really beneficial.

Are you referring to the limited skill tested on IQ tests? Otherwise, I'm going to strongly disagree. We live in a resource-constrained world, particularly those of us in professional services. By necessity, faster processing speeds translate into higher output for human capital intensive work where time is the hard stop on productivity, all else equal.

Beyond productivity arguments, simply being able to perform a task well in a shorter period of time than a competitor means, in many contexts, winning a zero sum game. Examples that come to mind are:

- Fighter pilots engaging in dog fights.
- Traders and investment bankers responding to rapid fluctuations in value.
- Lawyers presenting arguments in trial or in negotiations.
- Consultants presenting strategic recommendations to clients responding to fluctuating inputs and push-back.
- Diagnosticians identifying and treating time-bound diseases.
- Journalists jockeying to release the first well written coverage of an event.

The list goes on.

That would be a refreshing change.

/snark

And it would indeed be a first.

I'm going to put in an endorsement of memorizing. IMO, it's helpful in some situations (especially for beginners at a subject). For example, when learning a new idea, it's easy to have trouble seeing the big picture because of all the details. If you've memorized a chunk of important information, you don't have to think about it. This gives your working memory that much more space to analyze whatever idea you're struggling with. Alternatively, if you derive something, you have to shift your focus from, say, seeing the big picture of the problem to deriving something that's a small part of it. Sometimes it's hard to get back on track. More concretely, if you've memorized the definition of integer, you don't have to look it up when the problem asks for integer solutions to a particular equation. Again, the distraction factor is reduced.

Different people have different neural circuitry. For some, deriving may be more efficient. For people like me, memorizing can definitely has its advantages.

So I don't see this question as an either/or proposition.