Interview with Dr. Scott Lillienfend, Dept. of Psychology, Emory University.
1. Who do you consider a genius (intellectual, athletic or artistic) and why?
Genius is a term I use rarely. If I had to name some geniuses though, they would be people like Einstein and Bohr. Geniuses are people with extraordinary creativity and intelligence. They can be manifested in college professors, composers. The genius really lies in the eye of the beholder, the line is drawn by each individual. I wouldn't necessarily call athletes geniuses because it takes more than just athletic ability. Surely extremely successful athletes are intelligent, but it takes more than that.
2. At what point do you separate mastery of field and actual genius? In other words, what do geniuses have that distinguishes them for other people who are also talented in the specific area of interest?
A genius, I think, is made up of a configuration of different components. They must have creativity, a hard work ethic, some luck and an innate intelligence all working together to be a genius. Take, for example, the genius shown in the movie "Good Will Hunting." I don't think that that situation is realistic because it underestimated the importance of hard work. A genius needs to work at their specialty to become a genius in that area.
3. According to our research thus far, we know that both genetics and environment affect the degree to which a person is gifted in a certain field. From your experience, do you think that the “natural gift” of being a genius can be purely genetic or purely environmental?
I think a genius is influenced by both factors. There is no doubt that intelligence plays a very important role. A very bright individual needs a faciliatory environment, one which presents the child with variety and diversity so they are exposed to many different things at a young age. Their parents don't need to push them to learn, just keep their options open and communication with one's child is also very important. As for genes, I believe that geniuses come from smart parents and that there is some connection that is very hard to measure. IQ, or intelligence, has been linked to brain size, but it is a loose connection and other factors are involved, such as maybe the speed of neurons in the brain or differences in brain structure.
4. To what extent can the environment change the outcome of genetics and vice versa? Can one override the other? Do either the environment or genetics have more force than the other?
I don't believe that this is a well stated question because there is no real method of experimentation that would allow us to answer this question. One would have to control the environment to test the influence or genes or visa versa, which cannot be done.
5. Is there a specific part of the brain that is most associated with genius? Is there a physical difference in brain structure between a genius and typical person? Is there any truth to the past theories of genius that stated that the bigger the brain, the smarter you are?
As I said before, there could be differences in the speed or neurons in the brain or differences in the brain structure. Whatever it is, we know that it is probably a combination of factors that are very difficult to measure.
6. Is there any common childhood development by parents or life pattern that seems to be most associated with a genius?
Well, like I said before, I think that geniuses need a facilitory environment, which would be one which parents encouraged their children to experience different things, create diversity and variation in their lives. I remember reading an article about how parents were attempting to create "superbabies" by playing Mozart at an early age or trying to teach their children calculus before they could walk, which is unscientific to try and rush a child's development when it is obvious that the cognitive abilities have not yet developed.
7. What is your stance on IQ tests?
I believe that IQ tests have been misused in the past, but that they can also be properly used, and one shouldn't judge their effectiveness by their past misuses. It's a lot easier to criticize a test, and the IQ test does not test for important factors such as creativity. Even though they do not test everything, they are very valid predictors of occupational success and educational success, and they even correlate with brain size. Certain standardized tests such as SAT's and GRE's predict outcomes better than chance, but they are not perfect and it causes negative effects such as teaching for the test.