Psychological research on wisdom began in the late 1970s, and numerous explicit-formal theories on wisdom have been developed.
Definitions There is no scientific consensus on the definition of wisdom, and the existing psychological definitions of wisdom vary. There are a large number of definitions, but some are: • Holiday and Chandler (1986) found that wisdom is related to five underlying factors: "exceptional understanding, judgment and communication skills, general competence, interpersonal skills, and social unobtrusiveness". • Baltes, Glück and Kunzmann (2001): "the ability to deal with the contradictions of a specific situation and to assess the consequences of an action for themselves and for others. It is achieved when in a concrete situation, a balance between intrapersonal, interpersonal and institutional interests can be prepared". • Sternberg (2003): wisdom is "the value-laden application of
tacit knowledge not only for one's own benefit (as can be the case with successful intelligence), but also for the benefit of others, in order to attain a common good. The wise person realizes that what matters is not just knowledge, or the intellectual skills one applies to this knowledge, but how the knowledge is used." • Brown and Greene (2006): "wisdom is an expertise in dealing with difficult questions of life and adaptation to the complex requirements." • Baltes and Smith (2008): "The Berlin Wisdom Paradigm [...] combines a broad definition of wisdom as excellence in mind and virtue with a specific characterization of wisdom as an expert knowledge system dealing with the conduct and understanding of life." • Jeste et al. (2010) found that an expert consensus panel mostly agreed that wisdom is "uniquely human; a form of advanced cognitive and emotional development that is experience driven; and a personal quality, albeit a rare one, which can be learned, increases with age, can be measured, and is not likely to be enhanced by taking medication." • Zhang, Shi and Wang (2023) distinguish two different understandings of wisdom: "(a) As action or behav-iour, wisdom refers to well-motivated actors achieving an altruistic outcome by creatively and successfully solving problems. (b) As a psychological trait, wisdom refers to a global psychological quality that engages intellectual ability, prior knowl-edge and experience in a way that integrates virtue and wit, and is acquired through life experience and continued practice" Zhang et al. (2023) note that all definitions include two common components, namely an emphasis on cognition, meaning, and affect, and a concern for human welfare, which means that "most definitions point to wisdom as essential to creating a better world."
Approaches Heuristic approaches Sternberg (1990) distinguishes three distinctive approaches to understanding wisdom: philosophical, folk conceptions, and psychodevelopmental views. Sternberg (2003) distinguishes philosophical approaches, implicit-theoretical approaches (folk-conceptions), and explicit-theoretical approaches. For the philosophical approaches Sternberg refers to , who points to Plato's three different senses of wisdom, namely
sophia,
phronesis, and
episteme. Implicit-theoretical approaches explicate folk conceptions of wisdom, as first set out by Clayton (1975). Explicit-thepretical approaches "have in common a formal theory of wisdom that is proposed to account for wisdom." A distinct group of theories focus on structural stage theory and post-formal thinking as a stage beyond Piaget's formal operations. According to Baltes and Staudinger (2000), theoretical and empirical studies on wisdom have, broadly seen, taken three approaches to understanding wisdom: as a personal characteristic or a "constellation of personality dispositions", such as
Erik Eriksons theory of
stages of psychosocial development; as a
post-formal way of thinking in structural stage theory: or as an expert way of dealing with "the meaning of and conduct of life."
Trait, context, behaviour According Sternberg, definitions can be grouped as "into four types: (a) a personal psychological excellence [trait], (b) a property of the situation, (c) an interaction between person and situation, and (d) a property of action." Trait-theories include Erikson's lifespan theory, neo-Piagetian post-formal stages, and Baltes' Berlin Wisdom paradigm. According to Grossman (2017), wisdom can be viewed as a stable personality trait, or as a context-bound process, meaning that a person in some contexts behaves wisely, but in other contexts does not. Zhang et al. (2023) point to Martin Luther King, Mohandas Gandhi and Albert Einstein, who "show great wisdom in their careers, but not in their personal live." Zhang et al. (2023) further note that an interactional approach is a sociocultural approach, which takes into account "the sociocultural context within which wisdom occurs." Sternberg's theory takes this approach. As a "property of action," research "should not focus on individuals but on the actions of individuals or groups," according to Sternberg. To this, Zhang et al. (2023) object that wisdom as a concept involves more than just observing and classifying begaviour, but also distinguishing psychological attributes.
Theories and models Developmental theories hark back to the older theories of
Erik Erikson, who posited
stages of psychosocial development, and
post-formal stages of structural stage theories, such as
Jane Loevinger's stages of ego development and
James W. Fowler's stages of faith. Zhang, Shi, and Wang (2023) list the following explicit-formal theories of wisdom: •
The Berlin Wisdom Paradigm, an expertise model of life wisdom developed by Paul B. Baltes. •
The Balance Theory of Wisdom developed by Robert J. Sternberg •
The Self-transcendence Wisdom Theory •
The Three-dimensional Wisdom Theory •
The H.E.R.O.(E.) Model of Wisdom •
The Process View of Wisdom •
The Integrating Virtue and Wit Theory of Wisdom Berlin Wisdom Paradigm - Paul B.Baltes The research of Baltes and his colleagues is related to his research on intellectual abilities and aging. Their research focuses on decision-making in fundamental life-matters, discerning general personal factors, experyise specific factors, and "facilitative experiential contexts" as facilitating wise judgments. Acoridng to Baltes' research, wisdom has five components: rich factual knowledge of life-matters, rich procedural knowledge, life span contextualism, relativism, apprehending uncertainty. According to Baltes,
Balance Theory of Wisdom - Robert J. Sternberg Sternberg's research has focused on intelligence, creativity, and wisdom, and the question what constitutes succesfull intelligence, arguing that creative and practical abilities are also essential contributors to life success. Sternberg amended his research on intelligence with the question how success can proceed beyond mere material success and personal benefit. In Sternbergs view', wisdom is "the value-laden application of
tacit knowledge not only for one's own benefit (as can be the case with successful intelligence), but also for the benefit of others, in order to attain a common good. The wise person realizes that what matters is not just knowledge, or the intellectual skills one applies to this knowledge, but how the knolwedge is used."
Aspects Meta-cognition There is some consensus that critical to wisdom are certain
meta-cognitive processes that afford life reflection and judgment about critical life matters. Accordin to Vuong (2022), these processes include recognizing the limits of one's own knowledge, acknowledging uncertainty and change, attention to context and the bigger picture, and integrating different perspectives of a situation. Grossmann and colleagues summarized prior psychological literature to conclude that wisdom involves certain cognitive processes that afford
unbiased, sound
judgment in the face of ill-defined life situations: • intellectual humility, or recognition of limits of own knowledge • appreciation of perspectives broader than the issue at hand • sensitivity to the possibility of change in social relations • compromise or integration of different perspectives
Interpersonal sensitivity According to Brienza et al. (2017), wisdom-related reasoning is associated with achieving balance between intrapersonal and interpersonal interests when facing personal life challenges, and when setting goals for managing interpersonal conflicts. Grossmann and Kross identified a phenomenon they called "the Solomon's paradox": that wise people reflect more wisely on other people's problems than on their own. (It is named after
King Solomon, who had legendary sagacity when making judgments about other people's dilemmas but lacked insight when it came to important decisions in his own life.)
Contextual factors Grossmann says contextual factorssuch as culture, experiences, and social situationsinfluence the understanding, development, and propensity of wisdom, with implications for training and educational practice. and within-cultural variability, and systematic variability in reasoning wisely across contexts and in daily life. Grossmann and colleagues (2018) also documented a positive relationship between diversity of emotional experience and wise reasoning, irrespective of emotional intensity.
Relation with intelligence Robert J. Sternberg, studying the relation between wisdom, intelligence, and creativity, argues that wisdom is both theoretically and empirically distinct from general (fluid or crystallized) intelligence, and that success requires more than mere intelligence. Sternberg (1990) found six components related to folk-concpetions of wisdom: reasoning ability, sagacity, learning from ideas and environment, judgment, expeditious use of information, perspicacity. For intelligence, the components were practical problem-solving ability, verbal ability, intellectual balance and integration, goal orientation and attainment, contectual intelligence, fluid thought. Sternberg further found that "wisdom and intelligence are highly correlated in people's implicit theories, at least in the United States. Staudinger, Lopez and Baltes (1997) "found that measures of intelligence (as well as personality) overlap with, but are nonidentical to, measures of wisdom in terms of constructs measured." Grossmann et al. (2010) have shown empirically that wise reasoning is distinct from
IQ. According to Brown and Greene (2006) "there is an overlap of the implicit theory of wisdom with intelligence, perceptiveness, spirituality, and shrewdness." Jeste et al. (2010) defined wisdom using an expert consensus panel to determine how wisdom was viewed as being different from intelligence and spirituality, and found that the panel viewed wisdom as being different from intelligence on 49 of the 53 items used in their Likert scale statements.
Relation with age Many, but not all, studies find that adults' self-ratings of perspective and wisdom do not depend on age. This conflicts with the popular notion that wisdom increases with age.
Measuring wisdom Empirical (evidence-based) research on wisdom is relatively new, but growing rapidly. Wisdom as a personality trait can be measured with self-questionnaires, which are prone to
self-report bias. Contextual approaches measure multiple dimensions including features of cognition, motivation, and emotion, in the context of a specific situation. Such state-level measures provide less-biased responses as well as greater power in explaining meaningful psychological processes. is based on a survey (SD-WISE-28) created by researchers at the
University of California San Diego to determine how wise a person is. In 2021
Dilip V. Jeste and his colleagues created a survey (SD-WISE-7) testing seven components: acceptance of diverse perspectives,
decisiveness,
emotional regulation,
prosocial behaviors,
self-reflection, social advising, and (to a lesser degree)
spirituality. However, the usefulness of such ultra-short, abstract, and decontextualized approaches are increasingly put into question from a methodological and ontological perspective, as summarized in the latest Annual Review of Psychology on wisdom. As the "humility paradox" discussed by Grossmann and Weststrate demonstrates, a person claiming to be incredibly humble may either deceive themselves and others, or this person may be miscalibrated in their self-views due to the lack of humility. ==Psychotherapy==