IQ: Ranges, Meaning, and Achievement

[xMathFanx]

IQ: Ranges, Meaning, and Achievement

This Thread is intended to present material on IQ research that will be explored by all members that wish to participate. Arguments both for and against (as well as neutral) are all welcome. If members have further research/findings they would like to present, by all means, please do so--any & all contributions are encouraged.

[Note: Due to character limitations, I will present some initial thoughts/posts immediately following the creation of this Thread]

 

[xMathFanx]

Part I:


Consider, a normal IQ score falls between the range 85-115 which is approximately 70% of the population (and only 15% of people have an IQ of 115 or above), while an extended average IQ range tends to encompass those between 80-119 which is "x"% of the population. In order to qualify for the International High IQ Society, one must have an IQ of 125 or above, while entry into Mensa (a High IQ organization that represents the upper 2% of the population) requires an IQ of 2 standard deviations above average (or 130 and above). For the lower end of the bell curve, this will be explored later on in the post (as well as a more proper breakdown of the rest of the distribution).

Now, what do these numbers mean? That is, in principle, what can one do with a 100 IQ? It turns out, many studies have been done linking average IQ scores to completion of College Majors, SAT scores, and GRE (set aside the problematic elements for a moment, of which we can explore later). As for College Majors, studies have revealed a strong correlation for between those who go far into/complete specific college majors and IQ. The breakdown is as follows:

Top End of Spectrum

-Physics & Astronomy (133)
-Mathematical Sciences (130)
-Philosophy (129)
-Materials Engineering (129)
-Economics (128)
-Chemical Engineering (128)
-Other Engineering (128)
-Mechanical Engineering (126)

Bottom End of Spectrum

-Administration (107)
-Home Economics (106)
-Special (106)
-Student Counseling (105)
-Early Childhood (104)
-Social Work (103)

In order to attend College and be successful, it was found that an IQ of 110-115 is standardly required. Now, if a person with a 110-115 IQ attempted to be a Physics & Astronomy major, it has been found that they would quickly run into trouble and likely have to drop out (or fail out) early on. However, they would be successful at other college majors, some of which were listed previously. Then, an individual with a 100 base IQ has been shown to not (currently) be able to attend college successfully.

To put this in practical terms, lets take the example of those with an IQ 2 standard deviations from the norm in the *adult population* (2% of the population), or Physics & Astronomy combined with Mathematical Sciences Majors (closely followed by Philosophy and certain Engineering Majors, but we will limit our discussion to those past the threshold). This indicates that if we took a random sampling of 100 adults, approximately 2 would have a mind currently capable of the "brain power" necessary to do Complex Analysis or Statistical Mechanics (which is in-line with Senior level Physics or Math major cognitive abilities). As for what a 115 IQ would look like in practical terms, such a person would (currently) struggle tremendously to get a Political Science degree if they were able to attain it at all (IQ 120), while they would be able to get a degree in Business (114), Education (110), ect. See list here for more details: [https://thetab.com/us/2017/04/10/whi...ghest-iq-64811)

 

[xMathFanx]

Part II:

Now, IQ links to Standardized Tests such as the SAT and GRE are quite interesting as well--let us proceed with investigating the case of SAT scores. We will use the 1600 score standard (Note: a link to conversions between 2400 to 1600 score standards will be provided under *Sources* if one were curious). Consider, a score of 925 on the SAT (is claimed) to translate to a base 100 IQ. Here is an outline mapping out key points on the Bell Curve:

IQ, SAT, Meaning

- 55, 400, Trainable Moderate Mental Retardation
- 66, 525, Mild Mental Retardation
- 75, 630, Borderline Mental Retardation
- 87, 775, Dull
- 100, 935, Average
- 113, 1100, Bright
- 120, 1200, Very Bright
- 130, 1310, Extremely Bright
- 141, 1445, Briliant
- 151, 1575, Very Brilliant

For convenience, a few figures converted to the 2400 point scale (conversion chart here- [https://blog.prepscholar.com/new-sat...00-to-new-1600) ):

IQ, SAT

- 75, 820
- 87, 1020
- 100, 1260
- 113, 1510
- 120, 1670
- 130, 1840
- 141, 2070
- 151, 2340

[Note: There are various IQ scales, some reach to numbers higher well higher to this, this is a Standard Scale, others could be used with similar (though varying in extent) results]
Follow this link to find an IQ Reference Table which outlines IQ ranges and typical corresponding abilities:

[https://www.easycalculation.com/medi...core-table.php)
Below is a transcription of the outline (IQ range, Category, Typical Ability):

1. 0-24
Profound Mental Retardation
Limited or no ability to communicate, eat, bath, dress and toilet.

2. 25-39
Severe Mental Retardation
Limited ability to communicate, eat, bath, dress and toilet. No academic skills.

3. 40-54
Moderate Mental Retardation
Some independent self-help skills and very basic academic skills.

4. 55-69
Mild Mental Retardation
Usually able to dress/bath independently and can do simple jobs. Elementary school academics.

5. 70-79
Border Line
May live independently with difficulties. Can perform simple and repetitive jobs.

6. 80-89
Low Average
Can complete vocational education and live independently.

7. 90-109
Average
Can complete high school graduation and college with difficulty.

8. 110-119
High Average
Typical level of college graduates.

9. 120-129
Superior
Typical level of persons with doctoral degrees.


10. 130-144
Gifted
Capable of understanding highly, complex academic material.

11. 145-159
Genius
Exception intellectual ability and capable of looking beyond known facts.

12. 160-175
Extraordinary genius
Extraordinary talent like Albert Einstein

Sources

1. www.iqcomparisonsite.com/oldSATIQ.aspx
2. [https://www.statisticbrain.com/iq-es...college-major/)
3. What Is An IQ Test? What Is A High IQ Score?
4. [https://www.123test.com/interpretati...f-an-iq-score/)
5. [https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/12/16...q-equivalents/)
6. [https://steemit.com/education/@chhay...is-is-the-case)
7. [https://thetab.com/us/2017/04/10/whi...ghest-iq-64811)
8. [https://blog.prepscholar.com/new-sat...00-to-new-1600)
9. [https://www.easycalculation.com/medi...core-table.php)
10. [https://www.easycalculation.com/medi...core-table.php)
11. Academic achievement, income, IQ
12. Average IQ of students by college major and gender ratio | Dr. Randal S. Olson

 

[CLAX1911]

IQ: Ranges, Meaning, and Achievement

This Thread is intended to present material on IQ research that will be explored by all members that wish to participate. Arguments both for and against (as well as neutral) are all welcome. If members have further research/findings they would like to present, by all means, please do so--any & all contributions are encouraged.

[Note: Due to character limitations, I will present some initial thoughts/posts immediately following the creation of this Thread]

IQ is not really a big deal. It really illustrates potential. Some would say that I waste my IQ. I could go be a professor or some other god aweful waste of life type career because of my intelligence quotient.

Back when they tested my IQ it was high on abstract thinking. I don't really know how they measure that I never found it important.

A much more important aspect to achievement is perseverance. I would say attitude, aptitude and will are much more important than IQ as well.

Even if you have a high IQ it isn't easy to get out of life what you want.

 

[Grand Mal]

IQ: Ranges, Meaning, and Achievement

This Thread is intended to present material on IQ research that will be explored by all members that wish to participate. Arguments both for and against (as well as neutral) are all welcome. If members have further research/findings they would like to present, by all means, please do so--any & all contributions are encouraged.

[Note: Due to character limitations, I will present some initial thoughts/posts immediately following the creation of this Thread]

Well, since I've never seen a definition of 'intelligence' that seems adequate, I'm saying there's no way to quantify it. You can't measure something if you can't say where it starts and stops. What IQ numbers do, in my opinion, is offer a prediction of ability to learn. What's done with that ability can be wildly different between individuals with identical numbers.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

The problem with so called IQ tests is that if you practice them you get better at them. Thus invalidating them. But it makes some people feel better about themselves.

 

[celticwar17]

The problem with so called IQ tests is that if you practice them you get better at them. Thus invalidating them. But it makes some people feel better about themselves.

They are an extremely accurate means of determining success.... in fact, it is the statistic that has the largest correlation to success in America.... even more-so than born wealth.


By dismissing IQ tests you dismiss the entire discipline of Psychology... accurate IQ tests is the largest achievement in the field... it is used in every facet of the field... and is used in countless applications.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

They are an extremely accurate means of determining success.... in fact, it is the statistic that has the largest correlation to success in America.... even more-so than born wealth.


By dismissing IQ tests you dismiss the entire discipline of Psychology... accurate IQ tests is the largest achievement in the field... it is used in every facet of the field... and is used in countless applications.

No by dismissing IQ tests I dismiss pseudoscience. It is anecdotal to use IQ scores in relation to success. Obviously the main other factor would be that those successful people you are talking about attending higher education. They are merely well versed in taking tests.

 

[Taylor]

It's more complicated than that, for two people with the same IQ score might have different strengths in the underlying ability scores, as will the same person throughout their lifespan.

IQ is also not an immutable characteristic. For most tests, the more eduction you have, the higher your score is going to be.

 

[xMathFanx]

No by dismissing IQ tests I dismiss pseudoscience. It is anecdotal to use IQ scores in relation to success. Obviously the main other factor would be that those successful people you are talking about attending higher education. They are merely well versed in taking tests.

The general argument Celtic is referring is along these lines (Celtic, please correct me if you think I am doing this an injustice):

1. Those with Higher IQ's tend to do better on the SATs
2. Those who tend to do better on the SAT's tend to get into bigger/more elite schools where they choose and succeed at more challenging College Majors (such as the ones listed in my OP--e.g. STEM, ect.)
3. Those more challenging College Majors (e.g. Engineering, Physical Sciences, Mathematical Sciences, ect.) tend to pay much more than less challenging majors
4. Therefore, those with Higher IQ's tend to be more successful Academically and Monetarily in life compared to those with lower IQ's

 

[xMathFanx]

IQ is also not an immutable characteristic. For most tests, the more eduction you have, the higher your score is going to be.

@Taylor

Good observation

Yes, there are strong indications that intelligence is by no means a static ability, but rather dynamic and open to change (for both better or worse) due to Neuroplasticity. Having said that, people are born with particular "hardware" on a spectrum of "lowest grade" to "highest grade", which does introduce some constraints to the equation

 

[celticwar17]

No by dismissing IQ tests I dismiss pseudoscience. It is anecdotal to use IQ scores in relation to success. Obviously the main other factor would be that those successful people you are talking about attending higher education. They are merely well versed in taking tests.

Children take IQ tests... with no experience to make it as unbiased as possible... and that is when IQ tests are most effective. But even outside of that, IQ tests cover many different abilities and people who intentionally study for an IQ test are in the significant minority.

You seem to be ignorant about the process.

 

[celticwar17]

The general argument Celtic is referring is along these lines (Celtic, please correct me if you think I am doing this an injustice):

1. Those with Higher IQ's tend to do better on the SATs
2. Those who tend to do better on the SAT's tend to get into bigger/more elite schools where they choose and succeed at more challenging College Majors (such as the ones listed in my OP--e.g. STEM, ect.)
3. Those more challenging College Majors (e.g. Engineering, Physical Sciences, Mathematical Sciences, ect.) tend to pay much more than less challenging majors
4. Therefore, those with Higher IQ's tend to be more successful Academically and Monetarily in life compared to those with lower IQ's

People IQ tested as children... have a higher correlation with success in adulthood than any other characteristic. It predicts success more than any other factor.... it certainly isn't the ONLY factor. But it is the factor that has the highest correlation.

 

[xMathFanx]

Children take IQ tests... with no experience..

Yes, an issue with this tends to be that children's brains are nowhere near matured/fully developed yet. Thus, in some ways, it is almost as though people are being tested for their physical abilities before they hit puberty.

If one were curious in "ball-parking" their IQ, one should match their general academic accomplishments against the outlines given (as Psychology research suggests them to be quite robust in this respect). That is, for example, if one were under the impression that they had an IQ in the mid to high 80s, but was able to successfully attend College, this would strongly suggest your previous estimates were wrong and you truly fall roughly in the 110-115 range (minimum). Conversely, if one were under the impression that they had a 140+ IQ, attempted to go to College for Engineering and dropped out/failed out early on due to extreme rigor of the program, this would strongly suggest that your true IQ is markedly below the 128ish mark (or else they quite likely would have succeed into making it to the Senior level courses for the major or Graduating).

 

[xMathFanx]

People IQ tested as children... have a higher correlation with success in adulthood than any other characteristic. It predicts success more than any other factor.... it certainly isn't the ONLY factor. But it is the factor that has the highest correlation.

The term "children" here is quite loose, as the most reliable set tends to be from SAT score which occur around age 16-18. Legitimate, full length IQ tests are very expensive, very lengthy, ect. thus, other methods (such as SAT, GRE scores, ect.) are regularly employed as substitutes

 

[celticwar17]

Yes, an issue with this tends to be that children's brains are nowhere near matured/fully developed yet. Thus, in some ways, it is almost as though people are being tested for their physical abilities before they hit puberty.

If one were curious in "ball-parking" their IQ, one should match their general academic accomplishments against the outlines given (as Psychology research suggests them to be quite robust in this respect). That is, for example, if one were under the impression that they had an IQ in the mid to high 80s, but was able to successfully attend College, this would strongly suggest your previous estimates were wrong and you truly fall roughly in the 110-115 range (minimum). Conversely, if one were under the impression that they had a 140+ IQ, attempted to go to College for Engineering and dropped out/failed out early on due to extreme rigor of the program, this would strongly suggest that your true IQ is markedly below the 128ish mark (or else they quite likely would have succeed into making it to the Senior level courses for the major or Graduating).

But the high correlation with success actually counters your assumption. It does not seem to be an issue that childrens brains are not fully developed... childrens IQ tend to correlate to adulthood success and adult IQ... again, more than ANY other factor. Just because it is possible for one's IQ to change or increase, does not mean that the overwhelming majorities doesn't, there are exceptions without a doubt and any one individual can be an exception.

Of course it is not perfect, it is not a test to see if you will never do anything worthwhile in your life.... It is a tool to help you, the government, psychologists, and researchers...it is a real phenomenon, that has real life consequences.

IQ is actually kind of a truth hurts concept. It's kind of unfortunate the world works this way

 

[xMathFanx]

But the high correlation with success actually counters your assumption. It does not seem to be an issue that childrens brains are not fully developed... childrens IQ tend to correlate to adulthood success and adult IQ... again, more than ANY other factor. Just because it is possible for one's IQ to increase, does not mean that the overwhelming majorities doesn't, there are exceptions without a doubt and any one individual can be an exception.

Of course it is not perfect, it is not a test to see if you will never do anything worthwhile in your life.... It is a tool to help you, the government, psychologists, and researchers.

@Celtic

See my other/previous post for my response here

 

[celticwar17]

The term "children" here is quite loose, as the most reliable set tends to be from SAT score which occur around age 16-18. Legitimate, full length IQ tests are very expensive, very lengthy, ect. thus, other methods (such as SAT, GRE scores, ect.) are regularly employed as substitutes

I am aware they are substitutes. I am not mentioning or talking about them whatsoever...I am talking about scientific research done on children and adults with REAL IQ tests. Which, you are correct are significantly more extensive than SAT or GRE tests.
I was never talking about those tests.

 

[xMathFanx]

IQ is actually kind of a truth hurts concept. It's kind of unfortunate the world works this way

@Celtic

I tend to think most people who do not know too much about IQ would be somewhat pleasantly surprised to find out the scaling (i.e. where they rank), since many people who attend a typical College major, for instance Business, may not have known that more or less necessitates an IQ of 115 (rather than a + or - 15-20pt. distribution around the 100 mark--which appear to be people's general intuition, then they worry they may be "below 100"). Conversely, people in STEM tend not to care as they know their subject area requires at minimum "above average" intelligence to do--and aren't surprised when they see the Study results more or less line up with that perception.

Also, these scores are subject to change significantly with training, as the brain is capable of rewiring its own architecture. However, there are constraints, and this certainly doesn't mean one can turn themselves into some Godly amalgamation of Newton, Euler, Lebinez, Ramanajun, Darwin, Curie, ect. Rather, if one is born in a healthy, average range, there are a lot of possibilities open to them provided they are willing to train for it (or even recognize that it is something they can train). If no training occurs, then they will stay at their "stock" IQ number, and their "success" in life will be highly predictable in that categorization.

 

[xMathFanx]

I am aware they are substitutes. I am not mentioning or talking about them whatsoever...I am talking about scientific research done on children and adults with REAL IQ tests. Which, you are correct are significantly more extensive than SAT or GRE tests.
I was never talking about those tests.

@Celtic

I understand, it is just that those studies are far more limited than the expansive (SAT, ect.) counterparts due to the monetary, time, ect. burden. Thus, much/most of the research is coming from these alternatives that are attempted to be connected with the full-length models (legitimate, full-length IQ test data)

 

[celticwar17]

@Celtic

I tend to think most people who do not know too much about IQ would be somewhat pleasantly surprised to find out the scaling (i.e. where they rank), since many people who attend a typical College major, for instance Business, may not have known that more or less necessitates an IQ of 115 (rather than a + or - 15-20pt. distribution around the 100 mark--which appear to be people's general intuition, then they worry they may be "below 100"). Conversely, people in STEM tend not to care as they know their subject area requires at minimum "above average" intelligence to do--and aren't surprised when they see the Study results more or less line up with that perception.

Also, these scores are subject to change significantly with training, as the brain is capable of rewiring its own architecture. However, there are constraints, and this certainly doesn't mean one can turn themselves into some Godly amalgamation of Newton, Euler, Lebinez, Ramanajun, Darwin, Curie, ect. Rather, if one is born in a healthy, average range, there are a lot of possibilities open to them provided they are willing to train for it (or even recognize that it is something they can train). If no training occurs, then they will stay at their "stock" IQ number, and their "success" in life will be highly predictable in that categorization.

Frankly I do not think that works... In General, you cannot increase your IQ with any sort of reliability... You can certainly learn more and gain more knowledge(which will help you become more successful in all sorts of ways)... and maybe eat better and exercise to make sure your body is operating to the best efficiency you can, which may have well impacted your IQ in the first place. IQ is not a measure of knowledge. And Knowledge is power.... You can actually be incredibly ignorant but still have an extremely high IQ(though it is less likely the case to be so)


What you can do... is specifically train for IQ tests... and try to get a higher score... though, that might be fun... it's just breaking the test and doesn't mean anything about your future.

 

[celticwar17]

@Celtic

I understand, it is just that those studies are far more limited than the expansive (SAT, ect.) counterparts due to the monetary, time, ect. burden. Thus, much/most of the research is coming from these alternatives that are attempted to be connected with the full-length models (legitimate, full-length IQ test data)

But if we are talking about acute accuracy, the real IQ tests are the only ones worth talking about if we want to talk about authenticity.

It is incorrect to use the SAT as an IQ test equivalent... it does not measure IQ... though people with a high IQ tend to do better on IQ tests... so it's correlated, but not perfectly correlated.

If you want base this on peoples SAT score does not mean you can't become successful and much smarter in your future life... absolutely... because SAT is an imperfect IQ test... though no IQ test is perfect, it is among the lessor precise ones out there.... it's not a reliable indicator of IQ.

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

Children take IQ tests... with no experience to make it as unbiased as possible... and that is when IQ tests are most effective. But even outside of that, IQ tests cover many different abilities and people who intentionally study for an IQ test are in the significant minority.

You seem to be ignorant about the process.

Put your IQ back your pants.

So I take it that you believe in IQ tests being legitimate? (Please take the time to read my signature....no exit required here)

 

[Lethargic Aptitude]

The general argument Celtic is referring is along these lines (Celtic, please correct me if you think I am doing this an injustice):

1. Those with Higher IQ's tend to do better on the SATs
2. Those who tend to do better on the SAT's tend to get into bigger/more elite schools where they choose and succeed at more challenging College Majors (such as the ones listed in my OP--e.g. STEM, ect.)
3. Those more challenging College Majors (e.g. Engineering, Physical Sciences, Mathematical Sciences, ect.) tend to pay much more than less challenging majors
4. Therefore, those with Higher IQ's tend to be more successful Academically and Monetarily in life compared to those with lower IQ's

Yes I gathered that from his post. But thank you for trying to translate down to me.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

There's the old saw about how there are probably several thousand people who tested at 135 and above who deliver pizzas or drive cab for a living due to the fact that IQ testing alone is not a good enough means of determining overall intelligence.