The influence of general knowledge test performance on self-ratings of and perceived relationships between intelligence, knowledge, and memory.

The present study examined how taking a general knowledge (GK) test affects perceptions of one's intelligence, memory, and knowledge and the relationship between these three constructs. Participants rated their abilities on each construct and the strength of the relationships between them before and after completing an easy or hard GK test or control task. In Experiment 1, participants were (mis)informed that GK questions were correctly answered by 50% of the population; in Experiment 2, no such information was provided. Regardless of (mis)information about others' performance, participants in the Hard condition believed they had a worse memory, were less knowledgeable, and were less intelligent post-task. However, the strength of the perceived relationship between GK and intelligence decreased only when participants were misled. Judgments of one's intelligence, memory, and knowledge can be manipulated by taking a GK test, and individuals engage in self-protective behavior to reduce the potential threat to one's self-concept.

Lay Definitions of Intelligence, Knowledge, and Memory: Inter- and Independence of Constructs.

The present study examined how lay participants define the following concepts used widely in psychology: being intelligent, knowing, and remembering. In the scientific community, knowledge overlaps with the contents of semantic memory, crystallized intelligence reflects the accumulation of knowledge, knowledge and event memory interact, and fluid intelligence and working memory correlate. Naturally, the lay public has implicit theories of these constructs. These theories mainly distinguish between intelligent and unintelligent behaviors and tend to include characteristics outside psychometric studies of intelligence, such as emotional intelligence. Here, we asked lay participants from the online platform Prolific to explain "what does being intelligent mean to you?" as well as "knowing" and "remembering" to understand their degree of alignment with theoretical conceptualizations in the research community. Qualitative coding of participant definitions showed that intelligence and knowledge are closely related, but asymmetrically-when defining what it means to be intelligent, participants reference knowledge, but intelligence is not considered in explaining knowing. Although participants note that intelligence is multi-faceted and related to problem-solving, there is an emphasis (in terms of frequency of mentions) on the crystallized side of intelligence (i.e., knowledge). A deeper understanding of lay participants' mental models of these constructs (i.e., their metacognitions) is essential for bridging gaps between experts and the general public.