So, what's your I.Q?

by nakedmvistar 95 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  shera

  Thankyou to you too Larc

  Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year
• 

  joannadandy

  Larc you misquoted me. I didn't say IQ tests were just for children, I said they started that way. in 1904 Alfred Binet need to find a way to how to spot students with special needs and those who needed extra help could be identified early in their school careers, before they fail in regular classes. Binet was also a political activist and concerned with the rights of children so he wanted an objective measure of learning ability that could protect students from poor families who might be forced to leave school because they were the deemed "slow learners" IQ was meant to help those who fell below the average, not to single out the intellectual elite.

  Binet teamed up Theophile Simon and they wanted to not mearly measure school achivevement but the intellectual skill students needed to do well in school. After they tried many tests and eliminated items that did not discriminate between successful and unsuccessful students, Binet and Simon finally indentified 58 testes, several for each age group from 3 to 13. This allowed to determine a Mental Age for a child. A child who scceeded on the items passed by most six year olds for example was considered to have a mental age of 6 wheather the child was actually 4,6,or 8. The concept of intelligence quotient was added later when it was brought to the United States and adapted at Stanford. An IQ score was computed by comparing the mental-age score to the person's actual chronological age. (IQ=Mental age/chronological ageX100)The practice of computing a mental age has proven to be problematic because IQ scores caluated on the basis of metal age do not have the same meaning as children get older.

  I was also talking my post that I am not sure how reliable everyones IQ's are here because so many people take them online or by themselves. True IQ tests are to be administered to one person at a time by a trained psychologist and takes about two hours. Most questions are read and require no reading or writing.

  Scoring you were close with, the break down is as follows. The average score is 100, 50% of people from a general population will score 100 or above. And 50% will thus score below. About 68% of the general population will earn IQ scores between 85 and 115. Only about 16% of people will recieve socres below 85 and only 16% will score above 115. (which amazes me because from our little sample at JWD it seems like an awful lot of people are MENSA quality.)

  Intelligence test scores ONLY predict achievement in schools, and do so quite well. For example, the correlation is about .65 between school achievement and scores on a popular individual intelligence test, the revised Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. This isn't surprising because the tests were designed to predict school achievement. Remember Binet threw out tests items that did not discriminate between good and poor students. However, these figures hold true for white native-speacking people whose first language is Standard English. Wheather IQ tests should even be used with ethnic minority-groups is hotly debated. Even scores on "culture-free" tests are lower for students placed at risk. At best IQ tests are only estimates of general aptitude for learning. Again let me state the scores should ONLY be used as perdictors of school abilities and are NOT measures of innate intellectual abilities.

  Small differences in scores aren't even worth talking about.Even an individuals score may change over time for many reasons, including measurement error. The total socre is usually an average of scores on several kinds of questions. So a score in the middle or average range generally means that the student performed at the average on every kind of question or that the student did quite well in some areas and rather pporly in other areas. IQ scores reflect peoples past experiences and learning as well, so of courses scores will be very different for adults.

  Do people who score high on IQ tests achieve more in life? Here the anser is less clear. Obviously those with high IQ's say yes.There is evidence that g, or general intelligence, correlates with "real-world academic, social and occupational accomplishments" (Ceci, 1991), but there is great debate about the size and meaning of these correlations. People with higher intelligence test scores tend to complete more years of school and to have higher-status jobs. However, when the number of years of education is held constant, IQ scores and school achievement are not highly correlated with income and success in later life. Other factors such as motivation, social skill, emotional intelligence, and luck may make the difference. Again the spectrum of Intelligence, IQ is just a tiny picture and means very little, and often gets misrepresented and in generally misunderstood by society.
• 

  Sirona

  OK about mensa - you have to score within the top 2% of the population to be a member. On their current tests (I took the Cattell B test and at a different time the Advanced Matrices test), that is a minimum score of 148. I think the highest score possible on that test is 161.

  All of you out there who may have scored 160 - either you are the most intelligent person in the universe, or you took a different test.

  I could be wrong of course. Its monday and I can't be bothered researching it. LOL. (I only took my test this year so I think I'm on target there).

  Sirona
• 

  LoneWolf

  larc --- Sorry about the "essays". My brother used to tell me that I didn't write letters, I wrote epistles. I don't mean to, but they just seem to end up that way whether I like it or not.

  Did you learn something about chicken?

  Your theory sounds interesting --- even if I don't know anything about it yet. The new and unusual is always fascinating to me.

  LizardSnot --- LOL. Yeah, I reckon most of us wouldn't amount to much if all we did is live up to other's expectations.

  In my case, I've always wondered about something. With all of the education my Momma gave my butt when I was a kid, I wouldn't be at all surprised if my brain and my butt had the same IQ.

  joannadandy --- I enjoyed that history. Thank you.

  LoneWolf
• 

  larc

  Lone Wolf, I enjoy your essays. They have good content and they are easy to read. Joann, sorry that I misread your comments. I enjoyed your last post about the early history of IQ testing. Revised versions of the Binet are still used today by school psychologists to help determine why particular students are having trouble in school. I agree with you that the nature and use of the tests are poorly understood by the general public. Some take test results as a perfect measure, which they are not. Others ridicule tests as worthless, when in fact, they are a very valuable tool when used properly. The subject has been discussed before, but I find this thread to be the most interesting that has been generated on this subject. Joann, I only disagree with you on a few points, and most of them are minor. The Binet and the WISC take about an hour to administer rather than two hours. You say that a reliable measure of IQ can only be obtained by using an individually administered test. While such tests are the most reliable, group administered tests are reliable enough for some purposes. Average error for the WAIS, WISC, and Binet is about 5%. The average error for group tests is about 10%. You say that tests are only useful for decisions made in a school setting. I would maintain that these tests are also useful in selecting applicants for employment. Hunter and Schmidt (Psych. Bulletin, 1998) demonstrated that such tests are the most valid preditors of job success. Using such tests can increase the productivity of the work force by about 25%, which is quite significant. You say that tests are less predictive when people are matched on their level of eductaion. I have not read the study you reference, but I would suspect that this result may occur because of a restriction of range in the IQ scores. Such a restriction would, indeed, lower the coorelation. I agree, that other factors help determine success. In the article I mentioned, the authors note that measures of integrety increase the correlation when added to IQ scores. I may have missed some details, and will reread your very interesting post. Sirona, you off on your numbers a bit. To be in the top 2%, you have to get a score of about 137. Edited to add: Joanna, I agree with your comments about what the test measures. I think the term IQ should be discarded. I think a better term is "Academic aptitude and achievement test." You mentioned how items were selected. I would add that items are also selected by how well they correlate with each other. Therefore, a person should do about as well on some parts of the test as they do on others. On the WAIS and WISC, a large variation across the subtests may be an indicator of a specific problem with cognitive functioning, and would indicate the need for the administration of more specific tests, some them may be of a neurological nature. I think that is it for now. I posted a thread about some case studies in this area. If I can find it, I will bring it back up top for your review.

  Edited by - larc on 16 December 2002 11:13:1
• 

  Sirona

  Larc,

  Mensa told me that I must score over 148 to join (top2%). I got a score over 148. It must be something with the tests or something.....either that or I'm a mega genius! lol. (NOT! I can't get my figures right it seems, LOL)

  I took the Cattell B test.

  Sirona
• 

  Sirona

  I got this from the Mensa Website (www.mensa.org)

  The term "IQ score" is widely used but poorly defined. There is a large number of tests with different scales. The result on one test of 132 can be the same as a score 148 on another test. Some intelligence tests don't use IQ scores at all. Mensa has set a percentile as cutoff to avoid this confusion. Candidates for membership in Mensa must achieve a score at or above the 98th percentile (a score that is greater than or equal to 98 percent of the general population taking the test) on a standard test of intelligence.

  That explains it!

  Sirona
• 

  blondie

  IQ tests only measure one aspect of intelligence.

  There is also emotional intelligence as well.

  I never knew my IQ until about 5 years ago. I still don't know what it means as far as measuring my ability to achieve. I just do my darndest and try to keep learning. A lot has to do with what you like. I am fairly proficient in math and was encouraged to go into research at the university. But it did not appeal to me to devote so many hours to a dry, purposeless subject.

  I use my mathematical abilities and creativity in my music. Amazingly, many people who have an aptitude for math are musical as well.

  Many high IQ people lack people and life skills and are miserable. Is that because they spent too much time on gaining book knowledge, that they missed out on association with the rest of the human race?

  The only thing I have noticed about my high IQ (measured 3 different ways) is that I catch on quicker than most. I get a head start but in the end most people eventually catch up to me (except in word games, I am a veritable walking dictionary).

  I never forget that I can and do learn something from everyone I meet.

  Blondie
• 

  larc

  For those who are interested, my other thread regarding tests is called, IQ stories. If you do a search, you shall find. If you have comments or questions, please make them on that thread to bring it back up top. Sirona, the best general tests of intelligence are the Binet, the WISC, and WAIS. A score of about 137 on these would put you at the 98th percentile. Since these tests are the standard metric in this area of endeavor, I think the Mensa statement is misleading. As to what these test do measure, I like the analogy used by Kalet in his general psych. text. Let us suppose you were selecting athletes for a contest. If the athletes had to compete in a variety of events, you would test them on their general athletic ability. The is similiar to the orientation of IQ tests. They measure a very general ability to learn. However, if you were selecting athletes to compete in a specific contest, you would test them on the specific skills and aptitudes needed for that event. Within psychometrics, and measurement within the cognitive domain, there are a number of such specific tests to measure aptitudes and achievements. Edited to add: I am using the edit function because I am approaching my posting limit. Blondie, yes, mathimatician, engineers and other analytical types to have a high percent of musicians in their midst. The reason is that both areas require good spatial ability to be successful. Now, you say that very bright people have many among them that are socially innept. Terman's study does not support your contention.

  Edited by - larc on 16 December 2002 11:48:47
• 

  Sirona

  Thanks Larc. Perhaps I should take one of the tests you mentioned. I'd be interested to find out my score.

  Sirona