2. Approaches to studying practical cognition

During the past two decades, there has been a growing interest (and in part a renewed interest) in nonacademic forms of cognition. Several distinct, but arguably overlapping, constructs have been proposed to capture this nonacademic form of cognition. One of these constructs is Sternberg's (1985a, 1997a) concept of practical cognition. Alternative related conceptualizations of nonacademic or practical cognition include social cognition(e.g., Cantor and Kihlstrom, 1987, Ford and Maher, 1998; Kihlstrom and Cantor, in press), emotional cognition (e.g., Goleman, 1995; Salovey and Mayer, 1990; Mayer, Salovey, and Caruso, in press), and intrapersonal and interpersonal cognitions (Gardner, 1983, 1993). Jones and Day (1997) noted the similarities among the various conceptualizations of nonacademic cognition. They suggested that practical, social, and emotional cognition share a focus on declarative and procedural knowledge, flexible knowledge-retrieval capabilities, and problem solving involving more than one correct interpretation or solution. We discuss the different conceptualizations of practical cognition and the methods researchers have used to study them.

2.1 Social cognition

Interest in the construct of social cognition has fluctuated since the concept was first introduced by Thorndike (1920). Thorndike defined social cognition as comprising the skills to understand others and to act or behave wisely in relation to others. He also distinguished social from abstract and mechanical forms of cognition. Several other definitions and expansions on Thorndike's definition followed. These expanded definitions included the skill to get along with others (Moss and Hunt, 1927), the skill to deal with people (T. Hunt, 1928), knowledge about people (Strang, 1930), ease with other people, insights into the states and traits of others (Vernon, 1933), and the skill to judge correctly the feelings, moods, and motivations of others (Wedeck, 1947). Wechsler's (1958) definition seemed to capture these various conceptualizations in the single definition of social cognition as one's facility in dealing with human beings.

Some researchers sought to understand the meaning of social cognition by studying people's implicit concepts or theories (e.g., Bruner, Shapiro, and Tagiuri, 1958; Cantor, 1978). In a study by Sternberg et al. (1981), discussed previously, experts and laypersons were asked to rate how characteristic various behaviors were of intelligent, academically intelligent, and everyday intelligent people. A factor of "social competence" emerged from the factor analyses of the ratings in each aspect of cognition.

More recently, Kosmitzki and John (1993) attempted to clarify some of the inconsistency in the literature regarding definitions of social cognition. They identified seven components that seemed to be most central to people's implicit conceptions of social cognition. The seven components included both cognitive elements (perspective taking, understanding people, knowing social rules, and openness to others) and behavioral elements (good at dealing with people, social adaptability, and interpersonal warmth). These implicit conceptions overlap, to some extent, with scientists' explicit theories, but suggest some additional aspects previously not included, such as interpersonal warmth and openness to others. Although these last two aspects have yet to be tested empirically, most studies have focused on some variation of the five remaining components (perspective taking, understanding people, knowing social rules, skill to deal with people, and social adaptability).