{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033150613416862436, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014095536413469069, 'mean_word_length': 5.230894308943089, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What is Intelligence? Edited by J. Khalfa. (Pp. 212.) Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1994. - Personality and Intelligence . Edited by Robert J. Sternberg and P. Ruzgis. (Pp. 349.) Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. 1994.

The 1990s have seen a good crop of academic books on human intelligence. Robert Sternberg's (1990) Metaphors of Mind: Conceptions of the Nature of Intelligence provided a broad survey of the various approaches to the study of individual differences in cognitive abilities. Paul Kline's (1991) Intelligence: The Psychometric View gave a clear but rudimentary account of the measurement, nature, bases and predictive power of intelligence as understood by those who favour IQ-type psychometric tests. Mike Anderson's (1992) Intelligence and Development: A Cognitive Theory attempted with some success to integrate psychometric intelligence with neuropsychology, developmental and cognitive psychology within a novel model of human intelligence differences. Any of these books could be used to give a novice a good working introduction to the main concerns of researchers studying human mental ability differences. The harvest also contained more heavyweight contributions more suited to the researcher or advanced student of intelligence. Nathan Brody's Intelligence (2nd edn, 1992) covers much the same ground as Paul Kline's book but the references are more numerous and more up to date, and the level of discussion more suited to the cognoscente than the tyro. In an area that attracts unrivalled controversy in psychology, Brody's transparent even-handedness, critical intelligence and ability to handle detail have earned his book much iespect from both proand anti-IQ academics alike. Most heavyweight of all, literally and metaphorically, was John Carroll's Human Cognitive Abilities: A Survey of Factor Analytic Studies (1993). This book attempted to answer the question, 'how many kinds of human intelligence are there: one, a few, or many?'. (The answer is, 'all of the above.') Carroll set himself the unenviable task of re-analysing, using a standardized method of factor analysis, all extant large data sets concerned with mental ability batteries. The result is an indigestible book that will be a useful reference on intelligence for decades. Another research-orientated text was Tony Vernon's (1993) edited book, Biological Approaches to the Study of Human Intelligence (in which the present author declares an interest). This is a series of reviews on various aspects of the biological correlates and bases of human intelligence differences including genetics, nutrition, biochemistry, electroencephalography and evoked potentials, endocrinology and functional brain scanning. The authors and editors of the above books come from a range of different backgrounds in psychology, and from three different continents. Nevertheless, they share the view that the topic of human intelligence begins with, and cannot avoid, the concept of intelligence as articulated by differential psychologists. More particularly, they respect the undeniable importance of the concept of general intelligence (or g), first discovered by Charles Spearman in 1904. How, then, can a book entitled What is Intelligence? (edited by Khalfa, 1994) mention IQ only three times (twice dismissively) in its 200 pages? The first answer is that, as happens in most edited books, contributors write about their own interests and attempt to bend those, at times unconvincingly, to the book's overall theme. The second answer is that intelligence has been taken by the authors to mean whatever they wanted it to mean. The word intelligence in the title could have been replaced by a number of words without violence to the contents; language, thought, cognition would have been equally applicable and wide of the mark.