{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020995334370139968, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00933125972006221, 'mean_word_length': 5.3399014778325125, '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': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Charles Spearman and the general factor in intelligence: genesis and interpretation in the light of sociopersonal considerations.

Interest in “intelligence” developed dramatically during the early twentieth century. Between 1900 and 1910 significant applications and theoretical moves were made, and, by 1918, the associated social technology of mass mental testing was being widely applied. Few theoretical aspects of these developments outrank Charles Spearman's production and promotion of the doctrine of g – the supposed general factor in intelligence. The theory of g has led to Spearman being compared with John Dalton, and has played a major role in attempts to explain what intelligence tests really measure. This article addresses the why and the how of Spearman's production and promotion of his conception. It is seen that the interpretation Spearman gave to his theory is broader than is generally acknowledged, and, consequently, that the “real” Spearman differed interestingly from the prototypic factor analyst that bears his name in many texts. It is argued that, for Spearman, the attractiveness of the theory resided not so much in its fit with empirical data as in its conformity to various philosophical, ethical, and social propositions which he strongly favored.