There are two different methods used when it comes to researching over a long period of time; longitudinal research and cross-sectional research. While each comes with its own benefits and limitations, it ultimately depends on the amount of time you have to achieve your outcome. The reason why time is important is because longitudinal studies can take years to get results from the research of a subject. Cross-sectional research, however, can be realized much faster using people of similar characteristics at the age’s one may desire to study. In this paper, we will explore the differences between these research methods and how they are applied when studying the development of intelligence.
To begin, one must understand intelligence and how it can be measured. While scientists like Charles Spearman (1863–1945) and Lewis Terman (1877–1956) have studied the development of intelligence extensively, we still only have a general concept of how our brain works. The scientist Robert Sternberg categorizes intelligence into three main buckets; analytical intelligence, creative intelligence, and practical intelligence. Sternberg argued that intelligence tests measured analytical intelligence but failed to measure creative and practical intelligence. The reasoning behind this is because tests are setup to have one right answer. It’s very difficult to measure someone’s ability to think of an idea and implement it using creative and practical intelligence at the same time.
Longitudinal research, the first method of research, is used to study subjects over an extended period of time. Information is gathered at the beginning of the study and then repeated throughout the duration. This type of research can last years, even decades. The benefit of this research is that it gives science an accurate view over time allowing for social and environmental influences. It is ideal for researching lifespan or developmental issues. However, longitudinal research studies take time and...