Session: 1         Page 123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100 of 100

There were no “idiot savants” in the group.

Was there any reason why you used this other scale, rather than the more customary IQ, as a measure?

There was a reason. To tell you the truth, I can't remember it. We might have been testing it. We might have been testing it.

Do you recall at that time any criticism of the IQ measure, that assumed a certain kind of socioeconomic background, and therefore didn't necessarily give an accurate measureof native intelligence of those who did not have that kind of background?

That may be. My memory is really very foggy on that, but that may be. It's possible. I just don't remember.

Of course, they may have been linked. That may have been one reason why you were testing the scale.

I think economics had something to do with it, because I had to work with these children in public schools, and I really had to get this thing done and get out of there, you know. I really couldn't take that long. I had hundreds of children in the sample. So that is probably the reason.

Was this sample selected by taking a certain number of schools, or did you select individual children from among the schools?

I had to select a certain number of elementary schools, a certain number of junior high schools, to get a good range,