Surveying the meritocracy: The problems of intelligence and mobility in the studies of the Population Investigation Committee

The post-war era saw the emergence of large-scale and longitudinal social and medical surveys in Britain. That these surveys were both representative of an entire nation and could follow individuals throughout their lives, gave them a privileged position in relation to policy-making. This paper will focus on two closely interrelated surveys, both instigated by the Population Investigation Committee at London School of Economics-the National Survey of Health and Development, which began in 1946, and the Scottish Mental Survey of 1947. These surveys had a critical role in educational research and policy and, more specifically, in changing perspectives regarding the concept and measurement of intelligence. They were seen to privilege social and environmental factors as determinants of mental ability, and they shifted attention away from genetic factors and eugenic concerns. However, while the surveys were indeed powerful tools, their structure, the questions they asked, the methods they used and the choices made over the data to be tabulated, also determined what could be known. The paper will examine the growing criticism and debate over the large-scale survey. Many argued that smaller-scale studies were more effective in understanding the social and biological causes of intellectual differences, and better for identifying the benefits and dangers of using intelligence and merit as a means of organising society.