We're launching a college campus program in Pune and are looking for Wikipedia Campus Ambassadors. Click here to find out more!

Intelligence quotientFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search "IQ" redirects here. For other uses, see IQ (disambiguation).

Human intelligence

Measuring and varieties

Intelligence quotient

General intelligence factor

Fluid and crystallized intelligence

Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory

Triarchic theory of intelligence

Theory of multiple intelligences

Factors associated with intelligence

Environment and intelligence

Evolution of human intelligence

Fertility and intelligence

Flynn effect

Health and intelligence

Height and intelligence

Heritability of IQ

Longevity and intelligence

Nations and intelligence

Neuroscience and intelligence

Race and intelligence

Religiosity and intelligence

Sex and psychology

Related

Creativity · High IQ society

Genius · Giftedness · Dysrationalia

v · d · e

An example of one kind of IQ test item, modeled after items in the Raven's Progressive Matrices test.

An intelligence quotient, or IQ, is a score derived from one of several different standardized tests designed to assess intelligence. The term "IQ" comes from the German Intelligenz-Quotient. When modern IQ tests are constructed the median score is set to 100 and a standard deviation to 15. Today almost all IQ tests adhere to the assignment of 15 IQ points to each standard deviation but this has not been the case historically. Approximately 95% of the population have scores within two standard deviations of the mean. If one SD is 15 points, then 95% of the population are within a range of 70 to 130.

IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality, parental social status,[1] and, to a substantial degree, parental IQ. While the heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, controversy remains regarding the significance of heritability estimates,[2][3] and the mechanisms of inheritance are still a matter of some debate.[4]

IQ scores are used in many contexts: as predictors of educational achievement or special needs, by social scientists who study the distribution of IQ scores in populations and the relationships between IQ score and other variables, and as predictors of job performance and income.

The average IQ scores for many populations have been rising at an average rate of three points per decade since the early 20th century, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. It is disputed whether these changes in scores reflect real changes in intellectual abilities.

Contents

[hide]

1 History o 1.1 Early history o 1.2 After World War One

2 Mental age vs. modern method 3 Modern tests 4 Reliability and validity 5 The general intelligence factor (g) 6 Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory 7 Flynn effect 8 IQ and age 9 Heritability of IQ

o 9.1 "Heritability" o 9.2 Shared family environment o 9.3 Non-shared family environment and environment outside the family o 9.4 Individual genes o 9.5 Regression towards the mean o 9.6 Gene-environment interaction

10 Interventions 11 IQ and brain anatomy 12 Health and IQ 13 Social outcomes

o 13.1 Other tests o 13.2 School performance o 13.3 Job performance o 13.4 Income o 13.5 IQ and crime o 13.6 Other correlations with IQ o 13.7 Real-life accomplishments

14 Group differences o 14.1 Sex o 14.2 Race o 14.3 Nations

15 Public policy 16 Criticism and views

o 16.1 Relation between IQ and intelligence o 16.2 Criticism of g o 16.3 Test bias o 16.4 Outdated methodology o 16.5 "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns"

17 High IQ societies 18 Popular culture usage 19 Reference charts 20 See also 21 References

o 21.1 Notes o 21.2 Bibliography

22 External links

History

See also: History of the race and intelligence controversy

Early history

The first large scale mental test may have been the imperial examination system in China. Modern mental testing began in France in the nineteenth century. It contributed to separating mental retardation from mental illness and reducing the neglect, torture, and ridicule heaped on both groups.[5]

Englishman Francis Galton, half-cousin to Charles Darwin, created the terms psychometrics and eugenics, and a method for measuring intelligence based on nonverbal sensory-motor tests. It was initially popular but was abandoned after the discovery that it had no relationship to outcomes such as college grades.[5][6]

French psychologists Alfred Binet, together with Victor Henri and Théodore Simon, after about 15 years of development, published the Binet-Simon test in 1905 which focused on verbal abilities. It was intended to identify mental retardation in school children. American psychologist Henry H. Goddard published a translation of it in 1910. The eugenics movement in the USA seized on it as a means to give them credibility in diagnosing mental retardation. American psychologist Lewis Terman at Stanford University revised the Binet-Simon scale which resulted in the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (1916). It became the most popular test in the United States for decades.[5][7][8][9]

Charles Spearman created the theory of a general intelligence factor in 1904. It argued that intelligence is largely a single global ability called g but that there are also smaller, specific factors or abilities for specific areas, labeled s. The theory remains influential and is discussed in a later section.[5]

During World War I a way was needed to evaluate and assign recruits. This caused a rapid development of several mental tests. The testing also caused controversy, misinterpretations of the data such as recent immigrants with poor English being deemed inferior in intellect, accusations of racism, and much public debate. Nonverbal or "Performance" tests were developed for those who could not speak English or were suspected of malingering.[5]

After World War One

However, a great deal of positive post war publicity on army psychological testing helped to make psychology a respected field.[10] Subsequently there was an increase in jobs and funding in

psychology.[11] Group intelligence tests were developed for and became widely used in both primary and secondary schools, universities and industry.[12]

L.L. Thurstone (1938) argued for a model of intelligence that included seven unrelated factors (verbal comprehension, word fluency, number facility, spatial visualization, associative memory, perceptual speed, reasoning, and induction). While not widely used, it influenced later theories.[5]

David Wechsler produced the first version of his test in 1939. It gradually become more popular and overtook the Binet in the 1960s. It has been revised several times, as is common for IQ tests in order to incorporate new research. One explanation is that psychologists and educators wanted more information than the single score from the Binet. Wechsler’s 10+ subtests provided this. Another is that the Binet focused on verbal abilities while the Wechsler also included non-verbal abilities. The Binet has also been revised several times and is now similar to the Wechsler in several aspects and but the Wechsler continues to be the most popular test in the United States.[5]

J.P. Guilford's Structure of Intellect (1967) model used three dimensions which when combined yielded a total of 120 types of intelligence. It was popular in the 1970s and early 1980s but faded due to both practical problems and theoretical criticisms.[5]

Alexander Luria's earlier work on neuropsychological processes lead to the PASS theory (1997). It argued that only looking at one general factor was inadequate for researchers and clinicians who worked with learning disabilities, attention disorders, mental retardation, and interventions for such disabilities. The PASS model covers four kinds of processes. The (P)lanning processes involve decision making, problem solving, and performing activities and requires goal setting and self-monitoring. The (A)ttention/arousal process involves selectively attending to a particular stimulus, ignoring distractions, and maintaining vigilance. (S)imultaneous processing involves the integration of stimuli into a group and requires the observation of relationships. (S)uccessive processing involves the integration of stimuli into serial order. The planning and attention/arousal components comes from structures located in the frontal lobe, and the simultaneous and successive processes come from structures located in the posterior region of the cortex.[13][14][15] It has influenced some recent IQ tests and been seen as a complement to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory described below.[5]

Raymond Cattell (1941) proposed two types of cognitive abilities in a revision of Spearman's concept of general intelligence. Fluid intelligence (Gf) was hypothesized as the ability to solve novel problems by using reasoning and crystallized intelligence (Gc) was hypothesized as a knowledge-based ability that was very dependent on education and experience. In addition, fluid intelligence was hypothesized to decline with age while crystallized intelligence was largely resistant. The theory was almost forgotten but revived by his student John L. Horn (1966) who later argued that Gf and Gc were only two among several factors and he eventually identified 9 or 10 broad abilities. The theory continued to be called Gf-Gc theory.[5]

John B. Carroll (1993) after a comprehensive re-analysis of earlier data proposed the Three Stratum Theory, which is a hierarchical model with three levels. At the bottom is the first stratum which consists of narrow abilities that are highly specialized (e.g., induction, spelling ability). The second stratum consists of broad abilities. Carroll identified eight second-stratum abilities.

Carroll accepted Spearman's concept of general intelligence, for the most part, as a representation of the uppermost third stratum.[16][17]

More recently (1999), a merging of the Gf-Gc theory of Cattell and Horn with Carroll's Three-Stratum theory has led to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. It has greatly influenced many of the current IQ tests.[5]

Mental age vs. modern method

The IQs of a large enough population are calculated so that they conform[18] to a normal distribution.

The term "IQ" comes from German "Intelligenz-Quotient", coined by the German psychologist William Stern in 1912, who proposed a method of scoring children's intelligence tests. He calculated the IQ score as the quotient of the "mental age" (the age group which scored such a result on average) of the test-taker and the "chronological age" of the test-taker, multiplied by 100. Terman used this system for the first version of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales.[19] This method has several problems such as not working for adults.

Wechsler introduced a different procedure for his test that is now used by almost all IQ tests. When an IQ test is constructed, a standardization sample representative of the general population takes the test. The median result is defined to be equivalent to 100 IQ points. In almost all modern tests, a standard deviation of the results is defined to equivalent to 15 IQ points. When a subject takes an IQ test, the result is ranked compared to the results of normalization sample and the subject is given an IQ score equal to those with the same test result in the normalization sample. Although the term "IQ" is still in common use, it is now an inaccurate description, mathematically speaking, since a quotient is no longer involved.

The values of 100 and 15 were chosen in order to get somewhat similar scores as in the older type of test. Likely as a part of the rivalry between the Binet and the Wechsler, the Binet until

2003 chose to have 16 for one SD, causing considerable confusion. Today almost all tests use 15 for one SD. Modern scores are sometimes referred to as "deviation IQs," while older method age-specific scores are referred to as "ratio IQs."[5][20]

Modern tests

Well-known modern IQ tests include Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Stanford-Binet, Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities, Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, and Raven's Progressive Matrices.

Approximately 95% or of the population have scores within two standard deviations of the mean. If one SD is 15 points as is common in almost all modern tests, then 95% of the population are within a range of 70 to 130. Alternatively, two-thirds of the population have IQ scores within one SD of the mean, i.e. within the range 85-115.

IQ scales are ordinally scaled.[21][22][23][24] While one standard deviation is 15 points, and two SDs are 30 points, and so on, this does not imply that cognitive ability is linearly related to IQ, such that IQ 50 means half the cognitive ability of IQ 100. In particular, IQ points are not percentage points.

The correlation between IQ tests and achievement tests is about 0.7.[5][25]

Reliability and validity

IQ scores can differ to some degree for the same individual on different IQ tests (age 12–13 years).[26]

Pupil KABC-II WISC-III WJ-IIIAsher 90 95 111

Brianna 125 110 105Colin 100 93 101

Danica 116 127 118Elpha 93 105 93Fritz 106 105 105

Georgi 95 100 90Hector 112 113 103Imelda 104 96 97

Jose 101 99 86Keoku 81 78 75

Leo 116 124 102

Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that while test-takers can have varying scores on differing occasions when taking the same test and can vary in scores on different IQ tests taken at the same age, the scores generally agree. A test-taker's score on any one IQ test is surrounded by an error band that shows, to a

specified degree of confidence, what the test-taker's true score is likely to be. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about 3 points, or in other words, the odds are about 2 out of 3 that a persons true IQ is in range from 3 points above to 3 points below the test IQ. Another description is that there is a 95% chance that the true IQ is in range from 4-5 points above to 4-5 points below the test IQ, depending on the test in question. Clinical psychologists generally regard them as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.[5][27][28]

The general intelligence factor (g)

Main article: General intelligence factor

There are many different kinds of IQ tests using a wide variety of methods. Some tests are visual, some are verbal, some tests only use of abstract-reasoning problems, and some tests concentrate on arithmetic, spatial imagery, reading, vocabulary, memory or general knowledge. The psychologist Charles Spearman early this century made the first formal factor analysis of correlations between the tests. He found that a single common factor explained for the positive correlations among test. This is an argument still accepted in principle by many psychometricians. Spearman named it g for "general intelligence factor". In any collections of IQ tests, by definition the test that best measures g is the one that has the highest correlations with all the others. Most of these g-loaded tests typically involve some form of abstract reasoning. Therefore Spearman and others have regarded g as the perhaps genetically determined real essence of intelligence. This is still a common but not proven view. Other factor analyses of the data are with different results are possible. Some psychometricians regard g as a statistical artifact. The accepted best measure of g is Raven's Progressive Matrices which is a test of visual reasoning.[29]

Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory

Many of the broad, recent IQ tests have been greatly influenced by the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory. It is argued to reflect much of what is known about intelligence from research. A hierarchy of factors is used. g is at the top. Under it there are 10 broad abilities that in turn are subdivided into 70 narrow abilities. The broad abilities are:[5]

Fluid Intelligence (Gf): includes the broad ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or novel procedures.

Crystallized Intelligence (Gc): includes the breadth and depth of a person's acquired knowledge, the ability to communicate one's knowledge, and the ability to reason using previously learned experiences or procedures.

Quantitative Reasoning (Gq): the ability to comprehend quantitative concepts and relationships and to manipulate numerical symbols.

Reading & Writing Ability (Grw): includes basic reading and writing skills. Short-Term Memory (Gsm): is the ability to apprehend and hold information in

immediate awareness and then use it within a few seconds. Long-Term Storage and Retrieval (Glr): is the ability to store information and fluently

retrieve it later in the process of thinking.

Visual Processing (Gv): is the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns, including the ability to store and recall visual representations.

Auditory Processing (Ga): is the ability to analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli, including the ability to process and discriminate speech sounds that may be presented under distorted conditions.

Processing Speed (Gs): is the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, particularly when measured under pressure to maintain focused attention.

Decision/Reaction Time/Speed (Gt): reflect the immediacy with which an individual can react to stimuli or a task (typically measured in seconds or fractions of seconds; not to be confused with Gs, which typically is measured in intervals of 2–3 minutes). See Mental chronometry.

Modern tests do not necessarily measure of all of these broad abilities. For example, Gq and Grw may be seen as measures of school achievement and not IQ.[5] Gt may be difficult to measure without special equipment.

g was earlier often subdivided into only Gf and Gc which were thought to correspond to the Nonverbal or Performance subtests and Verbal subtests in earlier versions of the popular Wechsler IQ test. More recent research has shown the situation to be more complex.[5]

Modern comprehensive IQ tests no longer give a single score. Although they still give an overall score, they now also gives scores for many of these more restricted abilities, identifying particular strengths and weaknesses of an individual.[5]

Flynn effect

Main article: Flynn effect

Since the early 20th century, raw scores on IQ tests have increased in most parts of the world.[30]

[31][32] When a new version of an IQ test is normed, the standard scoring is set so that performance at the population median results in a score of IQ 100. The phenomenon of rising raw score performance means that if test-takers are scored by a constant standard scoring rule, IQ test scores have been rising at an average rate of around three IQ points per decade. This phenomenon was named the Flynn effect in the book The Bell Curve after James R. Flynn, the author who did the most to bring this phenomenon to the attention of psychologists.[33][34]

Researchers have been exploring the issue of whether the Flynn effect is equally strong on performance of all kinds of IQ test items, whether the effect may have ended in some developed nations, whether or not there are social subgroup differences in the effect, and what possible causes of the effect might be.[35] Flynn's observation has prompted much new research in psychology and "demolish some long-cherished beliefs, and raise a number of other interesting issues along the way."[31]

IQ and age

IQ can change to some degree over the course of childhood.[36] However, in one longitudinal study, the mean IQ scores of tests at ages 17 and 18 were correlated at r=.86 with the mean scores of tests at ages 5, 6 and 7 and at r=.96 with the mean scores of tests at ages 11, 12 and 13.[37]

IQ scores for children are relative to children of a similar age. That is, a child of a certain age does not do as well on the tests as an older child or an adult with the same IQ. But relative to persons of a similar age, or other adults in the case of adults, they do equally well if the IQ scores are the same.[37]

For decades, it has been reported in practitioners' handbooks and textbooks on IQ testing that IQ declines with age after the beginning of adulthood. However, later researchers pointed out that this phenomenon is related to the Flynn effect and is in part a cohort effect rather than a true aging effect.

There have been a variety of studies of IQ and aging since the norming of the first Wechsler Intelligence Scale drew attention to IQ differences in different age groups of adults. Current consensus is that fluid intelligence generally declines with age after early adulthood, while crystallized intelligence remains intact. Both cohort effects (the birth year of the test-takers) and practice effects (test-takers taking the same form of IQ test more than once) must be controlled for to gain accurate data. It is unclear whether any lifestyle intervention can preserve fluid intelligence into older ages.[38]

The peak of capacity for both fluid intelligence and crystallized intelligence occurs at age 26. This is followed by a slow decline.[39]

Heritability of IQ

Environmental and genetic factors play a role in determining IQ. Their relative importance have been the subject of much research and debate.

"Heritability"

See also: Heritability of IQ and Environment and intelligence

"Heritability" is defined as the proportion of variance in a trait which is attributable to genotype within a defined population in a specific environment. A heritability of 1 indicates that all variation is genetic in origin and a heritability of 0 indicates that none of the variation is genetic. There are a number of points to consider when interpreting heritability.[40] Some examples:

Heritability measures the proportion of variation in a trait that can be attributed to genes, and not the proportion of a trait caused by genes. Thus, if the environment relevant to a given trait changes in a way that affects all members of the population equally, the mean value of the trait will change without any change in its heritability (because the variation or differences among individuals in the population will stay the same). This has evidently happened for height: the heritability of stature is high, but average heights continue to

increase.[37] Thus, even in developed nations, a high heritability of a trait does not necessarily mean that average group differences are due to genes.[37][41] Some have gone further, and used height as an example in order to argue that "even highly heritable traits can be strongly manipulated by the environment, so heritability has little if anything to do with controllability."[42] However, others argue that IQ is highly stable during life and has been largely resistant to interventions aimed to change it long-term and substantially.[43][44]

[45]

A common error is to assume that a heritability figure is necessarily unchangeable. The value of heritability can change if the impact of environment (or of genes) in the population is substantially altered.[37] If the environmental variation encountered by different individuals increases, then the heritability figure would decrease. On the other hand, if everyone had the same environment, then heritability would be 100%. The population in developing nations often have more diverse environments than in developed nations. This would mean that heritability figures would be lower in developing nations. Another example is phenylketonuria which previously caused mental retardation for everyone who had this genetic disorder and thus had a heritability of 100%. Today, this can be prevented by following a modified diet which has lowered heritability.

A high heritability of a trait does not mean that environmental effects such as learning are not involved. Vocabulary size, for example, is very substantially heritable (and highly correlated with general intelligence) although every word in an individual's vocabulary is learned. In a society in which plenty of words are available in everyone's environment, especially for individuals who are motivated to seek them out, the number of words that individuals actually learn depends to a considerable extent on their genetic predispositions and thus heritability is high.[37]

Since heritability increases during childhood and adolescence, and even increases greatly between 16–20 years of age and adulthood, one should be cautious drawing conclusions regarding the role of genetics and environment from studies where the participants are not followed until they are adults. Furthermore, there may be differences regarding the effects on g and on non-g factors, with g possibly being harder to affect and environmental interventions disproportionately affecting non-g factors.[45]

Various studies have found the heritability of IQ to be between 0.7 and 0.8 in adults and 0.45 in childhood in the United States.[37][46][47] It may seem reasonable to expect that genetic influences on traits like IQ should become less important as one gains experiences with age. However, the opposite occurs. Heritability measures in infancy are as low as 0.2, around 0.4 in middle childhood, and as high as 0.8 in adulthood.[48] One proposed explanation is that people with different genes tend to seek out different environments that reinforce the effects of those genes.[37] There is an ongoing debate, as discussed in the Heritability of IQ article, regarding if these high heritability estimates are too high due to not adequately considering factors such as that the environment may be relatively more important in families with low socio-economic status or the effect of the maternal (fetal) environment.

Shared family environment

There are aspects of environments that family members have in common (for example, characteristics of the home). This shared family environment accounts for 0.25-0.35 of the variation in IQ in childhood. By late adolescence it is is quite low (zero in some studies). There is a similar effect for several other psychological traits. These studies have not looked the effects of extreme environments such as in abusive families.[37][49][50][51]

Non-shared family environment and environment outside the family

Although parents treat their children differently, such differential treatment explains only a small amount of non-shared environmental influence. One suggestion is that children react differently to the same environment due to different genes. More likely influences may be the impact of peers and other experiences outside the family.[37][50]

Individual genes

A number of individual genes have been reported to be associated with IQ. Examples include CHRM2, microcephalin, and ASPM. However, Deary and colleagues (2009) argued that there are still almost no replicated evidence.[52] About 20,000 genes are thought to have an impact on the development and functionality of the brain.[53]

Regression towards the mean

Regression towards the mean is a statistical phenomenon that occurs when an outcome is determined by many independent factors. If an outcome is extreme, then this occurred because most of the independent factors agreed by chance. This is unlikely to occur again so to the next outcome is likely to be less extreme. If IQ is determined by many factors, genetic and/or environmental, then they must mostly agree in the same direction in order to produce an extreme IQ. The child of a person with an extreme IQ is unlikely to have all the factors agree so similarly so the child is on average likely to have a less extreme IQ.

People in professional occupations have on average 25 points higher IQ than unskilled workers. For their children the difference is 21 points. This is in itself not evidence for genetics or environment since the environment for the children likely differs greatly with it on average being more stimulating for the children of professionals.[5]

Gene-environment interaction

Dickens and Flynn (2001) argued that the "heritability" figure includes both a direct effect of the genotype on IQ and also indirect effects where the genotype changes the environment, in turn affecting IQ. That is, those with a higher IQ tend to seek out stimulating environments that further increase IQ. The direct effect can initially have been very small but feedback loops can create large differences in IQ. In their model an environmental stimulus can have a very large effect on IQ, even in adults, but this effect also decays over time unless the stimulus continues (the model could be adapted to include possible factors, like nutrition in early childhood, that may cause permanent effects). The Flynn effect can be explained by a generally more stimulating environment for all people. The authors suggest that programs aiming to increase IQ

would be most likely to produce long-term IQ gains if they taught children how to replicate outside the program the kinds of cognitively demanding experiences that produce IQ gains while they are in the program and motivate them to persist in that replication long after they have left the program.[54][55]

Interventions

Interventions such as the Head Start Program have not produced lasting gains, although the more intensive Abecedarian Project have.[37] In general, many interventions, as those described below, have shown short-term effects on IQ, but long-term follow-up is often missing.

A placebo-controlled double-blind experiment found that vegetarians who took 5 grams of creatine per day for six weeks showed a significant improvement on two separate tests of fluid intelligence, Raven's Progressive Matrices, and the backward digit span test from the WAIS. The treatment group was able to repeat longer sequences of numbers from memory and had higher overall IQ scores than the control group. The researchers concluded that "supplementation with creatine significantly increased intelligence compared with placebo."[56] A subsequent study found that creatine supplements improved cognitive ability in the elderly.[57] A study on young adults (0.03 g/kg/day for six weeks, e.g., 2 g/day for 150-pound individual) failed, however, to find any improvements.[58]

Musical training in childhood has also been found to correlate with higher than average IQ.[59]

Recent studies have shown that training in using one's working memory may increase IQ. A study on young adults published in April 2008 by a team from the Universities of Michigan and Bern supports the possibility of the transfer of fluid intelligence from specifically designed working memory training.[60][61] Further research will be needed to determine nature, extent and duration of the proposed transfer. Among other questions, it remains to be seen whether the results extend to other kinds of fluid intelligence tests than the matrix test used in the study, and if so, whether, after training, fluid intelligence measures retain their correlation with educational and occupational achievement or if the value of fluid intelligence for predicting performance on other tasks changes. It is also unclear whether the training is durable of extended periods of time.[62]

IQ and brain anatomy

Main article: Neuroscience and intelligence

Some studies have not found a correlation between some measures of brain size and IQ. Thus, Jensen and Reed in a 1993 study found no correlation between cranial capacity and IQ in nonpathological subjects (N=211).[63] However, more recent meta-analyses and reviews find such a correlation. Rushton and Ankney (2009) in a literature review write that in 28 samples using brain imaging techniques the mean brain size/g correlation was 0.40 (N = 1,389). In 59 samples using external head size measures it was 0.20 (N = 63,405). In 6 studies that corrected for that different IQ subtests measure g unequally well, the mean correlation was 0.63. Some studies

have found the whole brain to be important for g while others have found the frontal lobes to be particularly important. Two studies founds correlations of 0.48 and 0.56 between brain size and the number of neurons in the cerebral cortex (based on counting in representative areas.[64][65]

Luders and colleagues in a literature review (2009) write that the majority of data shows that both gray matter and white matter volume correlate with IQ but the correlation is stronger for gray matter. Increased number of neurons in the gray matter may explain the higher correlation but not necessarily so since glucose consumption and intelligence measures correlate negatively which may mean intelligent individuals use their neurons more efficiently, such as being more efficient in their formation of synapses between neurons which help to create more efficient neural circuitry. The white matter correlation may be due to more myelination or better control of pH and thus enhanced neural transmission. For more specific regions, the most frequently replicated positive correlations appear localized in the lateral and medial frontal lobe cortex. Positive correlations are also found with volume in many other areas. Cortical thickness may be a better measure than gray matter volume although this may vary with age with an initially negative correlation in early childhood becoming positive later. The explanation may again be that more intelligent individuals manage their synapses better. During evolution not only brain size but also brain folding has increased which has increased the surface area. Convolution data may support the "The Parieto-Frontal Integration Theory" which see medial cortex structures as particularly important. Volume of the corpus callosum or subareas were found to be important in several studies which may be due to more efficient inter-hemispheric information transfer.[66]

Brain injuries at an early age isolated to one side of the brain typically results in relatively spared intellectual function and with IQ in the normal range.[67]

Health and IQ

Main article: Health and intelligence

Proper childhood nutrition appears critical for cognitive development; malnutrition can lower IQ. For example, iodine deficiency causes a fall, in average, of 12 IQ points.[68] It is expected that average IQ in third world countries will increase if malnutrition of various kinds is eradicated.

One recent study found that a group of children with the "C" version of the FADS2 gene who were breastfed acquired on average 7 IQ points higher than to those with the "G" allele of the gene.[69][70] Other studies have failed to replicate any correlation between the FADS2 gene,[71] breastfeeding and IQ, while others show a negative effect on IQ when combining bottledfeeding, and the "G" version of FADS2 .[72]

People with a higher IQ have generally lower adult morbidity and mortality. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder [73] and schizophrenia [74] [75] are less prevalent in higher IQ bands. People in the midsts of a major depressive episode have been shown to have a lower IQ than when without symptoms and lower cognitive ability than people without depression of equivalent verbal intelligence.[76][77]

A study of 11,282 individuals in Scotland who took intelligence tests at ages 7, 9 and 11 in the 1950s and 1960s, found an "inverse linear association" between childhood IQ scores and hospital admissions for injuries in adulthood. The association between childhood IQ and the risk of later injury remained even after accounting for factors such as the child's socioeconomic background.[78] Research in Scotland has also shown that a 15-point lower IQ meant people had a fifth less chance of living to 76, while those with a 30-point disadvantage were 37% less likely than those with a higher IQ to live that long.[79]

A decrease in IQ has also been shown as an early predictor of late-onset Alzheimer's Disease and other forms of dementia. In a 2004 study, Cervilla and colleagues showed that tests of cognitive ability provide useful predictive information up to a decade before the onset of dementia.[80] However, when diagnosing individuals with a higher level of cognitive ability, in this study those with IQs of 120 or more,[81] patients should not be diagnosed from the standard norm but from an adjusted high-IQ norm that measured changes against the individual's higher ability level. In 2000, Whalley and colleagues published a paper in the journal Neurology, which examined links between childhood mental ability and late-onset dementia. The study showed that mental ability scores were significantly lower in children who eventually developed late-onset dementia when compared with other children tested.[82]

IQ is also negatively correlated with certain diseases.

Several factors can lead to significant cognitive impairment, particularly if they occur during pregnancy and childhood when the brain is growing and the blood-brain barrier is less effective. Such impairment may sometimes be permanent, or may sometimes be partially or wholly compensated for by later growth. Several harmful factors may also combine, possibly causing greater impairment.

Developed nations have implemented several health policies regarding nutrients and toxins known to influence cognitive function. These include laws requiring fortification of certain food products and laws establishing safe levels of pollutants (e.g. lead, mercury, and organochlorides). Comprehensive policy recommendations targeting reduction of cognitive impairment in children have been proposed.[83]

In terms of the effect of one's intelligence on health, in one British study, high childhood IQ was shown to correlate with one's chance of becoming a vegetarian in adulthood.[84] In another British study, high childhood IQ was shown to inversely correlate with the chances of smoking.[85]

There is also a relationship between longevity and intelligence.

Social outcomes

Outside of academic research and medicine, IQ testing is often done due to its ability to predict future job performance, social pathologies, or academic achievement. Academic research has also examined these associations, as well as the effect of IQ on other social outcomes, such as income and wealth.

Many of the arguments and criticisms assume that explained variance can be calculated as the square (algebra) of the correlation coefficient. This way of calculating explained variance has been criticized as inappropriate for most social scientific work.[86] Also, as for the heritability figure, the explained variance only refers to the proportion of variation in an outcome that is explained by a factor, and not the proportion of an outcome that is explained by a factor.

Other tests

One study found a correlation of 0.82 between g (general intelligence factor) and SAT scores;[87] another has found correlation of 0.81 between g and GCSE scores.[88]

Correlations between IQ scores (general cognitive ability) and achievement test scores are reported to be 0.81 by Deary and colleagues, with the explained variance ranging "from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design".[88]

School performance

The American Psychological Association's report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%. Achieving good grades depends on many factors other than IQ, such as "persistence, interest in school, and willingness to study" (p. 81).[37]

Job performance

According to Frank Schmidt and John Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."[89] The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.[90] The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods were controlled for.[37] While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function,[91] IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations.[89] That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management) low IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance, whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) are more likely to influence performance.[89] It is largely mediated through the quicker acquisition of job-relevant knowledge that IQ predicts job performance.

In establishing a causal direction to the link between IQ and work performance, longitudinal studies by Watkins and others suggest that IQ exerts a causal influence on future academic achievement, whereas academic achievement does not substantially influence future IQ scores.[92]

Treena Eileen Rohde and Lee Anne Thompson write that general cognitive ability but not specific ability scores predict academic achievement, with the exception that processing speed and spatial ability predict performance on the SAT math beyond the effect of general cognitive ability.[93]

The US military has minimum enlistment standards at about the IQ 85 level. There have been two experiments with lowering this to 80 but in both cases these men could not master soldiering well enough to justify their costs [94]

The American Psychological Association's report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" states that since the explained variance is 29%, other individual characteristics such as interpersonal skills, aspects of personality etc. are probably of equal or greater importance, but at this point there are no equally reliable instruments to measure them.[37]

Income

Some researchers claim that "in economic terms it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much."[95][96]

Other studies show that ability and performance for jobs are linearly related, such that at all IQ levels, an increase in IQ translates into a concomitant increase in performance.[97] Charles Murray, coauthor of The Bell Curve, found that IQ has a substantial effect on income independently of family background.[98]

Taking the above two principles together, very high IQ produces very high job performance, but no greater income than slightly high IQ. Studies also show that high IQ is related to higher net worth.[99]

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about one-fourth of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes.[37]

Some studies claim that IQ only accounts for (explained variance) a sixth of the variation in income because many studies are based on young adults (many of whom have not yet completed their education). On pg 568 of The g Factor, Arthur Jensen claims that although the correlation between IQ and income averages a moderate 0.4 (one sixth or 16% of the variance), the relationship increases with age, and peaks at middle age when people have reached their maximum career potential. In the book, A Question of Intelligence, Daniel Seligman cites an IQ income correlation of 0.5 (25% of the variance).

A 2002 study[100] further examined the impact of non-IQ factors on income and concluded that an individual's location, inherited wealth, race, and schooling are more important as factors in determining income than IQ.

IQ and crime

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlation between IQ and crime was -0.2. It was -0.19 between IQ scores and

number of juvenile offenses in a large Danish sample; with social class controlled, the correlation dropped to -0.17. A correlation of 0.20 means that the explained variance is less than 4%. It is important to realize that the causal links between psychometric ability and social outcomes may be indirect. Children with poor scholastic performance may feel alienated. Consequently, they may be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior, compared to other children who do well.[37]

In his book The g Factor (1998), Arthur Jensen cited data which showed that, regardless of race, people with IQs between 70 and 90 have higher crime rates than people with IQs below or above this range, with the peak range being between 80 and 90.

The 2009 Handbook of Crime Correlates stated that reviews have found that around eight IQ points, or 0.5 SD, separate criminals from the general population, especially for persistent serious offenders. It has been suggested that this simply reflects that "only dumb ones get caught" but there is similarly a negative relation between IQ and self-reported offending. That children with conduct disorder have lower IQ than their peers "strongly argue" against the theory.[101]

Other correlations with IQ

In addition, IQ and its correlation to health, violent crime, gross state product, and government effectiveness are the subject of a 2006 paper in the publication Intelligence. The paper breaks down IQ averages by U.S. states using the federal government's National Assessment of Educational Progress math and reading test scores as a source.[102]

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlations for most "negative outcome" variables are typically smaller than 0.20, which means that the explained variance is less than 4%.[37]

Tambs et al.[103][non-primary source needed] found that occupational status, educational attainment, and IQ are individually heritable; and further found that "genetic variance influencing educational attainment ... contributed approximately one-fourth of the genetic variance for occupational status and nearly half the genetic variance for IQ." In a sample of U.S. siblings, Rowe et al.[104] report that the inequality in education and income was predominantly due to genes, with shared environmental factors playing a subordinate role.

There are also other correlations such as those between religiosity and intelligence and fertility and intelligence.

Real-life accomplishments

Average adult IQs associated with real-life accomplishments:[5]

MDs or PhDs 125 College graduates 115 1–3 years of college 105-110

Clerical and sales workers 100-105 High school graduates, skilled workers (e.g., electricians, cabinetmakers) 100 1–3 years of of high school (completed 9–11 years of school) 95 Semi-skilled workers (e.g., truck drivers, factory workers) 90-95 Elementary school graduates (completed eighth grade) 90 Elementary school dropouts (completed 0–7 years of school) 80-85 Have 50/50 chance of reaching high school 75

Average IQ of various occupational groups:[5]

Professional and technical 112 Managers and administrators 104 Clerical workers; sales workers; skilled workers, craftsmen, and foremen 101 Semi-skilled workers (operatives, service workers, including private household; farmers

and farm managers) 92 Unskilled workers 87

Type of work that can be accomplished:[5]

Adults can harvest vegetables, repair furniture 60 Adults can do domestic work, simple carpentry 50 Adults can mow lawns, do simple laundry 40

There is considerable variation within and overlap between these categories. People with high IQs are found at all levels of education and occupational categories. The biggest difference occurs for low IQs with only an occasional college graduate or professional scoring below 90.[5]

Group differences

Among the most controversial issues related to the study of intelligence is the observation that intelligence measures such as IQ scores vary between ethnic and racial groups and sexes. While there is little scholarly debate about the existence of some of these differences, their causes remain highly controversial both within academia and in the public sphere.

Sex

Main article: Sex and intelligence

Men and women have statistically significant differences in average scores on tests of particular abilities.[105][106] Studies also illustrate consistently greater variance in the performance of men compared to that of women.[107]

IQ tests are weighted on these sex differences so there is no bias on average in favor of one sex, however the consistent difference in variance is not removed. Because the tests are defined so there is no average difference it is difficult to put any meaning on a statement that one sex has a higher intelligence than the other. However some people have made claims like this even using

unbiased IQ tests. For instance, there are claims that men tend to outperform women on average by three to four IQ points based on tests of medical students where the greater variance of men's IQ can be expected to contribute to the result,[108] or where a 'correction' is made for different maturation ages.[citation needed]

Race

Main article: Race and intelligence

The 1996 Task Force investigation on Intelligence sponsored by the American Psychological Association concluded that there are significant variations in IQ across races.[37] The problem of determining the causes underlying this variation relates to the question of the contributions of "nature and nurture" to IQ. Psychologists such as Alan S. Kaufman [109] and Nathan Brody[110] and statisticians such as Bernie Devlin[111] argue that there are insufficient data to conclude that this is because of genetic influences. One of the most notable researchers arguing for a strong genetic influence on these average score differences is Arthur Jensen. In contrast, other researchers such as Richard Nisbett argues that environmental factors can explain all of the average group differences.[112]

Nations

Main article: Nations and intelligence

A number of literature reviews have found differences in average national IQs. Other studies have found many factors such economic growth, democracy, crime, fertility, or atheism to be associated with average national IQs. In particular for developing nations environmental factors such as malnutrition and diseases likely affect average national IQs.

Public policy

The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. Please improve this article and discuss the issue on the talk page. (August 2010)

Main article: Intelligence and public policy

In the United States, certain public policies and laws regarding military service,[113] [114] education, public benefits,[115] capital punishment,[116] and employment incorporate an individual's IQ into their decisions. However, in the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. in 1971, for the purpose of minimizing employment practices that disparately impacted racial minorities, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the use of IQ tests in employment, except in very rare cases.[117] Internationally, certain public policies, such as improving nutrition and prohibiting neurotoxins, have as one of their goals raising, or preventing a decline in, intelligence.

A diagnosis of mental retardation is in part based on the results of IQ testing. Borderline intellectual functioning is a categorization where a person has below average cognitive ability (an IQ of 71–85), but the deficit is not as severe as mental retardation (70 or below).

Criticism and views

Relation between IQ and intelligence

See also: Intelligence

IQ is the most researched approach to intelligence and by far the most widely used in practical setting. There are critics, who do not dispute the stability of IQ test scores or the fact that they predict certain forms of achievement rather effectively. They do argue, however, that to base a concept of intelligence on IQ test scores alone is to ignore many important aspects of mental ability.[1][118]

Criticism of g

Some scientists dispute IQ entirely. In The Mismeasure of Man (1996), paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould criticized IQ tests and argued that that they were used for scientific racism. He argued that g was a mathematical artifact and criticized:

…the abstraction of intelligence as a single entity, its location within the brain, its quantification as one number for each individual, and the use of these numbers to rank people in a single series of worthiness, invariably to find that oppressed and disadvantaged groups—races, classes, or sexes—are innately inferior and deserve their status.(pp. 24–25)

Psychologist Peter Schönemann was also a persistent critic of IQ, calling it "the IQ myth". He argued that g is a flawed theory and that the high heritability estimates of IQ are based on false assumptions.[119][120]

Psychologist Arthur Jensen has rejected the criticism by Gould and also argued that even if g was replaced by a model with several intelligences this would change the situation less than expected. All tests of cognitive ability would continue to be highly correlated with one anther and there would still be a black-white gap on cognitive tests.[121] James R. Flynn, an intelligence researcher known for his criticisms of racial theories of intelligence, similarly argued that "Gould's book evades all of [Arthur] Jensen's best arguments for a genetic component in the black-white IQ gap by positing that they are dependent on the concept of g as a general intelligence factor. Therefore, Gould believes that if he can discredit g no more need be said. This is manifestly false. Jensen's arguments would bite no matter whether blacks suffered from a score deficit on one or 10 or 100 factors."[122]

Test bias

See also: Stereotype threat

The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that in the United States IQ tests as predictors of social achievement are not biased against African Americans since they predict future performance, such as school achievement, similarly to the way they predict future performance for Whites.[37]

However, IQ tests may well be biased when used in other situations. A 2005 study stated that "differential validity in prediction suggests that the WAIS-R test may contain cultural influences that reduce the validity of the WAIS-R as a measure of cognitive ability for Mexican American students,"[123] indicating a weaker positive correlation relative to sampled white students. Other recent studies have questioned the culture-fairness of IQ tests when used in South Africa.[124][125] Standard intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet, are often inappropriate for children with autism; the alternative of using developmental or adaptive skills measures are relatively poor measures of intelligence in autistic children, and may have resulted in incorrect claims that a majority of children with autism are mentally retarded.[126]

Outdated methodology

A 2006 article stated that contemporary psychologic research often did not reflect substantial recent developments in psychometrics and "bears an uncanny resemblance to the psychometric state of the art as it existed in the 1950s." However, it also states that an "increasing number of psychometrically informed research papers that have been appearing in the past decade." [127]

"Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns"

In response to the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association's Board of Scientific Affairs established a task force in 1995 to write a report on the state of intelligence research which could be used by all sides as a basis for discussion, "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns". The full text of the report is available through several websites.[37][128]

In this paper the representatives of the association regret that IQ-related works are frequently written with a view to their political consequences: "research findings were often assessed not so much on their merits or their scientific standing as on their supposed political implications".

The task force concluded that IQ scores do have high predictive validity for individual differences in school achievement. They confirm the predictive validity of IQ for adult occupational status, even when variables such as education and family background have been statistically controlled. They stated that individual differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by both genetics and environment.

The report stated that a number of biological factors, including malnutrition, exposure to toxic substances, and various prenatal and perinatal stressors, result in lowered psychometric intelligence under at least some conditions. The task force agrees that large differences do exist between the average IQ scores of blacks and whites. "The cause of that differential is not known; it is apparently not due to any simple form of bias in the content or administration of the tests themselves. The Flynn effect shows that environmental factors can produce differences of at

least this magnitude, but that effect is mysterious in its own right. Several culturally based explanations of the Black/ White IQ differential have been proposed; some are plausible, but so far none has been conclusively supported. There is even less empirical support for a genetic interpretation. In short, no adequate explanation of the differential between the IQ means of Blacks and Whites is presently available."

The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997, several of them arguing that the report failed to examine adequately the evidence for partly-genetic explanations.

High IQ societies

Main article: High IQ society

There are social organizations, some international, which limit membership to people who have scores as high as or higher than the 98th percentile on some IQ test or equivalent. Mensa International is perhaps the most well known of these. There are other groups requiring a score above the 98th percentile.

Popular culture usage

Many websites and magazines use the term IQ to refer to technical or popular knowledge in a variety of subjects not related to intelligence, including sex,[129] poker,[130] and American football,[131] among a wide variety of other topics. These tests are generally not standardized and do not fit within the normal definition of intelligence. Modern Intelligence tests are not merely placing a test taker's score within the norm, as presumably are the thousands of alleged "IQ Tests" found on the internet, but they are also testing factors (e.g., fluid and crystallized intelligence, working memory, and the like) that were previously found to represent pure measures of intelligence using factor analysis. This claim may not be made for the hundreds of online tests marketing themselves as IQ Tests, a distinction that may be unfortunately lost upon the public taking them.

Reference charts

Main article: IQ reference chart

IQ reference charts are tables suggested by test publishers to divide intelligence ranges in various categories.

See also

Child prodigy Cultural intelligence Curiosity quotient Developmental disability

Educational quotient Genius Intellectual giftedness Late bloomer Learning disability Malleable intelligence Nature versus nurture Savant syndrome Sentience quotient Social IQ Spiritual intelligence

References

Notes

1. ^ a b Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns (Report of a Task Force established by the Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association - Released August 7, 1995 — a slightly edited version was published in American Psychologist: Neisser, Ulric; Boodoo, Gwyneth; Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr.; Boykin, A. Wade; Brody, Nathan; Ceci, Stephen J.; Halpern, Diane F.; Loehlin, John C. et al. (1996). "Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns". American Psychologist 51 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77. http://internal.psychology.illinois.edu/~broberts/Neisser%20et%20al,%201996,%20intelligence.pdf.)

2. ̂ Johnson, Wendy; Turkheimer, Eric; Gottesman, Irving I.; Bouchard Jr., Thomas J. (2009). "Beyond Heritability: Twin Studies in Behavioral Research". Current Directions in Psychological Science 18 (4): 217–220. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01639.x. PMC 2899491. PMID 20625474. http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20Online%20CV/Johnson%20%282009%29.pdf.

3. ̂ Turkheimer, Eric (spring 2008). "A Better Way to Use Twins for Developmental Research". LIFE Newsletter (Max Planck Institute for Human Development): 2–5. http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/Articles%20for%20Online%20CV/Turkheimer%20%282008%29.pdf. Retrieved 29 June 2010.

4. ̂ Devlin, B.; Daniels, Michael; Roeder, Kathryn (1997). "The heritability of IQ". Nature 388 (6641): 468–71. doi:10.1038/41319. PMID 9242404. http://www.psych.umn.edu/courses/spring06/mcguem/psy5137/readings/devlin%201997.pdf.

5. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w IQ Testing 101, Alan S. Kaufman, 2009, Springer Publishing Company, ISBN 0826106293 ISBN 9780826106292

6. ̂ Gillham, Nicholas W. (2001). "Sir Francis Galton and the birth of eugenics". Annual Review of Genetics 35 (1): 83–101. doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.35.102401.090055. PMID 11700278.

7. ̂ Terman, Lewis M.; Lyman, Grace; Ordahl, George; Ordahl, Louise; Galbreath, Neva; Talbert, Wilford (1915). "The Stanford revision of the Binet-Simon scale and some results from its application to 1000 non-selected children". Journal of Educational Psychology 6 (9): 551–62. doi:10.1037/h0075455.

8. ̂ Wallin, J. E. W. (1911). "The new clinical psychology and the psycho-clinicist". Journal of Educational Psychology 2 (3): 121–32. doi:10.1037/h0075544.

9. ̂ Richardson, John T. E. (2003). "Howard Andrew Knox and the origins of performance testing on Ellis Island, 1912-1916". History of Psychology 6 (2): 143–70. doi:10.1037/1093-4510.6.2.143. PMID 12822554.

10. ̂ Kennedy, Carrie H.; McNeil, Jeffrey A. (2006). "A history of military psychology". In Kennedy, Carrie H.; Zillmer, Eric. Military Psychology: Clinical and Operational Applications. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 1–17. ISBN 1-57230-724-2. http://books.google.com/books?id=rytCzdXGgXkC&pg=PA1.

11. ̂ Katzell, Raymond A.; Austin, James T. (1992). "From then to now: The development of industrial-organizational psychology in the United States". Journal of Applied Psychology 77 (6): 803–35. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.77.6.803.

12. ̂ Kevles, D. J. (1968). "Testing the Army's Intelligence: Psychologists and the Military in World War I". The Journal of American History 55 (3): 565–81. doi:10.2307/1891014. JSTOR 1891014.

13. ̂ Das, J.P., Kirby, J., & Jarman, R.F. (1975). "Simultaneous and successive synthesis: An alternative model for cognitive abilities". Psychological Bulletin 82: 87–103. doi:10.1037/h0076163.

14. ̂ Das, J.P. (2000). "A better look at intelligence". Current Directions in Psychological Science 11: 28–33. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00162.

15. ̂ Naglieri, J.A., & Das, J.P. (2002). "Planning, attention, simultaneous, and successive cognitive processes as a model for assessment". School Psychology Review 19: 423–442.

16. ̂ Lubinski, D. (2004). "Introduction to the special section on cognitive abilities: 100 years after Spearman's (1904) '"General Intelligence," Objectively Determined and Measured'". Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 86 (1): 96–111. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.1.96. PMID 14717630.

17. ̂ Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521387124.

18. ̂ S.E. Embretson & S.P.Reise: Item response theory for psychologists, 2000. "...for many other psychological tests, normal distributions are achieved by normalizing procedures. For example, intelligence tests..." Found on: http://books.google.se/books?id=rYU7rsi53gQC&pg=PA29&lpg=PA29&dq=%22intelligence+tests%22+normalize&source=bl&ots=ZAIQEgaa6Q&sig=q-amDaZqx7Ix6mMkvIDMnj9M9O0&hl=sv&ei=lEEJTNqSIYWMOPqLuRE&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q&f=false

19. ̂ Mackintosh, N. J. (1998). IQ and Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 15. ISBN 978-0-19-852367-3. Lay summary (9 August 2010).

20. ̂ Pinneau, Samuel R. (1961). Changes in Intelligence Quotient Infancy to Maturity: New Insights from the Berkeley Growth Study with Implications for the Stanford-Binet Scales and Applications to Professional Practice. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

21. ̂ Mussen, Paul Henry (1973). Psychology: An Introduction. Lexington (MA): Heath. p. 363. ISBN 0-669-61383-7. "The I.Q. is essentially a rank; there are no true "units" of intellectual ability."

22. ̂ Truch, Steve (1993). The WISC-III Companion: A Guide to Interpretation and Educational Intervention. Austin (TX): Pro-Ed. p. 35. ISBN 0890795851. "An IQ score is not an equal-interval score, as is evident in Table A.4 in the WISC-III manual."

23. ̂ Bartholomew, David J. (2004). Measuring Intelligence: Facts and Fallacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 50. ISBN 9780521544788. Lay summary (27 July 2010). "When we come to quantities like IQ or g, as we are presently able to measure them, we shall see later that we have an even lower level of measurement—an ordinal level. This means that the numbers we assign to individuals can only be used to rank them—the number tells us where the individual comes in the rank order and nothing else."

24. ̂ Mackintosh, N. J. (1998). IQ and Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 0-19-852367-X. "In the jargon of psychological measurement theory, IQ is an ordinal scale, where we are simply rank-ordering people. . . . It is not even appropriate to claim that the 10-point difference between IQ scores of 110 and 100 is the same as the 10-point difference between IQs of 160 and 150"

25. ̂ Naglieri, J. A.; Bornstein, B. T. (2003). "Intelligence and Achievement: Just how Correlated are they?". Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 21 (3): 244–260. doi:10.1177/073428290302100302. edit

26. ̂ (IQ score table data and pupil pseudonyms adapted from description of KABC-II norming study cited in Kaufman 2009.Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing. pp. 151–153. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2.

27. ̂ Terman, Lewis Madison; Merrill, MaudeA. (1937). Measuring intelligence: A guide to the administration of the new revised Stanford-Binet tests of intelligence. Riverside textbooks in education. Boston (MA): Houghton Mifflin. p. 44.

28. ̂ Anastasi, Anne; Urbina, Susana (1997). Psychological Testing (Seventh ed.). Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice Hall. pp. 326–327. ISBN 978-0023030857. Lay summary (28 July 2010).

29. ̂ Neisser U (1997). "Rising Scores on Intelligence Tests". American Scientist 85: 440–7. http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/rising-scores-on-intelligence-tests/1.

30. ̂ Neisser, Ulric, ed (1998). The Rising Curve: Long-Term Gains in IQ and Related Measures. APA Science Volume Series. Washington (DC): American Psychological Association. ISBN 978-1-55798-503-3.[page needed]

31. ^ a b Mackintosh, N. J. (1998). IQ and Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-852367-3. Lay summary (9 August 2010).[page needed]

32. ̂ Flynn, James R. (2009). What Is Intelligence: Beyond the Flynn Effect (expanded paperback ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-74147-7. Lay summary (18 July 2010).[page needed]

33. ̂ Flynn, James R. (1984). "The mean IQ of Americans: Massive gains 1932 to 1978.". Psychological Bulletin 95 (1): 29–51. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.95.1.29.

34. ̂ Flynn, James R. (1987). "Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure.". Psychological Bulletin 101 (2): 171–91. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171. http://psycnet.apa.org.floyd.lib.umn.edu/journals/bul/101/2/171.pdf.

35. ̂ Zhou, Xiaobin; Grégoire, Jacques; Zhu, Jianjin (2010). "The Flynn Effect and the Wechsler Scales". In Weiss, Lawrence G.; Saklofske, Donald H.; Coalson, Diane et al.. WAIS-IV Clinical Use and Interpretation: Scientist-Practitioner Perspectives. Practical Resources for the Mental Health Professional. Alan S. Kaufman (Foreword). Amsterdam: Academic Press. ISBN 978-0-12-375035-8. Lay summary (16 August 2010).[page needed]

36. ̂ Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing. pp. 220–222. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2. Lay summary (10 August 2010).

37. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t Neisser et al. (August 7, 1995). "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns". Board of Scientific Affairs of the American Psychological Association. http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/taboos/apa_01.html. Retrieved August 6, 2006.

38. ̂ Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing. Chapter 8. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2. Lay summary (10 August 2010).[page needed]

39. ̂ McArdle, John J.; Ferrer-Caja, Emilio; Hamagami, Fumiaki; Woodcock, Richard W. (2002). "Comparative longitudinal structural analyses of the growth and decline of multiple intellectual abilities over the life span.". Developmental Psychology 38 (1): 115–42. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.1.115. PMID 11806695.

40. ̂ International Journal of Epidemiology, Volume 35, Issue 3, June 2006. See reprint of Leowontin's 1974 article "The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes" and 2006 commentaries: http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/3.toc

41. ̂ Brooks-Gunn, J.; Klebanov, P. K.; Duncan, G. J. (1996). "Ethnic Differences in Children's Intelligence Test Scores: Role of Economic Deprivation, Home Environment, and Maternal Characteristics". Child Development 67 (2): 396–408. doi:10.2307/1131822. JSTOR 1131822. PMID 8625720.

42. ̂ Johnson, Wendy; Turkheimer, Eric; Gottesman, Irving I.; Bouchard Jr., Thomas (2009). "Beyond Heritability: Twin Studies in Behavioral Research.". Current Directions in Psychological Science 18 (4): 217–220. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01639.x. PMC 2899491. PMID 20625474. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2899491.

43. ̂ Sesardic, 2005. Making sense of heritability44. ̂ Gottfredson. L. S. (2007). Flynn, Ceci, and Turkheimer on race and intelligence: Opening moves. Cato

Unbound, November 26.45. ^ a b Rushton, J. Philippe; Jensen, Arthur R. (2010). "Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research

in Richard Nisbett ’ s Intelligence and How to Get It". The Open Psychology Journal 3: 9–35. doi:10.2174/1874350101003010009. edit

46. ̂ Plomin, R.; Pedersen, N. L.; Lichtenstein, P.; McClearn, G. E. (1994). "Variability and stability in cognitive abilities are largely genetic later in life". Behavior Genetics 24 (3): 207–15. doi:10.1007/BF01067188. PMID 7945151.

47. ̂ Bouchard, T.; Lykken, D.; McGue, M; Segal, N.; Tellegen, A (1990). "Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart". Science 250 (4978): 223–8. doi:10.1126/science.2218526. PMID 2218526.

48. ̂ Bouchard, Thomas J. (2004). "Genetic Influence on Human Psychological Traits. A Survey". Current Directions in Psychological Science 13 (4): 148–51. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00295.x.

49. ̂ Bouchard Jr, TJ (1998). "Genetic and environmental influences on adult intelligence and special mental abilities.". Human biology; an international record of research 70 (2): 257–79. PMID 9549239.

50. ^ a b Plomin, R; Asbury, K; Dunn, J (2001). "Why are children in the same family so different? Nonshared environment a decade later.". Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie 46 (3): 225–33. PMID 11320676.

51. ̂ (Harris 1998)

52. ̂ Deary, Ian J.; Johnson, W.; Houlihan, L. M. (2009). "Genetic foundations of human intelligence". Human Genetics 126 (1): 215–232. doi:10.1007/s00439-009-0655-4. PMID 19294424. edit

53. ̂ Pietropaolo, S.; Crusio, W. E. (2010). "Genes and cognition". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science: n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/wcs.135. edit

54. ̂ Dickens, William T.; Flynn, James R. (2001). "Heritability estimates versus large environmental effects: The IQ paradox resolved.". Psychological Review 108 (2): 346–69. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.346. PMID 11381833.

55. ̂ Dickens, William T.; Flynn, James R. (2002). "The IQ Paradox: Still Resolved". Psychological Review 109 (4). http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/dickens/20020205.pdf.

56. ̂ , pp. 2147–50, doi:10.1098/rspb.2003.249257. ̂ McMorris, Terry; Mielcarz, Gregorsz; Harris, Roger C.; Swain, Jonathan P.; Howard, Alan (2007).

"Creatine Supplementation and Cognitive Performance in Elderly Individuals". Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition 14 (5): 517–28. doi:10.1080/13825580600788100. PMID 17828627.

58. ̂ Rawson, E; Lieberman, H; Walsh, T; Zuber, S; Harhart, J; Matthews, T (2008). "Creatine supplementation does not improve cognitive function in young adults". Physiology & Behavior 95 (1-2): 130–4. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.05.009. PMID 18579168.

59. ̂ Glenn Schellenberg, E. (2004). "Music Lessons Enhance IQ". Psychological Science 15 (8): 511–4. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00711.x. PMID 15270994.

60. ̂ (Klingberg , Forssberg & Westerberg 2002 )61. ̂ Jaeggi, S. M.; Buschkuehl, M.; Jonides, J.; Perrig, W. J. (2008). "From the Cover: Improving fluid

intelligence with training on working memory". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (19): 6829–33. doi:10.1073/pnas.0801268105. PMC 2383929. PMID 18443283. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2383929.

62. ̂ Sternberg, R. J. (2008). "Increasing fluid intelligence is possible after all". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105 (19): 6791–2. doi:10.1073/pnas.0803396105. PMC 2383939. PMID 18474863. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2383939.

63. ̂ Edward Reed, T (1993). "Cranial capacity: New Caucasian data and comments on Rushton's claimed Mongoloid-Caucasoid brain-size differences". Intelligence 17 (3): 423–31. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(93)90009-T.

64. ̂ McDaniel, M (2005). "Big-brained people are smarter: A meta-analysis of the relationship between in vivo brain volume and intelligence". Intelligence 33 (4): 337–46. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2004.11.005. http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/Big-Brained%20article.pdf.

65. ̂ Rushton, J. Philippe; Ankney, C. Davison (2009). "Whole Brain Size and General Mental Ability: A Review". International Journal of Neuroscience 119 (5): 692–732. doi:10.1080/00207450802325843. edit

66. ̂ Luders, Eileen; Narr, Katherine L.; Thompson, Paul M.; Toga, Arthur W. (2009). "Neuroanatomical correlates of intelligence". Intelligence 37 (2): 156–163. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2008.07.002. PMC 2770698. PMID 20160919. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2770698. edit

67. ̂ Bava, Sunita; Ballantyne, Angela O; Trauner, Doris A (2005). "Disparity of Verbal and Performance IQ Following Early Bilateral Brain Damage". Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology 18 (3): 163–70. doi:10.1097/01.wnn.0000178228.61938.3e. PMID 16175020.

68. ̂ Qian M, Wang D, Watkins WE, et al. (2005). "The effects of iodine on intelligence in children: a meta-analysis of studies conducted in China". Asia Pacific Journal of Clinical Nutrition 14 (1): 32–42. PMID 15734706.

69. ̂ Gene governs IQ boost from breastfeeding70. ̂ Caspi, A.; Williams, B.; Kim-Cohen, J.; Craig, I. W.; Milne, B. J.; Poulton, R.; Schalkwyk, L. C.; Taylor,

A. et al. (2007). "Moderation of breastfeeding effects on the IQ by genetic variation in fatty acid metabolism". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104 (47): 18860–5. doi:10.1073/pnas.0704292104. PMC 2141867. PMID 17984066. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2141867.

71. ̂ N. W. Martin, B. Benyamin, N. K. Hansell, G. W. Montgomery, N. G. Martin, M. J. Wright and T. C. Bates. (2011). Cognitive function in adolescence: testing for interactions between breast-feeding and FADS2 polymorphisms. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 50, 55-62 e4. 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.10.010

72. ̂ Steer CD, Davey Smith G, Emmett PM, Hibbeln JR, Golding J (2010). Penha-Goncalves, Carlos. ed. "FADS2 polymorphisms modify the effect of breastfeeding on child IQ.". PLoS One 5 (7): e11570.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0011570. PMC 2903485. PMID 20644632. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2903485. "No summary available".

73. ̂ Breslau, N.; Lucia, V. C.; Alvarado, G. F. (2006). "Intelligence and Other Predisposing Factors in Exposure to Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Follow-up Study at Age 17 Years". Archives of General Psychiatry 63 (11): 1238–45. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.63.11.1238. PMID 17088504.

74. ̂ Zinkstok, Janneke R; De Wilde, Odette; Van Amelsvoort, Therese AMJ; Tanck, Michael W; Baas, Frank; Linszen, Don H (2007). "Association between the DTNBP1 gene and intelligence: a case-control study in young patients with schizophrenia and related disorders and unaffected siblings". Behavioral and Brain Functions 3 (1): 19. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-3-19. PMC 1864987. PMID 17445278. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1864987.

75. ̂ Woodberry, K. A.; Giuliano, A. J.; Seidman, L. J. (2008). "Premorbid IQ in Schizophrenia: A Meta-Analytic Review". American Journal of Psychiatry 165 (5): 579–87. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07081242. PMID 18413704.

76. ̂ Sackeim, Harold; Freeman, Jon; McElhiney, Martin; Coleman, Eliza; Prudic, Joan; Devanand, D. P. (1992). "Effects of major depression on estimates of intelligence". Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 14 (2): 268–88. doi:10.1080/01688639208402828. PMID 1572949.

77. ̂ Mandelli, Laura; Serretti, Alessandro; Colombo, Cristina; Florita, Marcello; Santoro, Alessia; Rossini, David; Zanardi, Raffaella; Smeraldi, Enrico (2006). "Improvement of cognitive functioning in mood disorder patients with depressive symptomatic recovery during treatment: An exploratory analysis". Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 60 (5): 598–604. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1819.2006.01564.x. PMID 16958944.

78. ̂ Lawlor, D. A.; Clark, H.; Leon, D. A. (2006). "Associations Between Childhood Intelligence and Hospital Admissions for Unintentional Injuries in Adulthood: The Aberdeen Children of the 1950s Cohort Study". American Journal of Public Health 97 (2): 291–7. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2005.080168. PMC 1781410. PMID 17194859. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1781410.

79. ̂ Whalley, L. J; Deary, IJ (2001). "Longitudinal cohort study of childhood IQ and survival up to age 76". BMJ 322 (7290): 819. doi:10.1136/bmj.322.7290.819. PMC 30556. PMID 11290633. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=30556.

80. ̂ Cervilla, J; Prince, M; Joels, S; Lovestone, S; Mann, A (2004). "Premorbid cognitive testing predicts the onset of dementia and Alzheimer's disease better than and independently of APOE genotype". Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry 75 (8): 1100–6. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2003.028076. PMC 1739178. PMID 15258208. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1739178.

81. ̂ Dorene Rentz, Brigham and Women's Hospital's Department of Neurology and Harvard Medical School. "More Sensitive Test Norms Better Predict Who Might Develop Alzheimer's Disease". Neuropsychology, published by the American Psychological Association. http://laboratory-manager.advanceweb.com/common/editorial/editorial.aspx?CC=27318. Retrieved 2006-08-06.

82. ̂ Whalley LJ, Starr JM, Athawes R, Hunter D, Pattie A, Deary IJ (2000). "Childhood mental ability and dementia". Neurology 55 (10): 1455–9. PMID 11094097. http://www.neurology.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=11094097.

83. ̂ Olness K (2003). "Effects on brain development leading to cognitive impairment: a worldwide epidemic". J Dev Behav Pediatr 24 (2): 120–30. PMID 12692458. http://meta.wkhealth.com/pt/pt-core/template-journal/lwwgateway/media/landingpage.htm?issn=0196-206X&volume=24&issue=2&spage=120.

84. ̂ Gale, C. R; Deary, I. J; Schoon, I.; Batty, G D.; Batty, G D. (2006). "IQ in childhood and vegetarianism in adulthood: 1970 British cohort study". BMJ 334 (7587): 245. doi:10.1136/bmj.39030.675069.55. PMC 1790759. PMID 17175567. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1790759.

85. ̂ Taylor, Michelle D.; Hart, Carole L.; Smith, George Davey; Starr, John M.; Hole, David J.; Whalley, Lawrence J.; Wilson, Valerie.; Deary, Ian J. (2005). "Childhood IQ and social factors on smoking behaviour, lung function and smoking-related outcomes in adulthood: Linking the Scottish Mental Survey 1932 and the Midspan studies". British Journal of Health Psychology 10 (3): 399–401. doi:10.1348/135910705X25075.

86. ̂ Achen, Christopher H. (1990). "What Does “Explained Variance” Explain?: Reply". Political Analysis 2 (1): 173–184. doi:10.1093/pan/2.1.173. edit

87. ̂ Frey, Meredith C.; Detterman, Douglas K. (2004). "Scholastic Assessment org?". Psychological Science 15 (6): 373–8. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.x. PMID 15147489.

88. ^ a b Deary, I; Strand, S; Smith, P; Fernandes, C (2007). "Intelligence and educational achievement". Intelligence 35 (1): 13–21. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.001.

89. ^ a b c Schmidt, Frank L.; Hunter, John E. (1998). "The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings". Psychological Bulletin 124 (2): 262–74. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262.

90. ̂ Hunter, John E.; Hunter, Ronda F. (1984). "Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance". Psychological Bulletin 96 (1): 72–98. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.96.1.72.

91. ̂ Warner, Molly; Ernst, John; Townes, Brenda; Peel, John; Preston, Michael (1987). "Relationships Between IQ and Neuropsychological Measures in Neuropsychiatric Populations: Within-Laboratory and Cross-Cultural Replications Using WAIS and WAIS-R". Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 9 (5): 545–62. doi:10.1080/01688638708410768. PMID 3667899.

92. ̂ Watkins, M; Lei, P; Canivez, G (2007). "Psychometric intelligence and achievement: A cross-lagged panel analysis". Intelligence 35 (1): 59–68. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.04.005.

93. ̂ Rohde, T; Thompson, L (2007). "Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability". Intelligence 35 (1): 83–92. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.05.004.

94. ̂ Gottfredson, L. S. (2006). Social consequences of group differences in cognitive ability (Consequencias sociais das diferencas de grupo em habilidade cognitiva). In C. E. Flores-Mendoza & R. Colom (Eds.), Introducau a psicologia das diferencas individuais (pp. 433-456). Porto Allegre, Brazil: ArtMed Publishers.

95. ̂ Detterman and Daniel, 1989.96. ̂ Earl Hunt. "The Role of Intelligence in Modern Society (July-Aug, 1995)". American Scientist. pp. 4

(Nonlinearities in Intelligence). Archived from the original on May 21, 2006. http://web.archive.org/web/20060521185816/http://www.americanscientist.org/template/AssetDetail/assetid/24538/page/4.

97. ̂ Coward, W. Mark; Sackett, Paul R. (1990). "Linearity of ability-performance relationships: A reconfirmation". Journal of Applied Psychology 75 (3): 297–300. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.297.

98. ̂ Murray, Charles (1998) (PDF). Income Inequality and IQ. AEI Press. ISBN 0-8447-7094-9. http://www.aei.org/docLib/20040302_book443.pdf.[page needed]

99. ̂ Henderson, Mark (April 25, 2007). "Brains dont make you rich IQ study finds". The Times (London). http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article1701377.ece. Retrieved May 5, 2010.

100. ̂ Bowles, Samuel; Gintis, Herbert (2002). "The Inheritance of Inequality". Journal of Economic Perspectives 16 (3): 3–30. doi:10.1257/089533002760278686.

101. ̂ Handbook of Crime Correlates; Lee Ellis, Kevin M. Beaver, John Wright; 2009; Academic Press102. ̂ McDaniel, M (2006). "Estimating state IQ: Measurement challenges and preliminary correlates".

Intelligence 34 (6): 607–19. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.08.007. http://www.people.vcu.edu/~mamcdani/Publications/McDaniel%20(2006)%20Estimating%20state%20IQ.pdf.

103. ̂ Tambs, Kristian; Sundet, Jon Martin; Magnus, Per; Berg, Kåre (1989). "Genetic and environmental contributions to the covariance between occupational status, educational attainment, and IQ: A study of twins". Behavior Genetics 19 (2): 209–22. doi:10.1007/BF01065905. PMID 2719624.

104. ̂ Rowe, D. C., W. J. Vesterdal, and J. L. Rodgers, "The Bell Curve Revisited: How Genes and Shared Environment Mediate IQ-SES Associations," University of Arizona, 1997[page needed]

105. ̂ Jackson, D; Rushton, J (2006). "Males have greater g: Sex differences in general mental ability from 100,000 17- to 18-year-olds on the Scholastic Assessment Test☆". Intelligence 34 (5): 479–86. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.03.005.

106. ̂ Lynn, R; Irwing, P (2004). "Sex differences on the progressive matrices: A meta-analysis". Intelligence 32 (5): 481−98. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2004.06.008.

107. ̂ Deary, I; Irwing, P; Der, G; Bates, T (2007). "Brother–sister differences in the g factor in intelligence: Analysis of full, opposite-sex siblings from the NLSY1979". Intelligence 35 (5): 451–6. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.09.003.

108. ̂ Stumpf, H; Jackson, D (1994). "Gender-related differences in cognitive abilities: Evidence from a medical school admissions testing program". Personality and Individual Differences 17 (3): 335–44. doi:10.1016/0191-8869(94)90281-X.

109. ̂ Kaufman, Alan S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York: Springer Publishing. p. 173. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2. Lay summary (10 August 2010).

110. ̂ Brody, Nathan chapter=To g or Not to g—That Is the Question (2005). Wilhelm, Oliver & Engle, Randall W. (Eds.). ed. Handbook of Understanding and Measuring Intelligence. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications.

111. ̂ Bernie Devlin, Stephen E. Fienberg, Daniel P. Resnick & Kathryn Roeder, ed (1997). Intelligence, Genes, and Success: Scientists Respond to the Bell Curve. New York (NY): Springer Verlag. ISBN 0-38798234-5.[page needed]

112. ̂ Nisbett, Richard E. (2009). Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count. New York (NY): W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-06505-3. Lay summary (28 June 2010).[page needed]

113. ̂ "RAND_TR193.pdf" (PDF). http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/2005/RAND_TR193.pdf.114. ̂ "MR818.ch2.pdf" (PDF). http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR818/MR818.ch2.pdf.115. ̂ "Social Security Administration". http://www.ssa.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/12.00-

MentalDisorders-Adult.htm.116. ̂ Flynn, James R. (2009). What Is Intelligence: Beyond the Flynn Effect (expanded paperback ed.).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-74147-7. Lay summary (18 July 2010).117. ̂ Nicholas Lemann. The IQ Meritocracy. Time 100 link118. ̂ The Waning of I.Q. by David Brooks, The New York Times119. ̂ Psychometrics of Intelligence. K. Kemp-Leonard (ed.) Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, 3, 193-201:

[1]120. ̂ Schönemann, Peter H. (1997). "On models and muddles of heritability.". Genetica 99 (2-3): 97–108.

doi:10.1007/BF02259513. PMID 9463078. http://www2.psych.purdue.edu/~phs/pdf/81.pdf.121. ̂ Jensen, Arthur (1982). "The Debunking of Scientific Fossils and Straw Persons" Contemporary

Education Review 1 (2): 121- 135.122. ̂ Flynn, J. R. (1999). Evidence against Rushton: The Genetic Loading of the Wisc-R Subtests and the

Causes of Between-Group IQ Differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, p. 373-93.123. ̂ Verney, S. P.; Granholm, E; Marshall, SP; Malcarne, VL; Saccuzzo, DP (2005). "Culture-Fair Cognitive

Ability Assessment: Information Processing and Psychophysiological Approaches". Assessment 12 (3): 303–19. doi:10.1177/1073191105276674. PMID 16123251.

124. ̂ Shuttleworth-Edwards, Ann; Kemp, Ryan; Rust, Annegret; Muirhead, Joanne; Hartman, Nigel; Radloff, Sarah (2004). "Cross-cultural Effects on IQ Test Performance: A Review and Preliminary Normative Indications on WAIS-III Test Performance". Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 26 (7): 903–20. doi:10.1080/13803390490510824. PMID 15742541.

125. ̂ Cronshaw, Steven F.; Hamilton, Leah K.; Onyura, Betty R.; Winston, Andrew S. (2006). "Case for Non-Biased Intelligence Testing Against Black Africans Has Not Been Made: A Comment on Rushton, Skuy, and Bons (2004)". International Journal of Selection and Assessment 14 (3): 278–87. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2389.2006.00346.x.

126. ̂ Goldberg Edelson, M. (2006). "Are the Majority of Children With Autism Mentally Retarded?: A Systematic Evaluation of the Data". Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities 21 (2): 66–83. doi:10.1177/10883576060210020301.

127. ̂ Borsboom, Denny (2006). "The attack of the psychometricians". Psychometrika 71 (3): 425–40. doi:10.1007/s11336-006-1447-6. PMC 2779444. PMID 19946599. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=2779444.

128. ̂ Neisser, Ulric; Boodoo, Gwyneth; Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr.; Boykin, A. Wade; Brody, Nathan; Ceci, Stephen J.; Halpern, Diane F.; Loehlin, John C. et al. (1996). "Intelligence: Knowns and unknowns". American Psychologist 51 (2): 77–101. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77. http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/research/Correlation/Intelligence.pdf.

129. ̂ "Planned Parenthood Sex IQ". Archived from the original on 2008-07-06. http://web.archive.org/web/20080706120025/http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/sex-101/your-sex-iq-4328.htm. Retrieved 2008-08-10.

130. ̂ "NL Holdem Poker IQ Test". http://www.testyourpoker.com. Retrieved 2008-08-10.131. ̂ "American Football IQ". http://www.footballiqtest.com. Retrieved 2008-08-10.

Bibliography

Carroll, J.B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytical studies. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-38275-0.

Lahn, Bruce T.; Ebenstein, Lanny (2009). "Let's celebrate human genetic diversity". Nature 461 (7265): 726–8. doi:10.1038/461726a. PMID 19812654.

Coward, W. Mark; Sackett, Paul R. (1990). "Linearity of ability^performance relationships: A reconfirmation". Journal of Applied Psychology 75 (3): 297–300. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.297.

Duncan, J.; Seitz, RJ; Kolodny, J; Bor, D; Herzog, H; Ahmed, A; Newell, FN; Emslie, H (2000). "A Neural Basis for General Intelligence". Science 289 (5478): 457–60. doi:10.1126/science.289.5478.457. PMID 10903207.

Duncan, John; Burgess, Paul; Emslie, Hazel (1995). "Fluid intelligence after frontal lobe lesions". Neuropsychologia 33 (3): 261–8. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(94)00124-8. PMID 7791994.

Flynn, James R. (1999). "Searching for justice: The discovery of IQ gains over time". American Psychologist 54 (1): 5–20. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.1.5. http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/stuff_for_blog/flynn.pdf.

Frey, Meredith C.; Detterman, Douglas K. (2004). "Scholastic Assessment org?". Psychological Science 15 (6): 373–8. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00687.x. PMID 15147489.

Gale, C. R; Deary, I. J; Schoon, I.; Batty, G D.; Batty, G D. (2006). "IQ in childhood and vegetarianism in adulthood: 1970 British cohort study". BMJ 334 (7587): 245. doi:10.1136/bmj.39030.675069.55. PMC 1790759. PMID 17175567. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=1790759.

Gottfredson, L (1997). "Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life". Intelligence 24 (1): 79–132. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90014-3. http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997whygmatters.pdf.

Gottfredson, Linda S. (1998). "The general intelligence factor" (PDF). Scientific American Presents 9 (4): 24–29. http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1998generalintelligencefactor.pdf.

Gottfredson, L.S. (2005). "Suppressing intelligence research: Hurting those we intend to help.". In Wright, R.H. and Cummings, N.A (Eds.) (PDF). Destructive trends in mental health: The well-intentioned path to harm. New York: Taylor and Francis. pp. 155–186. ISBN 0-415-95086-4. http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2005suppressingintelligence.pdf.

Gottfredson, L.S. (2006). "Social consequences of group differences in cognitive ability (Consequencias sociais das diferencas de grupo em habilidade cognitiva)". In Flores-Mendoza, C.E. and Colom, R. (Eds.) (PDF). Introdução à psicologia das diferenças individuais. Porto Alegre, Brazil: ArtMed Publishers. pp. 155–186. ISBN 8-536-30621-1. http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/2004socialconsequences.pdf.

Gould, S.J. (1996). W. W. Norton & Co.. ed. The Mismeasure of Man: Revised and Expanded Edition. New-York: Penguin. ISBN 0140258248.

Gray, Jeremy R.; Chabris, Christopher F.; Braver, Todd S. (2003). "Neural mechanisms of general fluid intelligence". Nature Neuroscience 6 (3): 316–22. doi:10.1038/nn1014. PMID 12592404.

Gray, Jeremy R.; Thompson, Paul M. (2004). "Neurobiology of intelligence: science and ethics". Nature Reviews Neuroscience 5 (6): 471–82. doi:10.1038/nrn1405. PMID 15152197.

Haier, R; Jung, R; Yeo, R; Head, K; Alkire, M (2005). "The neuroanatomy of general intelligence: sex matters". NeuroImage 25 (1): 320–7. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.11.019. PMID 15734366.

Harris, J.R. (1998). The nurture assumption : why children turn out the way they do. New York (NY): Free Press. ISBN 0-684-84409-5.

Hunt, Earl (2001). "Multiple Views of Multiple Intelligence". PsycCRITIQUES 46 (1): 5–7. doi:10.1037/002513.

Jensen, A.R. (1979). Bias in mental testing. New York (NY): Free Press. ISBN 0-029-16430-3. Jensen, A.R. (1979). The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability. Wesport (CT): Praeger

Publishers. ISBN 0-275-96103-6.

Jensen, A.R. (2006). Clocking the Mind: Mental Chronometry and Individual Differences.. Elsevier. ISBN 0-080-44939-5.

Kaufman, A.S. (2009). IQ Testing 101. New York (NY): Springer Publishing. ISBN 978-0-8261-0629-2.

Klingberg, Torkel; Forssberg, Hans; Westerberg, Helena (2002). "Training of Working Memory in Children With ADHD". Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology (Neuropsychology, Development and Cognition: Section A) 24 (6): 781–91. doi:10.1076/jcen.24.6.781.8395. PMID 12424652.

McClearn, G. E.; Johansson, B; Berg, S; Pedersen, NL; Ahern, F; Petrill, SA; Plomin, R (1997). "Substantial Genetic Influence on Cognitive Abilities in Twins 80 or More Years Old". Science 276 (5318): 1560–3. doi:10.1126/science.276.5318.1560. PMID 9171059.

Mingroni, M (2004). "The secular rise in IQ: Giving heterosis a closer look". Intelligence 32 (1): 65–83. doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(03)00058-8.

Murray, C. (1998) (PDF). Income Inequality and IQ. Washington (DC): AEI Press. ISBN 0-8447-7094-9. http://www.aei.org/docLib/20040302_book443.pdf.

Noguera, P.A (2001). "Racial politics and the elusive quest for excellence and equity in education". Motion Magazine. Article # ER010930002. http://www.inmotionmagazine.com/er/pnrp1.html.

Plomin, R.; DeFries, J.C.; Craig, I.W.; McGuffin, P (2003). Behavioral genetics in the postgenomic era. Washington (DC): American Psychological Association. ISBN 1-557-98926-5.

Plomin, R.; DeFries, J.C.; McClearn, G.E.; McGuffin, P (2000). Behavioral genetics (4th ed.). New York (NY): Worth Publishers. ISBN 0-716-75159-3.

Rowe, D.C.; Vesterdal, W.J.; Rodgers, J.L. (1997). The Bell Curve Revisited: How Genes and Shared Environment Mediate IQ-SES Associations.[verification needed]

Schoenemann, P Thomas; Sheehan, Michael J; Glotzer, L Daniel (2005). "Prefrontal white matter volume is disproportionately larger in humans than in other primates". Nature Neuroscience 8 (2): 242–52. doi:10.1038/nn1394. PMID 15665874.

Shaw, P.; Greenstein, D.; Lerch, J.; Clasen, L.; Lenroot, R.; Gogtay, N.; Evans, A.; Rapoport, J. et al. (2006). "Intellectual ability and cortical development in children and adolescents". Nature 440 (7084): 676–9. doi:10.1038/nature04513. PMID 16572172.

Tambs, Kristian; Sundet, Jon Martin; Magnus, Per; Berg, Kåre (1989). "Genetic and environmental contributions to the covariance between occupational status, educational attainment, and IQ: A study of twins". Behavior Genetics 19 (2): 209–22. doi:10.1007/BF01065905. PMID 2719624.

Thompson, Paul M.; Cannon, Tyrone D.; Narr, Katherine L.; Van Erp, Theo; Poutanen, Veli-Pekka; Huttunen, Matti; Lönnqvist, Jouko; Standertskjöld-Nordenstam, Carl-Gustaf et al. (2001). "Genetic influences on brain structure". Nature Neuroscience 4 (12): 1253–8. doi:10.1038/nn758. PMID 11694885.

Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd ed.). San Antonia (TX): The Psychological Corporation.

Wechsler, D. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.). San Antonia (TX): The Psychological Corporation.

Weiss, Volkmar (2009). "National IQ means transformed from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Scores". The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies 31 (1): 71–94. http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14600/.

External links

Human Intelligence: biographical profiles, current controversies, resources for teachers Classics in the History of Psychology

[hide]v · d · eHuman group differences

Gender/Sex

Gender differences | Biology of gender | Biology and sexual orientation | Sex and intelligence | Gender and crime | Sex and spatial cognition | Gender and suicide | Sex and emotion | Sex and illness | Sex differences in humans

RaceRace and health (US) | Race and crime (US, UK)| Race and intelligence | Race and face perception | Race and genetics | Race and absolute pitch

Other dynamics

Nations and intelligence | Neuroscience and intelligence | Religiosity and intelligence | Heritability of IQ | Fertility and intelligence | Height and intelligence | Health and intelligence | Longevity and intelligence | Blood type | Human genetic variation | Y-DNA haplogroups

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient"Categories: Intelligence tests | Psychometrics | Intelligence | Intelligence by typeHidden categories: All pages needing cleanup | Wikipedia articles needing page number citations from January 2011 | All pages needing factual verification | Wikipedia articles needing factual verification from November 2010 | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from January 2011 | Articles with limited geographic scope from August 2010 | USA-centric | Wikipedia articles needing factual verification from March 2010

Personal tools

Log in / create account

Namespaces

Article Discussion

Variants

Views

Read View source View history

Actions

Search

Navigation

Main page

Special:Search

Search

Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia

Interaction

Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact Wikipedia

Toolbox

What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Cite this page

Print/export

Create a book Download as PDF Printable version

Languages

العربية Azərbaycanca Català Česky Dansk Deutsch Eesti Ελληνικά Español Esperanto فارسی Français Galego 한국어 हि�न्दी� Íslenska

Italiano עברית ಕನ್ನ�ಡ Lietuvių Magyar مصرى Nederlands 日本語 Norsk (bokmål) Polski Português Română Русский Simple English Slovenčina Slovenščina کوردی Српски / Srpski Suomi Svenska தமி�ழ் తెలు�గు� ไทย Türkçe Українська Tiếng Việt יִידיש 中文

This page was last modified on 10 April 2011 at 11:36. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License;

additional terms may apply. See Terms of Use for details.Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

Contact us

Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers

What is an IQ Score? Originally, IQ, or Intelligence Quotient, was used to detect persons of lower intelligence, and to detect children of lower intelligence in order to place them in special education programs. The first IQ tests were designed to compare a child's intelligence to what his or her intelligence "should be" as compared to the child's age. If the child was significantly "smarter" than a "normal" child of his or her age, the child was given a higher score, and if the child scored lower than expected for a child of his or her age, the child was given a lower IQ score.

Today IQ testing is used not primarily for children, but for adults. Today we attempt to write tests that will determine an adult's true mental potential, unbiased by culture, and compare scores to the scores of other adults who have taken the same test. So today we compare an adult's objective results to the objective results of other adults, and determine how intelligent each test taker is compared to all other test takers, instead of comparing test takers to an arbitrary age related standard.

Standard Deviation:The first step to understanding IQ testing is to understand standard deviation.

Standard deviation is kind of the "avg of the avg," and often can help you find the story behind the data. To understand this concept, it can help to learn about what statisticians call normal distribution of data.

A normal distribution of data means that most of the examples in a set of data are close to the "average," while relatively few examples tend to one extreme or the other.

Let's say you are writing a story about nutrition. You need to look at people's typical daily calorie consumption. Like most data, the numbers for people's typical consumption probably will turn out to be normally distributed. That is, for most people, their consumption will be close to the mean, while fewer people eat a lot more or a lot less than the mean.

When you think about it, that's just common sense. Not that many people are getting by on a single serving of kelp and rice. Or on eight meals of steak and milkshakes. Most people lie somewhere in between.

If you looked at normally distributed data on a graph, it would look something like this:

The x-axis (the horizontal one) is the value in question... calories consumed, dollars earned or crimes committed, for example. And the y-axis (the vertical one) is the number of datapoints for each value on the x-axis... in other words, the number of people who eat x calories, the number of households that earn x dollars, or the number of cities with x crimes committed.

Now, not all sets of data will have graphs that look this perfect. Some will have relatively flat curves, others will be pretty steep. Sometimes the mean will lean a little bit to one side or the other. But all normally distributed data will have something like this same "bell curve" shape.

The standard deviation is a statistic that tells you how tightly all the various examples are clustered around the mean in a set of data. When the examples are pretty tightly bunched together and the bell-shaped curve is steep, the standard deviation is small. When the examples are spread apart and the bell curve is relatively flat, that tells you you have a relatively large standard deviation.

Computing the value of a standard deviation is complicated. But let me show you graphically what a standard deviation represents...

(Niles Online)

One standard deviation away from the mean in either direction on the horizontal axis (the red area on the above graph) accounts for somewhere around 68 percent of the people in this group. Two standard deviations away from the mean (the red and green areas) account for roughly 95 percent of the people. And three standard deviations (the red, green and blue areas) account for about 99 percent of the people.

If this curve were flatter and more spread out, the standard deviation would have to be larger in order to account for those 68 percent or so of the people. So that's why the standard deviation can tell you how spread out the examples in a set are from the mean.

Why is this useful? Here's an example: If you are comparing test scores for different schools, the standard deviation will tell you how diverse the test scores are for each school.

Let's say Springfield Elementary has a higher mean test score than Shelbyville Elementary. Your first reaction might be to say that the kids at Springfield are smarter.

But a bigger standard deviation for one school tells you that there are relatively more kids at that school scoring toward one extreme or the other. By asking a few follow-up questions you might find that, say, Springfield's mean was skewed up because the school district sends all of the gifted kids to Springfield. Or that Shelbyville's scores were dragged down because students who recently have been "mainstreamed" from special education classes have all been sent to Shelbyville.

In this way, looking at the standard deviation can help point you in the right direction when asking why data is the way it is.

The standard deviation can also help you evaluate the worth of all those so-called "studies" that seem to be released to the press everyday. A large standard deviation in a study that claims to show a relationship between eating Twinkies and killing politicians, for example, might tip you off that the study's claims aren't all that trustworthy.

Here is one formula for computing the standard deviation.A warning, this is for math geeks only! Writers and others seeking only a basic understanding of stats don't need to read any further. Remember, a decent calculator and stats program will calculate this for you...

Terms you'll need to knowx = one value in your set of data(x) = the mean (average) of all values x in your set of datan = the number of values x in your set of data

For each value x, subtract (x) from x, then multiply that value by itself (otherwise known as determining the square of that value). Sum up all those squared values. Then multiply that value by this value... 1/(n-1). Then take the square root of the resulting value. That's the standard deviation of your set of data.

 

Defining IntelligenceMost people have an intuitive notion of what intelligence is, and many words in the English language distinguish between different levels of intellectual skill: bright, dull, smart, stupid, clever, slow, and so on. Yet no universally accepted definition of intelligence exists, and people continue to debate what, exactly, it is. Fundamental questions remain: Is intelligence one general ability or several independent systems of abilities? Is intelligence a property of the brain, a characteristic of behavior, or a set of knowledge and skills?

The simplest definition proposed is that intelligence is whatever intelligence tests measure. But this definition does not characterize the ability well, and it has several problems. First, it is circular: The tests are assumed to verify the existence of intelligence, which in turn is measurable by the tests. Second, many different intelligence tests exist, and they do not all measure the same thing. In fact, the makers of the first intelligence tests did not begin with a precise idea of what they wanted to measure. Finally, the definition says very little about the specific nature of intelligence.

Whenever scientists are asked to define intelligence in terms of what causes it or what it actually is, almost every scientist comes up with a different definition. For example, in 1921 an academic journal asked 14 prominent psychologists and educators to define intelligence. The journal received 14 different definitions, although many experts emphasized the ability to learn from experience and the ability to adapt to one's environment. In 1986 researchers repeated the experiment by asking 25 experts for their definition of intelligence. The researchers received many different definitions: general adaptability to new problems in life; ability to engage in abstract thinking; adjustment to the environment; capacity for knowledge and knowledge possessed; general capacity for independence, originality, and productiveness in thinking; capacity to acquire capacity; apprehension of relevant relationships; ability to judge, to understand, and to reason; deduction of relationships; and innate, general cognitive ability.

People in the general population have somewhat different conceptions of intelligence than do most experts. Laypersons and the popular press tend to emphasize cleverness, common sense, practical problem solving ability, verbal ability, and interest in learning. In addition, many people think social competence is an important component of intelligence.

Most intelligence researchers define intelligence as what is measured by intelligence tests, but some scholars argue that this definition is inadequate and that intelligence is whatever abilities are valued by one's culture. According to this perspective, conceptions of intelligence vary from culture to culture. For example, North Americans often associate verbal and mathematical skills with intelligence, but some seafaring cultures in the islands of the South Pacific view spatial memory and navigational skills as markers of intelligence. Those who believe intelligence is culturally relative dispute the idea that any one test could fairly measure intelligence across different cultures. Others, however, view intelligence as a basic cognitive ability independent of culture.

In recent years, a number of theorists have argued that standard intelligence tests measure only a portion of the human abilities that could be considered aspects of intelligence. Other scholars believe that such tests accurately measure intelligence and that the lack of agreement on a definition of intelligence does not invalidate its measurement. In their view, intelligence is much like many scientific concepts that are accurately measured well before scientists understand what the measurement actually means. Gravity, temperature, and radiation are all examples of concepts that were measured before they were understood.

History of Intelligence TestingAmong the first to investigate individual differences in mental ability was a British scientist, Sir Frances Galton, who compared people based on their awards and accomplishments. This research convinced him that intelligence was inherited and led to further studies which involved evaluating individual differences in reaction time and range and specificity of the senses, which have since been shown to correlate with academic success.

A French psychologist, Alfred Binet, developed a test to accurately predict academic success when the French government asked him to help them determine which children in the public schools would have difficulty with formal education. He, and his colleague, Theodore Simon, found that tests of practical knowledge, memory, reasoning, vocabulary, and problem solving were better predictors of school success than the sensory tests used by Galton. Subjects were asked to perform simple commands and gestures, repeat spoken numbers, name objects in pictures, define common words, tell how two objects are different, and define abstract terms. Similar items are used in today�s intelligence tests.

Assuming that children all follow the same pattern of development but develop at different rates, Binet and Simon created the concept of mental age, whereby, for example, a child of any age who scored as well as an average twelve-year-old was said to have a mental age of twelve.

Binet’s test was not widely used in France, but Henry Goddard, director of a school for mentally challenged students, brought it to the United States, translated it into English, and used it to test people for mental retardation. Lewis Terman, another American psychologist, adapted the test for use with adults, established new standards for average ability at each age, and called it the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, because of his affiliation with Stanford University.

Instead of giving a person’s performance on the Stanford-Binet as a mental age, Terman converted performance into a single score, which he called the intelligence quotient, or IQ. A quotient is the number that results from dividing one number by another. The idea of an intelligence quotient was first suggested by German psychologist, William Stern, in 1912.  To compute IQ, Stern divided mental age by the actual, chronological age of the person taking the test and then multiplied by 100 to get rid of the decimal point. So, a child who was eight years old and answered the test questions as well as a twelve-year-old scored an intelligence quotient of 12/8 x 100, or 150. A twelve-year-old who answered the test questions as well as an average eight-year-old would have an IQ of 8/12 x 100, or 66.

This formula works well for comparing children, but since intelligence levels off in adulthood, it is not appropriate for adults. A thirty-year-old who answers questions as well as an average twenty-year-old would have an IQ of only 20/30 x 100, or 66.

So intelligence tests today no longer use the IQ formula. Instead, the score on a modern intelligence test compares a person�s performance with others his/her own age, while arbitrarily defining the average score as 100. By convention, most people still use the term IQ to refer to a score on an intelligence test.

Group Intelligence TestsBefore World War I, all intelligence tests were administered on a one to one basis. During the war, a group of psychologists, led by Robert M.Yerkes, developed two tests, one for English speakers, and one for non-English speakers or illiterates, which could be administered to groups of recruits to help the army determine the most effective placement of individuals. Highest scoring recruits were considered for officer training, and lowest scoring recruits were rejected from service.

Following the war, group tests were more popular. The National Intelligence Test, developed by Terman and Yerkes, was first used around 1920 to test school children. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) was introduced in 1926 to help colleges and universities screen prospective students.

Today individual and group intelligence tests are widely used in education, the military, and business.

Some of the Consciousness Exercises you will receive:

Inner Reality

All things are merely concepts within our minds.

Ultimate Self

Intellectually approaching your ultimate self.

Universal Consciousness

A technique for gaining the experience of Universal Consciousness.

Selecting Your Personality

A strong technique for enhancing personality with positivity.

Self Awareness

A strange essay composed of sentient sentences.

Unearthing Emotion

A powerful technique for unearthing deep emotions.

Automatic Creativity

The true, automatic nature of creativity.

Subtle Mind

An extremely powerful technique for enhancing consciousness.

Being God

How do we deal with being jaded?

Choice

Changing handedness temporarily as an exercise in taking control.

Consenting Adult Game

A fun game for adults.

A visit from God

A short visit from God allows the sacredness of life to be appreciated.

Now

"Now" is examined as a concept that is inconceivable.

Inner Witness

The difference between mind and the witness of it.

Sainthood, Step by Step

Starting along a path to perfection.

Summary: Understanding IQ

To understand IQ (Intelligence Quotient), you should first have an idea about what intelligence is - read various definitions.

IQ scores reflect general capacity for performing intellectual tasks, such as solving verbal and mathematical problems.

The average IQ score is 100.  The standard deviation of IQ scores is 15.  So, this means:

50% of people have IQ scores between 90 and 110 2.5% of people are very superior in intelligence (over 130) 2.5% of people are mentally deficient / impaired / retarded (under 70) 0.5% of people are near genius or genius (over 140)

IQ - Intelligence Quotient

IQ Resources

Convert SAT or GRE to IQ

Take Braingle's IQ Test

 

Intelligence is the mental ability to respond to new and changing situations in a purposeful way that demonstrates comprehension, learning, abstract thinking, and problem solving capabilities. An IQ is a number that attempts to measure a person's intelligence.

IQ tests are calibrated to give people with average intelligence a score of 100, with numbers above and below this following a Gaussian curve (see chart). As a result, most people will have an IQ that clusters around the middle of the graph, with a few people lying at the edges.

Correlation with Success

IQ is often measured because it correlates well with success in a variety of life events. People with high IQs generally finish a higher level of education, have bigger incomes, do better at their jobs, have lower violent crime rates and have better health. It should be noted that IQ seems to be independent of self-assessed levels of happiness.

IQ Tests

There are a number of standardized tests that attempt to measure a person's IQ, however there is some debate about the accuracy and validity of many of these tests. Several popular tests have been shown to be culturally biased. For example, someone who grew up in Asia and then took an English based IQ test might receive an inaccurate score. Some tests claim to correct for this problem.

The first IQ test was developed by a psychologist named Alfred Binet to help identify students who might need extra help in school. This test was later refined by Stanford Professor Lewis Terman into the "Stanford-Binet" test, which is still used today to identify gifted students.

The first test to measure intelligence in adults was designed by Dr. David Wechsler and was called the "Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale" (WAIS). He also created a test for children called the "Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children" (WISC). The unique thing about these tests is that they report separate scores for verbal and performance IQ. This gives the ability to judge intelligence independent of verbal ability. These tests are still in use today.

Multiple Intelligences

Some scientists argue that intelligence is such a complicated concept that comes in so many different flavors, that it is impossible to condense it all into a single number. One common theory, proposed by psychologist Howard Gardner, is that there are eight different types of intelligence: interpersonal, intrapersonal, kinesthetic, linguistic, logical, musical, naturalistic, and spatial.

Traditional IQ tests do a good job of measuring linguistic and logical intelligence, but they fail to measure intelligence in the other areas. For example, a virtuoso piano player or a gifted athlete may score low on a written IQ test, even though they may have a high intelligence in their area of expertise.

Good aptitude tests that demonstrate that these different types of intelligence are independent of each other have yet to be made.

Getting Tested

The most accurate way to get your IQ tested is to take an official IQ test given by a qualified professional. Many psychologists are trained to administer the test and it shouldn't be too difficult to locate one in your area.

There are a number of books, that you can find at a bookstore or library, with self-tests that you can take and score at home. While these are not official tests, they can give you a good idea of your IQ score. The Amazon.com box to the right may contain some useful books about IQ and IQ tests.

It is also possible to estimate your IQ from certain standardized test scores. Braingle's IQ calculator can estimate your IQ from SAT or GRE test scores.

It is also possible to estimate your IQ by taking Braingle's IQ test. This is not an official test, but it can give you a good idea of what you may score on an offical IQ test.