Human Capabilities as Components of Human Capital

greenspun.com : LUSENET : History & Theory of Psychology : One Thread

One of the economists created this classification of human capabilities as components of human capital: “Tangible” capabilities are physiological attributes: stature, strength, stamina, eyesight, hearing, and so on. The individual’s general health status is also included, along with “longevity”.

For the “intangible” human attributes, three main groups are distinguished: (a) psycho-motor based skills, (b)cognitive capabilities, and (c) procedural capabilities. The lattermost among them is further elaborated, distinguishing four kinds of procedural capabilities: (i) the attributes of creativity and “innovativeness” are separated from (ii) more routinised qualities such as problem-solving abilities, complex task management, and leadership; (iii)“flexibility”, (being able to perform multi-task activities readily and also to absorb re-training easily) and (iv) “social” capabilities (a set of specific personal qualities such as diligence, loyalty, cooperativeness and the capacity for discerning trust in other individuals).

When I look at psychology textbooks I have found, I do not find anything concerning "procedural capabilities". Creative thinking and problem-solving abilities are the part of cognitive capabilities in those books. So I am confused now. My question is: is this classification (especially procedural capabilities and their further elaboration) based on psychology as a science?

Thank you very much for your answers!

Stevo Pucar

-- Stevo Pucar (prstevo@banjaluka.com), January 26, 2004

Answers

No. "Procedural" in psychology usually refers to highly automatized activities that do not require any (or much) conscious control. For instance, you have "procedural" knowledge of how to ride a bike, drive a car, write letters of the alphabet, etc. There are, however, large psychological literatures on creativity, problem-solving, and "social intelligence." The middle one probably has the most solid experimental literature. The first one is all over the place (some good, some terribly speculative). The third one has become a bit "fashionable" and so it will take some time, I think, to sort out the good from the bad. Much of the related "emotional intelligence" literature is virtually "pop" psychology. As for "flexibility,""multi-tasking" ability, and "teachability", I am sure there is stuff about these capacities in the literature, though probably not under those terms. You would have to dig around a bit to find what you want. Actually, these abilities are often considered part of basic intelligence and turn up in that literature frequently.

-- Christopher Green (christo@yorku.ca), January 26, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ