Intelligence and Aging: Contested definitions, trends and interventions
October 23, 2018
There are several theoretical and conceptual frameworks with which to explore adult development, and each offers valuable perspectives to understand the processes that characterize how people change throughout the life course. Intelligence and aging is one such framework which can be applied to explore adult development and learning. A common stereotype is that aging is characterized by declines in mental faculties. With the reality of a growing, aging Canadian workforce (Fields, Uppal, & LaRochelle-Côté, 2017) and longer Canadian life expectancies (Statistics Canada, 2018), it is worth taking a critical look at the intelligence and aging perspective, including key concepts and theories, as well as implications for educators of adult learners.
By and large, aging is commonly associated with negative assumptions about declines in abilities, which is also explored in psychometric research, although without uniform conclusions. Clark and Caffarella (1999) state that natural aging does not affect people’s abilities until they are in their sixties or seventies, whereas Hill (2001) identifies that age-related memory impairments are observed in the fifth decade — though this should not diminish learning in healthy adults. Cavanaugh, Blanchard-Fields and Norris (2008) characterize that mechanics of intelligence may decline somewhat with age, but there is stability in the pragmatics of intelligence. Psychometric tests of primary abilities in adults after age 60 indicate declines. Particularly after the mid-seventies, these declines may translate to challenges with everyday tasks.
So what can we glean from these results? Part of the challenge is that there lacks a uniform definition for intelligence across the research. Depending on the focus or kind of intelligence being investigated, the results about intelligence patterns across the life course differ. Interestingly, Hill (2001) notes that female brains may not degenerate until later in life compared to male brains. It is unclear whether this has roots in biological differences between the sexes, or perhaps is influenced by the ways that individuals differentially experience gender within their particular society. Looking at memory as it connects with cognitive ability, Merriam, Caffarella and Baumgartner (2007) discuss differences in processing versus memory storage. “Research has demonstrated that as we get older, we have more problems encoding and retrieving memories; the actual retention or storage of our memories remains fairly constant” (p. 395). Indeed, certain kinds of memories or knowledge persist and are more successfully retained as individuals age. These same authors also acknowledge there are gaps in definitive knowledge regarding brain functioning and the connections with learning.
Examining intelligence and aging is important because our understanding of how adults develop and learn into their senior years has social and economic implications. Clark and Caffarella (1999) note that there are various cultural beliefs about seniors within society that impact the roles they have and how they are valued within the community. Unfortunately, many of these cultural beliefs or assumptions frame aging negatively, which can lead to senior adults more often having their abilities and decision-making questioned. The reality is that with a high quality of life and increasing life expectancy for Canadians (OECD Better Life Index, n.d.; Statistics Canada, 2018), it is more common for individuals to be working into their older years, or still actively involved in learning and their community. Cavanaugh et al. (2008) point to the fact that younger cohorts have more educational opportunities, which then implies that their needs and experiences as they age and reach senior years may differ from previous cohorts. So new perspectives about opportunities for older age are being voiced. Dychtwald and Flower (1989) describe the “third age”, or life beyond age 60, as a period that allows for “further development of intellect, memory, and imagination, of emotional maturity, and of one’s personal sense of spiritual identity” (as cited in Merriam et al., 2007, p. 357). Merriam (2005) examines how learning in adults is often prompted by transitions and role changes that they experience. With the changing dynamics of the workforce from the impacts of globalization and technology, more adults may now be seeking further education, training or retraining for economic reasons. Recognizing that adults may differ in their learning needs, for example, needing to have new information organized in ways that make sense to them (Merriam et al., 2007), will be crucial for the success of adult education programs and the learners themselves.
Key Concepts and Principles
As mentioned previously, there lacks a universally accepted definition of intelligence. As cited by Merriam et al. (2007), Horn and Cattell (1966, 1967) described two types of intelligence which can be nurtured. Fluid intelligence, Gf, relates to working memory and reasoning abilities. By contrast, crystallized intelligence, Gc, describes accumulated knowledge and comprehension. Fluid intelligence may decline throughout the life course as a result of disease, injury, or lack of practice, as demonstrated by age-related changes to people’s ability and speed of processing information (Cavanaugh et al., 2008). Crystallized intelligence, however, is seen to improve with age, with greater individual differences in this form of intelligence as people age, compared with fluid intelligence. Still, it is contested whether observed declines in intelligence may be from disuse (Merriam et al., 2007). It is also possible that the style of thinking that people employ changes as they age, with older adults tending to rely more so on pre-existing knowledge and strategies to make everyday decisions, instead of seeking new or more information (Cavanaugh et al., 2008).
There are three main approaches to conceptualizing and investigating adult intelligence, which are psychometric, cognitive, and biological (i.e. exploring the genetic basis of intelligence) (Merriam et al., 2007). A common approach that emerged from the psychological tradition investigates individual differences, based on the assumption that intelligence is something that can be defined and measured using various tests (Cavanaugh et al., 2008). Challenges and gaps with psychometric studies must be considered, including cohort effect, individual variability, and selectivity effects. Merriam et al. (2007) raise the concerns about subject bias, where study subjects may not be representative of the general population, as well as a lack of agreed on parameters regarding when an individual is considered an adult.
Other approaches to conceptualizing intelligence have focused on more practical examples of intelligence. Gardiner’s theory of multiple intelligences presents the idea that there are seven or eight distinct types of intelligence, and each individual possess a different complement of relative strengths in these intelligence types (Merriam et al., 2007). Among these intelligence types are: linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal, interpersonal, and naturalist. These relatively autonomous intellectual competencies may be infinitely combined and adaptive to an individual’s historical and cultural context. So perhaps it is no longer a question of how intelligent individuals are or are not, but rather that everyone is intelligently competent in their own unique way. With a wealth of experience, it is possible that older adults become specialized or expert in the kinds of intelligence they employ, with the result being that they approach and solve problems in a different way than their younger counterparts (Cavanaugh et al., 2008). Depending on the type of intelligence test or the content of what they are being tested on, older adults may perform worse than younger adults because the knowledge may not be applicable to their experience, despite having other or different kinds of expertise.
In the 1980s, Sternberg proposed a triarchic theory of intelligence, focusing on how practical intelligence is composed of componential, experiential and contextual components (Merriam et al., 2007). By this theory, all people have access or potential for different kinds of intelligence, but individuals express intelligence differently. Importantly, what is considered intelligent behaviour varies between individuals and depending on their sociocultural context. Unfortunately, this theory currently lacks empirical means to be validated. Sternberg also later discussed the concept of “successful intelligence” (1997), whereby individuals are successfully intelligent when they are able to navigate how and when to effectively employ analytical, creative and practical abilities (as cited in Merriam et al., 2007). Regarding adults’ ability to learn and demonstrate successful intelligence, what may not be captured by psychometric tests are the individuals’ personality or orientations to learning, in particular their readiness to learn new skills and strategies that may depart from the knowledge areas in which they are already experts. This stubbornness or closed attitude towards learning may result in the individuals ignoring or rejecting information that they qualify as irrelevant or confusing.
Implications for Adult Learning
Important to this conversation about intelligence and aging is how adult learners understand intelligence and how or if they see themselves as learners. Because of the focus on psychometric testing of intelligence from early in people’s experience and exposures to education systems (if applicable), how they have performed academically can very much influence their self-perception as a learner, employment opportunities, and quality of life (Merriam et al., 2007). Cozolino and Sprokay (2006) describe the brain as a social organ that learns through shared experiences. Because of prior experiences with education and common stereotypes about intellectual decline associated with age, older adults returning to learn or develop new skills may be battling internal and social stigmas regarding their likeliness of succeeding academically. If fear and anxiety of the learner is great, it may impair semantic and narrative capabilities, which are often required to demonstrate academic learning. From a motivational and learning perspective, narrative abilities are important as they inform memory. If adult learners are overcome with self-doubt about their intelligence or abilities related to their age, they may realize self-fulfilling prophecies in their outcomes as learners.
How we understand adults impacts how we design learning programs for them and which intellectual abilities we teach or strive to develop with them. For example, if we are aware that life transitions or changes in social roles may prompt adults to seek education and training (Merriam, 2005), then learning programs can be planned around adults’ anticipated transitions and the kinds of learning they may be seeking as a result.
Educators supporting adult learning should be sensitive to the needs of older adults. The relationship between the learner and the instructor is crucial for older adults’ success. Adult learners are best supported by a non-authoritarian and cooperative learning environment, where the instructor facilitates and guides learning around the learners’ goals for what they are seeking to learn (Ilacqua & Zulauf, 2000). The dynamic between instructor and student should be more equal and characterized by multidirectional exchange. Cozolino & Sprokay (2006) emphasize that the relationship between the instructor and learner has the potential to prime the student’s ability to take in and consider new information. Instructors can help students feel unafraid to engage in their learning. When students feel they are acknowledged, respected and in dialogue with their instructor, then new knowledge has the potential to freely build on their existing expertise, because they can have trust in the learning process. Merriam et al. (2007) makes an interesting point that instructors may be best at teaching those who share their own style of learning, which raises to mind the potential importance of mentorship models for adult learning success.
Adult learners benefit from social and stimulating environments, as our brains continue to change and reorganize in response to how we interact with our environment (Hill, 2001). Given the different ways that individuals express intelligence abilities and the different context that may define if they are successfully intelligent, adult learners benefit from a variety of support (Merriam et al., 2007). Particularly effective may be memory or task training that connects to practical needs of learners, and considers their existing schemas of knowledge. Investigating the sociocultural contexts of adults, several researchers have proposed factors that can help the mental agility of older adults. Singh Kalsa (1997) identifies education, strenuous activity, adequate lung function and absence of chronic disease as factors that positively correlate to demonstrating intelligence in older age (as cited by Hill, 2001). Cavanaugh et al. (2008) also notes that intellectual decline may be slowed by variables such as work that requires complex thought and judgment, long marriage to a well-educated spouse, exposure to stimulating environments, use of cultural and educational resources, and strong social connections. Younger cohorts generally have higher levels of education, better lifestyles, nutrition and health care than older cohorts, so the trajectory of intelligence expressed as this cohort ages may be different than the current cohort of older adults.
Conclusion
The conceptual perspective of intelligence and aging offers a diverse insights about adult development and the potential for adult education to support the transitions of individuals in older age. The research presents interesting questions about our definitions of adults and intelligence, the various ways that intelligence can be expressed, and how it is currently tested particularly with regards to older adults. Challenges and gaps do exist in the current research and their applicability to the general population, and we must be mindful of the cultural and historical contexts in which these theories of intelligence have originated and who they describe. Nonetheless, various researchers have proposed helpful suggestions for supporting adult learning and sustaining the intellectual abilities of individuals as they age. Cohort differences and shifts in social and economic conditions of peoples’ lives may mean that the trends regarding intelligence and aging, as we currently understand them, may continue to evolve.
References
Cavanaugh, J.C., Blanchard-Fields, F., & Norris, J. E. (2008). Adult Development and Aging (1st Canadian Ed.). Toronto: Nelson.
Clark, M.C., & Caffarella, R.S. (1999). Theorizing Adult Development. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 84, 3–8.
Cozolino, L., & Sprokay, S. (2006). Neuroscience and Adult Learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 110(Summer), 11–19.
Fields, A., Uppal, S., & LaRochelle-Côté, S. (2017, June 14). The impact of aging on labour market participation rates. Retrieved from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/75-006-x/2017001/article/14826-eng.htm
Hill, L.H. (2001). The Brain and Consciousness: Sources of Information for Understanding Adult Learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 73–81.
Ilacqua, J.A., & Zulauf, C.A. (2000). The New Learning Environment and Adult Developmental Needs. Journal of Adult Development, 7(3), 171–178.
Merriam, S.B. (2005). How adult life transitions foster learning and development. New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education, 108, 3–13.
Merriam, S.B., Caffarella, R.S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (3rd Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
OECD Better Life Index. (n.d.). Canada. Retrieved from: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/countries/canada/
Statistics Canada. (2018, October 23). Table 13–10–0409–01: Life expectancy at birth and at age 65, by province and territory, three-year average. Retrieved from: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1310040901
