Skip to main content
EnglandPsychologySyllabus dot point

Can intelligence tests be biased and misused to make unfair claims about whole groups of people?

Classic study: Gould (1982), A nation of morons. Aim, method, results and conclusions, evaluation, and links to the individual differences area and the misuse of intelligence testing.

An OCR A-Level Psychology answer to the classic individual differences study, Gould (1982) A nation of morons. Covers the aim, the review of Yerkes' Army IQ tests, the cultural bias and flawed administration, the misuse of the data in immigration policy, evaluation, and links to Hancock and the individual differences area.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.814 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

Gould (1982), "A nation of morons", is the classic study in the individual differences area for the theme "measuring differences", paired with Hancock. You must know its aim, method, content and conclusions, evaluate it, and explain what it tells us about the individual differences area and the misuse of intelligence testing.

The answer

Aim and method

Three tests were used: Army Alpha (written, for literate recruits), Army Beta (pictorial, for illiterate recruits) and individual spoken exams.

Results and conclusions

Evaluation

  • Real-world relevance. A powerful, well-documented critique of cultural bias and the social consequences of testing.
  • Scale. Draws on a very large historical dataset.
  • Secondary review. Gould's own analysis is interpretive and may be selective towards his argument.
  • Historical data. The data are old and the conclusions specific to their era.
  • No new data. As a critique, it generates no new controlled evidence.

Examples in context

Example 1. Why this study fits the individual differences area. The individual differences area includes how psychology measures differences between people, such as intelligence. Gould examines the measurement itself, showing that an apparently objective IQ test can be biased and misused to make unjust claims about groups. This critical focus on measuring differences places it in the individual differences area.

Example 2. The contrast with Hancock. Gould is paired with Hancock et al. (2011), who used computerised language analysis to study how psychopaths speak. Where Gould critiques a flawed historical measure of a difference (intelligence), Hancock uses a modern, objective method to measure a difference (language patterns) linked to psychopathy. Comparing them covers old versus modern measurement of individual differences, the classic-contemporary comparison the exam asks for, and raises socially sensitive research.

Try this

Q1. Name the three intelligence tests Yerkes used. [3 marks]

  • Cue. Army Alpha (written), Army Beta (pictorial) and individual spoken examinations.

Q2. Explain one way the testing was poorly administered. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Many men who should have taken the Beta test (because they were illiterate) took the written Alpha test and scored zero, wrongly appearing unintelligent.

Q3. Explain how Yerkes' data were misused. [3 marks]

  • Cue. The biased scores were used to claim immigrants and black Americans were intellectually inferior, supporting the racist 1924 Immigration Restriction Act and eugenic ideas, despite reflecting test bias rather than intelligence.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

OCR 201910 marksDescribe what Gould (1982) reported about Yerkes' Army intelligence tests in 'A nation of morons'. [10 marks]
Show worked answer →

A description item testing the content of the review (AO1).

Gould reviewed Robert Yerkes' First World War intelligence testing of about 1.75 million US Army recruits. Three tests were used: Army Alpha (written, for literate recruits), Army Beta (pictorial, for illiterate recruits or those who failed Alpha) and individual spoken exams. Gould described how the tests were culturally biased (Alpha asked about American products, sports and celebrities that recent immigrants could not know) and how administration was chaotic: many men who should have taken Beta took Alpha and scored zero, conditions were noisy and crowded, and instructions were often not understood.

The results were used to claim that the average mental age of white American adults was about 13, that recent immigrants from southern and eastern Europe were intellectually inferior, and that black Americans scored lowest. Gould argued the data reflected the tests' bias and poor administration, not real intelligence, yet they were used to support the racist 1924 Immigration Restriction Act and ideas of eugenics.

Markers reward the description of Yerkes' three tests, the cultural bias and flawed administration, and the misuse of the findings in immigration policy.

OCR 202112 marksDiscuss what Gould's (1982) 'A nation of morons' tells us about the use and misuse of intelligence testing, including its strengths and weaknesses. [12 marks]
Show worked answer →

Tests interpretation plus evaluation (AO1 and AO3).

What it tells us: intelligence tests are not culture-free; Yerkes' tests measured familiarity with American culture and the testing conditions, not innate intelligence, yet were treated as objective and used to justify discriminatory policy. This shows how apparently scientific measurement of individual differences can be biased and socially misused.

Strengths: the review is a powerful, well-documented critique highlighting cultural bias and the social consequences of testing, with major real-world relevance; and it uses a large historical dataset.

Weaknesses: it is a secondary review and interpretation, so Gould's own analysis may be selective or biased towards his argument; the original data are old and the conclusions historical; and as a critique rather than an empirical study it generates no new controlled data.

A strong answer concludes that Gould compellingly exposes the cultural bias and dangerous misuse of intelligence testing, but as a secondary, interpretive review it has the limitations of any reanalysis. Markers reward the use-and-misuse interpretation plus balanced evaluation.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this