1. Home
  2. »
  3. Creativity
  4. »
  5. Fluid and crystallized intelligence

Fluid and crystallized intelligence

Fluid and crystallized intelligence

In psychology , fluid and crystallized intelligence (abbreviated respectivement f and c ) are factors of general intelligence , Originally APPROBATION by Raymond Cattell . [1] Concepts of fluid and crystallized intelligence by Cattell’s student, John L. Horn .

Fluid intelligence or fluid reasoning is the capacity to reason and solve novel problems, independent of any knowledge of the past. [2] It is the ability to analyze novel problems, identifying patterns and relationships that underpin these problems and the extrapolation of these using logic. It is necessary for all logical problem solving, eg, in scientific, mathematical, and technical problem solving. Fluid reasoning includes inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning .

Crystallized intelligence is the ability to use skills, knowledge, and experience. It does not equate to memory, but it does rely on accessing information from long-term memory. Crystallized intelligence is one of life’s achievements, as well as one’s vocabulary and general knowledge . This is one of the things you can do to expand one’s knowledge.

The terms are somewhat misleading because they are not a “crystallized” form of the other. Rather, they are believed to be separate neural and mental systems. Crystallized intelligence is Indicated by a person’s depth and breadth of general knowledge, vocabulary, and the Ability to reason using words and numbers. It is the product of educational and cultural experience in interaction with fluid intelligence.

Fluid and crystallized intelligence are thus correlated with each other, and most IQ tests attempt to measure both varieties. For example, the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) measures fluid intelligence on the performance scale and crystallized intelligence on the verbal scale. The overall IQ score is based on a combination of these two scales.


Fluid and crystallized intelligence by Raymond Cattell . [3] Concepts of fluid and crystallized intelligence by Cattell’s student, John L. Horn . Since Cattell’s and Horn’s publications, the concepts of fluid and crystallized intelligence Have Become so ingrained in the field of intelligence That They Are No follow Routinely Attributed To Cattell Golden Horn-much as Cattell’s scree plot est devenu ingrained in the practice of factor analysis or Freud’s concept of the subconscious is ingrained in psychology and in the public’s perceptions of the mind.

Theoretical development

Fluid and crystallized intelligence are discrete factors of general intelligence , or g . [4] ALTHOUGH Formally reconnu by Cattell, the distinction Was foreshadowed by Charles Spearman Who Originally Developed the theory of g and made a similar observation Regarding the différence entre eductive and Reproductive Ability mind. [5]

According to Cattell, “… it is apparent that one of these powers … has the ‘fluid’ quality of being able to be compared to the other. affecting the others. ” [4] Thus, his claim was that, or factor, was independent of the other, though many authors noted an apparent interdependence of the two. [6]

Fluid versus crystallized

Fluid intelligence includes such capabilities as pattern recognition, abstract reasoning, and problem-solving. Evidence is consistent with the view that Gf is more affected by brain injury. [7] [8]

Impaired Performance On Some tasks measuring fluid intelligence and enhanced performance are others are found on Some Measures in Individuals with autism spectrum disorders Including Asperger syndrome . [9] [10] [11]

Crystallized intelligence is more likely to change as it is linked to specific, acquired knowledge. When learning new facts, someone ‘s fund of knowledge is expanded. Vocabulary tests and the verbal subscale of the WAIS are considered good measures of Gc. Crystallized intelligence relates to the study of aging. Belsky claims this declines with age. In life, knowledge that is not used can be forgotten. Belsky believes that there is at least one age of maximum crystallized intelligence; after which forgetting exceeds the rate at which knowledge is acquired. [12]

Not surprisingly, people with a high capacity of Gf tends to acquire more knowledge. The process of acquiring factual knowledge is sometimes called ” cognitive investment .” [13]

Some researchers have linked the theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence to Piaget’s conception of operative intelligence and learning. [14] [15] Fluid ability and Piaget’s operative intelligence both concern logical thinking and the eduction of relations. Crystallized ability and Piaget’s treatment of everyday learning. Piaget’s operability is like, it is considered to be more important than ever, and it provides the foundation for everyday learning.

Factor structure

Fluid intelligence generally correlates with measures of abstract reasoning and puzzle solving. Crystallized intelligence correlates with abilities that depend on knowledge and experience, such as vocabulary, general information, and analogies. Paul Kline identified a number of factors that shared a correlation of at least r = .60 with Gf and Gc. [16] Factors with median loadings clarify ]of greater than 0.6 on Gf included induction, visualization, quantitative reasoning, and ideational fluency. Factors with median loadings of greater than 0.6 on Gc included verbal ability, language development, reading comprehension, sequential reasoning, and general information. It may be suggested that tests of intelligence can not be easily reflected in fluid intelligence. Some authors have suggested that unless the subject is considered to be of particular interest, the cognitive work required may not be performed because of a lack of interest. [17] These authors contend that a low score on tests which are intended to measure fluid intelligence may reflect more a lack of interest in the tasks rather than inability to complete the tasks successfully.

Measurement of fluid intelligence

There are various measures that assess fluid intelligence. The Cattell Culture Fair IQ test , the Raven Progressive Matrices (RPM), and the subscale performance of the WAIS are measures of Gf. The RPM [18] is one of the most commonly used measures of fluid abilities. It is a non-verbal multiple choice test. The following are some of the most important features of the organization of an array of objects, and one of the following features. [19] This task assesses the ability to consider one or more relationships between mental representations and relational reasoning. Propositional analogiesand semantic decision tasks are also used to assess relational reasoning. [20] [21]

Standardized IQ tests such as those used in psychoeducational assessment also include tests of fluid intelligence. In the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities , [22]Gf is assessed by two tests: Concept Training (Test 5) in the Standard Battery and Analysis Synthesis (Test 15) in the Extended Battery. On Concept Training tasks, the individual has to apply concepts by inferring the rules for solving visual puzzles that are presented in increasing levels of difficulty. Individuals at the preschool level A key difference in the understanding of what constitutes a key difference (or the “rule”) for solving puzzles involving one to one comparisons, and on the following items identifying common differences among a set of items. For more difficult items, please read the concept of “and” (eg solution must have some of this and the concept of “gold” (eg to be inside a box, the item must be this or that). The most difficult items require fluid transformations and cognitive shifting between the various types of concept puzzles that the examined has worked with previously.[23]

Concept Training tasks assess inductive reasoning ability. In the Analysis-Synthesis test, the individual has to learn and orally state the solutions to incomplete logic puzzles that mimics a miniature mathematics system. The test also contains some of the features involved in using symbolic formulations in other fields such as chemistry and logic. The individual is presented with a set of logic rules, a “key” that is used to solve the puzzles. The individual has to be determined by the puzzles using the key. Complex items present puzzles that require two or more sequential mental manipulations of the key to a final solution. Increasingly difficult items involve a mix of puzzles that require fluid shifts in deduction, logic, and inference. [23] Analysis Synthesis tasks assess general sequential reasoning.

In the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children- IV (WISC IV), [24] the Perceptual Reasoning Index contains two subtests that assess Gf: Matrix Reasoning, which involves induction and education, and Picture Concepts, which involves induction. [25]In the Picture Concepts task, children are presented in a series of pictures on two or three rows and asked which pictures (one from each row) This task assesses the child’s ability to discover the underlying characteristic (eg rule, concept, trend, class membership) that governs a set of materials. Matrix Reasoning also tests this ability and the ability to start a new problem (education). In the Matrix Reasoning test, children are presenting a series of pictures. Their task is to choose the picture that fits the series or an array of five options.[25]

Within the corporate environment, fluid intelligence is a predictor of a person’s ability to work in an environment characterized by complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity. The Cognitive Process Profile (CPP) a person’s fluid intelligence and cognitive processes. It maps thesis contre suitable work environments selon Elliott Jacques Stratified Systems Theory.

Development and physiology

Fluid intelligence, like reaction time , typically peaks in young adulthood and then steadily declines. This decline may be related to local atrophy of the brain in the right cerebellum. [26] Other researchers have suggested that a lack of practice, along with age-related changes in the brain may contribute to the decline. [6] Crystallized intelligence increases, and is relatively stable over most of adulthood, and then begins to decline after age 65. [6]The exact peak age of cognitive skills remains elusive, it depends on the skill measurement and the survey design. Cross-sectional data shows typically an earlier onset of cognitive decline in comparison with longitudinal data. The former may be confounded due to the effects of stress on the test. [27]

Working memory capacity is closely related to fluid intelligence, and has been proposed to account for individual differences in Gf. [28]

Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory

According to David Geary, Gf and Gc can be traced to two separate brain systems. Fluid intelligence involves both the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex , the anterior cingulate cortex , and other systems related to attention and short-term memory. Crystallized intelligence appears to be a function of brain regions that involves the storage and use of long-term memories, such as the hippocampus . [29]

Some researchers question whether the results are long lasting and transferable, especially when these techniques are used by healthy children and adults without cognitive deficiencies. [30] A recent meta-analytical review conducted by researchers from the University of Oslo concluded that “memory training programs appear to produce short-term, specific training effects that do not generalize.” [31]

In a controversial study, Susanne M. Jaeggi and her colleagues at the University of Michigan found That healthy young adults Who Practiced a demanding working memory task ( dual n -back ) Approximately 25 minutes per day for 19 days and 8 entre HAD Statistically significant Increases in their scores on a matrix test of fluid intelligence [32]

A second study conducted at the University of Technology in Hangzhou, China, supports Jaeggi’s independently. After student subjects were given a 10-day regimen based on the dual n-back working memory theory, the students were tested on Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices. Their scores were found to have increased significantly. [33]

Subsequent studies on n-back, Choio & Thompson [34] and Redick et al., [35] do not support the findings of the Jaeggi study. Although participants’ performance has been improved, these studies have shown that they have significantly improved their ability to work.

See also

  • Outline of human intelligence
  • Raymond Cattell
  • CHC theory
  • General intelligence factor
  • Intelligence
  • Three stratum theory
  • Malleability of intelligence


  1. Jump up^ Cattell, RB (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action. New York: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 0-395-04275-5.
  2. Jump up^ Jaeggi, Susanne M .; Buschkuehl, Martin; Jonides, John; Perrig, Walter J. (2008-05-13). “Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory” . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . 105 (19): 6829-6833. ISSN  0027-8424 . PMC  2383929  . PMID  18443283 . doi : 10.1073 / pnas.0801268105 .
  3. Jump up^ Cattell, RB (1971). Abilities: Their structure, growth, and action . New York: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN  0-395-04275-5 . [ page needed ]
  4. ^ Jump up to:b Cattell, RB (1987). Intelligence: Its structure, growth, and action . New York: Elsevier Science. page needed ]
  5. Jump up^ Spearman, Charles B. (2005). The Abilities of Man: Their Nature and Measurement . The Blackburn Press. ISBN  1-932846-10-7 .
  6. ^ Jump up to:c Cavanaugh, JC; Blanchard-Fields, F (2006). Adult development and aging (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing / Thomson Learning. ISBN  0-534-52066-9 . page needed ]
  7. Jump up^ Cattell, Raymond B. (1963). “Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment”. Journal of Educational Psychology . 54 : 1-22. doi :10.1037 / h0046743 .
  8. Jump up^ Suchy, Yana; Eastvold, Angela; Whittaker, Wilson J .; Strassberg, Donald (2007). “Validation of the Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale-Electronic Version: Sensitivity to subtle sequelae of mild traumatic brain injury”. Brain Injury . 21(1): 69-80. PMID  17364522 . doi : 10.1080 / 02699050601149088 .
  9. Jump up^ Hayashi, Mika; Kato, Motoichiro; Igarashi, Kazue; Kashima, Haruo (2008). “Superior Fluid Intelligence in Children with Asperger’s Disorder”. Brain and Cognition . 66 (3): 306-10. PMID  17980944 . doi : 10.1016 / j.bandc.2007.09.008 .
  10. Jump up^ Soulières, Isabelle; Dawson, Michelle; Gernsbacher, Morton Ann; Mottron, Laurent (2011). Skoulakis, Efthimios M. C, ed. “The Level and Nature of Autistic Intelligence II: What about Asperger Syndrome?” . PLoS ONE . 6(9): e25372. Bibcode : 2011PLoSO … 625372S . PMC  3182210  . PMID  21991394 . doi : 10.1371 / journal.pone.0025372 .
  11. Jump up^ Dawson, M .; Soulieres, I .; Ann Gernsbacher, M .; Mottron, L. (2007). “The Level and Nature of Autistic Intelligence”. Psychological Science . 18 (8): 657-62. PMID  17680932 . doi : 10.1111 / j.1467-9280.2007.01954.x .
  12. Jump up^ Belsky, Janet (1999). The Psychology of Aging: Theory, Research, and Interventions . Pacific, CA: Brooks / Cole Publishing.
  13. Jump up^ Ackerman, Phillip L. (1996). “A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge”. Intelligence . 22 (2): 227-57. doi : 10.1016 / S0160-2896 (96) 90016-1 .
  14. Jump up^ Papalia, D .; Fitzgerald, J .; Hooper, FH (1971). “Piagetian Theory and the Aging Process: Extensions and Speculations”. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development . 2 : 3-20. doi : 10.2190 / AG.2.1.b .
  15. Jump up^ Schonfeld, Irvin S. (1986). “The Genevan and Cattell-Horn conceptions of comparative intelligence: Early implementation of numerical solution aids”. Developmental Psychology . 22 (2): 204-12. doi : 10.1037 / 0012-1649.22.2.204 .
  16. Jump up^ Kline, P. (1998). The new psychometrics: Science, psychology and measurement . London: Routledge. [ page needed ]
  17. Jump up^ Messick, Samuel (1989). “Values ​​and Values ​​in Validation: The Science and Ethics of Assessment”. Educational Researcher . 18 (2): 5-11. JSTOR  1175249 . doi : 10.3102 / 0013189X018002005 .
  18. Jump up^ Raven, J .; Raven, JC; Short, JH (2003) [1998]. “Section 1: General Overview”. Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment. [ page needed ]
  19. Jump up^ Bornstein, Joel C .; Foong, Jaime Pei Pei (2009). “MGluR 1 Receptors Contributes to Non-Purinergic Slow Excitatory Transmission to Submucosal VIP Neurons of Guinea-Pig Ileum” . Frontiers in Neuroscience . 3 : 46.PMC  2695390  . PMID  20582273 . doi : 10.3389 / neuro.21.001.2009.
  20. Jump up^ Wright, Samantha B .; Matlen, Bryan J .; Baym, Carol L .; Ferrer, Emilio; Bunge, Silvia A. (2007). “Neural correlates of fluid reasoning in children and adults” . Frontiers in Human Neuroscience . 1 : 8. PMC  2525981  . PMID  18958222 . doi : 10.3389 / neuro.09.008.2007 .
  21. Jump up^ Ferrer, Emilio; O’Hare, Elizabeth D .; Bunge, Silvia A. (2009). “Fluid reasoning and the developing brain” . Frontiers in Neuroscience . 3 (1): 46-51. PMC  2858618  . PMID  19753096 . doi : 10.3389 / neuro.01.003.2009 .
  22. Jump up^ Woodcock, RW; McGrew, KS; Mather, N (2001). Woodcock Johnson III . Itasca, IL: Riverside. [ page needed ]
  23. ^ Jump up to:b Schrank, FA; Flanagan, DP (2003). WJ III Clinical use and interpretation. Scientist-practitioner perspectives . San Diego, CA: Academic Press. page needed ]
  24. Jump up^ Wechsler, D. (2003). WISC-IV technical and interpretive manual . San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation. [ page needed ]
  25. ^ Jump up to:b Flanagan, DP; Kaufman, AS (2004). Essentials of WISC-IV assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley. page needed ]
  26. Jump up^ Lee, Jun-Young; Lyoo, In Kyoon; Kim, Seon-Uk; Jang, Hong-Suk; Lee, Dong-Woo; Jeon, Hong-Jin; Park, Sang Chul; Cho, Maeng I (2005). “Intellect declines in healthy elderly subjects and cerebellum”. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences . 59 (1): 45-51. PMID  15679539 . doi : 10.1111 / j.1440-1819.2005.01330.x . hdl : 10371/27902 .
  27. Jump up^ Desjardins, Richard; Warnke, Arne Jonas (2012). “Ageing and Skills”. OECD Education Working Papers. doi : 10.1787 / 5k9csvw87ckh-en .
  28. Jump up^ Kyllonen, Patrick C .; Christal, Raymond E. (1990). “Reasoning ability is working-memory capacity ?!” Intelligence . 14 (4): 389-433. doi : 10.1016 / S0160-2896 (05) 80012-1 .
  29. Jump up^ Geary, DC (2005). The origin of mind: Evolution of brain, cognition, and general intelligence . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  30. Jump up^ Todd W. Thompson; et al. (2013). “Failure of Working Memory Training to Enhance Cognition or Intelligence” . PLoS ONE .
  31. Jump up^ Melby-Lervåg, Monica; Hulme, Charles (2012). “Is Working Memory Effective Training? A Meta-Analytic Review”. Developmental Psychology . 49(2): 270-91. PMID  22612437 . doi : 10.1037 / a0028228 .
  32. Jump up^ Jaeggi, Susanne M .; Buschkuehl, Martin; Jonides, John; Perrig, Walter J. (2008). “Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory” . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . 105 (19): 6829-33. Bibcode : 2008PNAS..105.6829J . JSTOR  25461885 . PMC  2383929  . PMID  18443283 . doi : 10.1073 / pnas.0801268105 .
  33. Jump up^ Qiu, Feiyue; Wei, Qinqin; Zhao, Liying; Lin, Lifang (2009). “Study on Improving Fluid Intelligence through Cognitive Training System Based on Gabor Stimulus”. 2009 First International Conference on Information Science and Engineering . pp. 3459-62. ISBN  978-1-4244-4909-5 . doi : 10.1109 / ICISE.2009.1124 .
  34. Jump up^ Chooi, Weng-Tink; Thompson, Lee A. (2012). “Working memory training does not improve intelligence in healthy young adults” . Intelligence . 40(6): 531-42. doi : 10.1016 / j.intell.2012.07.004 .
  35. Jump up^ Redick, Thomas S .; Shipstead, Zach; Harrison, Tyler L .; Hicks, Kenny L .; Fried, David E .; Hambrick, David Z .; Kane, Michael J .; Engle, Randall W. (2012). “No Evidence of Intelligence Improvement After Working Memory Training: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study”. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General . 142 : 359-379. PMID  22708717 . doi : 10.1037 / a0029082 .