...

[uumlau]

I took the IQ test once, way back in the day. Was pleased with the results. Will never take it again lest I risk fucking up said results and ruining my self-image

You make IQ sounds like quantum mechanics: the measurement affects the reality.

 

[SearchingforPeace]

I read in one of Malcolm Gladwell' books that there is a law of diminishing returns in IQ. Once you hit around 125 ( I can't remember the exact number), you are not more successful the higher you go. In fact, an IQ too high could interfere with your earnings potential....

 

[Bush]

You make IQ sounds like quantum mechanics: the measurement affects the reality.

It's also like statics: one tiny adjustment at pretty much any spot on a (literal) house of cards will fuck up the forces holding all of your trusses in equilibrium and so the whole thing will collapse and then you have a huge God damned mess on your hands

Let's take the analogy much, much further than it needs to go, because yeah why not

Like, leave it standing there. Back away. It's good as is. Just walk away. It might collapse shortly afterward, but as far as you know it's still standing forever. Just don't look back at it. Ever.

Was sheer luck on your side when you built the thing? Could you do it again? Just.. don't seek out the answers to those questions. It's good, it's good.

 

[EcK]

The IQ test focuses too much on math for me. I took it once and got like an 80. I don't consider myself an unintelligent person.

Nobody does
[MENTION=23583]21lux[/MENTION] ps: i didn't mean that in a bad way, but it's funny something that is supposed to be an attempt to quantify and clarify so often just turns into a clash of egos in the end.

 

[Yama]

Nobody does
[MENTION=23583]21lux[/MENTION] ps: i didn't mean that in a bad way, but it's funny something that is supposed to be an attempt to quantify and clarify so often just turns into a clash of egos in the end.

Oh I knew you didn't mean it in a bad way, don't worry.
I mean, if the IQ test was heavily English based instead of math based I'd be well over 100. There are so many different kinds of intelligence. It's so hard to try to shove everyone into a very limited box and assign them a number that tells them how "smart" they are. There's three different outcomes: people score low and feel like idiots, people score high and think they're 3cool5school, and the ones who just don't care, regardless of score.
I have no idea how IQ would correlate with MBTI type, or if that's even useful information. It's only as useful as you believe IQ (or MBTI for that matter) to be.

 

[EcK]

Oh I knew you didn't mean it in a bad way, don't worry.
I mean, if the IQ test was heavily English based instead of math based I'd be well over 100. There are so many different kinds of intelligence. It's so hard to try to shove everyone into a very limited box and assign them a number that tells them how "smart" they are. There's three different outcomes: people score low and feel like idiots, people score high and think they're 3cool5school, and the ones who just don't care, regardless of score.
I have no idea how IQ would correlate with MBTI type, or if that's even useful information. It's only as useful as you believe IQ (or MBTI for that matter) to be.

Well there are a few studies on it. Seeming to indicate there is indeed a correlation. Types like INTJs, INFJs, INTP, ENTP (etc.)are significantly more likely to have iqs in the 'gifted' range (130 or above)

for example

For example an ENFP is over 7 times more likely to have an iq over 130 than an esfp.
I'm not making any judgment call on that, just what the research say. Now there haven't been hundreds of papers on the topic, but still quite a few and all seem to agree on these trends.

 

[Yama]

Well there are a few studies on it. Seeming to indicate there is indeed a correlation. Types like INTJs, INFJs, INTP, ENTP (etc.) have higher are much more like (2 or more times likely than the population taken as a whole) to have iqs in the 'gifted' range (130 or above)

Interesting. Do you know of any tests similar to the IQ test that test the types on different areas of intelligence, like artistic/verbal/etc intelligence? Perhaps there is a correlation between the different types and their strongest/most preferred type of intelligence.

 

[EcK]

Interesting. Do you know of any tests similar to the IQ test that test the types on different areas of intelligence, like artistic/verbal/etc intelligence? Perhaps there is a correlation between the different types and their strongest/most preferred type of intelligence.

That's an excellent question. Yeah there are tests like that (to a degree) but they all have complicated names and I forgot : P sorry.
Alot of tests attempting to do that are, in my opinion, horseshit. But I'm sure there are some very good ones. if you come accross any I'd be interested to see! : )

I know the SAT scores on average are highly correlated with IQ and both are correlated with socio economics. IQ is correlated with brain size (0.4 factor I think) (keep in mind brain size is also relative to body size, women have smaller brains but they also have smaller bodies, so need less 'body management' related neurons' women and men are as intelligent as the other iq wise)

Men are more likely to be in the extremes of the spectrum (retarded or genius levels), which I think it due to women having two X chromosomes and (at least a few) iq related genes being on the X chromosomes - It's like flipping a coin, imagine one side is 0 and the other is 1, if you have more coin flips (ie 'iq' related genes both 'good' and 'bad') you are more likely to get an average score near to 0.5. Same with IQ: it makes you more likely to be 'closer to the average'.
It's a SMALL trend of course. Just interesting I think.

Women are better at making both sides of their brain work together through a better physical connection between the two brains (yeah it's that simple : P )

High iq seem correlated with myelination of the prefrontal cortex (maybe other areas) - meaning their neurons are better at 'conducting messages' without loss of signal quality and with less 'energy expenditure'. This makes a brain able to create more complex activation patterns (ie - simplifiying - Ideas).

Now for having spent 2 years in a 'gifted class' I had the feeling there are more than one way to get the same iq. Say if u have a very good memory that will up ur score. Someone else can get the same score with a different mix of features. I saw my share of 'idiot savants' and people i'd genuinely call smart. (though i realize that's just my opinion).

I do find (again, take into account im just one person so i have bias even if i try not to) that IQ seems to me to be related to being 'intelligent'
But I always saw intelligence as a choice, the willingness to question and understand. I will often/have often called/considered guys with genius level iqs to be idiots and have alot of respect for people who technically are 'not smart' iq wise. I think wisedom is a form of elegance of simplicity, You don't need to be able to create crazy complex ideas to capture the simple and beautiful truths of life.
. At the end of the day we're all people, all unique. it sounds cliche but it's true.

High iq of course has its issues - i think its correlated with schizophrenia (really not sure, read that long ago), and being 'off the average' in society can be an issue when it comes to healthy socialization. etc.

Lots of things.

 

[Yama]

I do find (again, take into account im just one person so i have bias even if i try not to) that IQ seems to me to be related to being 'intelligent'
But I always saw intelligence as a choice, the willingness to question and understand. I will often/have often called/considered guys with genius level iqs to be idiots and have alot of respect for people who technically are 'not smart' iq wise. I think wisedom is a form of elegance of simplicity, You don't need to be able to create crazy complex ideas to capture the simple and beautiful truths of life.
. At the end of the day we're all people, all unique. it sounds cliche but it's true.

This reminds me of something I always thought about in school, which is that people with bad grades aren't dumb, just lazy (or depressed, or some other factor that is inhibiting them or their motivation). In junior high I got terrible grades but when my teachers threatened to hold me back I improved them all to passing grades within a week. I also think all people have the ability to learn any subject, but that it comes much more naturally to some than to others. Like I said before, I suck at math. I'm sure if I tried long and hard enough, and found a good enough teacher that helped me in a way specific to me and my learning needs, I could succeed in math (and would therefore probably improve my IQ score). But since it doesn't come naturally to me, and I don't enjoy it, and don't plan in signing up for a career that involves a lot of it, I find no reason to teach myself any more than the basics, which I guess could be considered laziness. Thus this "laziness" affects my IQ score (lowering it). Very interesting stuff.

 

[EcK]

This reminds me of something I always thought about in school, which is that people with bad grades aren't dumb, just lazy (or depressed, or some other factor that is inhibiting them or their motivation). In junior high I got terrible grades but when my teachers threatened to hold me back I improved them all to passing grades within a week. I also think all people have the ability to learn any subject, but that it comes much more naturally to some than to others. Like I said before, I suck at math. I'm sure if I tried long and hard enough, and found a good enough teacher that helped me in a way specific to me and my learning needs, I could succeed in math (and would therefore probably improve my IQ score). But since it doesn't come naturally to me, and I don't enjoy it, and don't plan in signing up for a career that involves a lot of it, I find no reason to teach myself any more than the basics, which I guess could be considered laziness. Thus this "laziness" affects my IQ score (lowering it). Very interesting stuff.

Lots of high iq scorers suck at math. Im not sure it influences iq scores so much? I had mine (full official etc test) when i was about 12 and i was dragged there at 6.30/45 am before an exam i hadnt prepared for and while still sick with the flue. So its a bit hazy to me. Sometimes i still wonder what kind of insane perspon starts a consultations so early in the morning.

 

[Hawthorne]

Replaying to main. Not convo in progress. This has probably already been hashed but w/e.

IQ tests almost exclusively measure mathematical, deductive, and spatial reasoning skills via abstract representations and pattern recognition. Types that are associated with those specific kinds of intelligences and skills will, as a group, outperform those who aren't. Individual variations are a given.

Reiterating: IQ tests only measure specific intelligences. The same ones that intimidate and are often excessively overvalued because of it. Just like MBTI tests are only capable of giving approximations of cognition style based on a limited set of arbitrarily valuable traits, IQ does the same to determine general intellectual capacity.

So basically: Old shit, nothing new.

Interesting thought: Everyone (except nerds) take these tests "cold". I wonder how much studying can improve one's score. 10, 20, 30 points? Can Average Joe go MENSA in a year?

 

[uumlau]

Replaying to main. Not convo in progress. This has probably already been hashed but w/e.

IQ tests almost exclusively measure mathematical, deductive, and spatial reasoning skills via abstract representations and pattern recognition. Types that are associated with those specific kinds of intelligences and skills will, as a group, outperform those who aren't. Individual variations are a given.

Reiterating: IQ tests only measure specific intelligences. The same ones that intimidate and are often excessively overvalued because of it. Just like MBTI tests are only capable of giving approximations of cognition style based on a limited set of arbitrarily valuable traits, IQ does the same to determine general intellectual capacity.

So basically: Old shit, nothing new.

Interesting thought: Everyone (except nerds) take these tests "cold". I wonder how much studying can improve one's score. 10, 20, 30 points? Can Average Joe go MENSA in a year?

Yes, a lot of what comprises IQ is learned. The notion that it is somehow innate is wishful thinking on the part of those who design such tests. In this, it's kind of like MBTI tests, as well: you end up measuring a lot of things that affect your measurements but have nothing to do with what you're trying to measure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

It's been known for a while that what one might regard as "average IQ" has been going up for the past century, by about 30 points. The main guess as to why is that we teach abstract reasoning much more broadly now, and abstract reasoning ability is what IQ tests measure, and abstract reasoning is what the S/N axis of MBTI measures ... oh ... wait ...

 

[SearchingforPeace]

Interestingly enough, I had a conversation on IQ tests last night with my ENTJ friend.

He said that in high school, he scored a 165 on an IQ test. He did the same later. In no way is he a super genius, but he is a pretty intelligent guy over all. For him, spatial reasoning is extremely easy. He doesn't even think about the questions for a second. The answers are just obvious to him, and he scores 100% in that section, with minimal time required.

The tests are somewhat limited....

 

[uumlau]

Interestingly enough, I had a conversation on IQ tests last night with my ENTJ friend.

He said that in high school, he scored a 165 on an IQ test. He did the same later. In no way is he a super genius, but he is a pretty intelligent guy over all. For him, spatial reasoning is extremely easy. He doesn't even think about the questions for a second. The answers are just obvious to him, and he scores 100% in that section, with minimal time required.

The tests are somewhat limited....

It REALLY depends on which IQ test.

For comparison purposes, I find SAT/GRE scores to be much more reliable, since anyone who went to college (or tried to go to college) took those, thus it's a good common ground. It's actually impossible to get a "165" IQ equivalent on SAT/GRE, because in spite of testing millions upon millions of people, the highest scores don't resolve that top 0.1% very well. If your friend did NOT get perfect SAT/GRE scores, then no, there is no chance he is 160 or higher.

To put things in perspective, I went to a very prestigious college, got a PhD in physics, and my SAT/GRE scores, while not perfect, put me at three standard deviations above the average (about 150 IQ, assuming 15 points per standard deviation). Most people I meet who claim 150 or 160 and I also ask their SAT score, have the equivalent of about a 130: really smart, and smarter than 98% of people, but not stratospherically smart as implied by their (often found on the internet) "IQ test".'

 

[SearchingforPeace]

It REALLY depends on which IQ test.

For comparison purposes, I find SAT/GRE scores to be much more reliable, since anyone who went to college (or tried to go to college) took those, thus it's a good common ground. It's actually impossible to get a "165" IQ equivalent on SAT/GRE, because in spite of testing millions upon millions of people, the highest scores don't resolve that top 0.1% very well. If your friend did NOT get perfect SAT/GRE scores, then no, there is no chance he is 160 or higher.

To put things in perspective, I went to a very prestigious college, got a PhD in physics, and my SAT/GRE scores, while not perfect, put me at three standard deviations above the average (about 150 IQ, assuming 15 points per standard deviation). Most people I meet who claim 150 or 160 and I also ask their SAT score, have the equivalent of about a 130: really smart, and smarter than 98% of people, but not stratospherically smart as implied by their (often found on the internet) "IQ test".'

I completely agree. I was just pointing out how distorted some tests can get. All tests are only as good as they are designed. Some things are really hard to be measured.

Having natural intelligence means little if you don't develop it. The two other kids I thought were as smart as me in my elementary school grade stopped achieving in middle school. Neither one finished college. Both abused a lot of drugs...... sad things....

 

[Poki]

It REALLY depends on which IQ test.

For comparison purposes, I find SAT/GRE scores to be much more reliable, since anyone who went to college (or tried to go to college) took those, thus it's a good common ground. It's actually impossible to get a "165" IQ equivalent on SAT/GRE, because in spite of testing millions upon millions of people, the highest scores don't resolve that top 0.1% very well. If your friend did NOT get perfect SAT/GRE scores, then no, there is no chance he is 160 or higher.

To put things in perspective, I went to a very prestigious college, got a PhD in physics, and my SAT/GRE scores, while not perfect, put me at three standard deviations above the average (about 150 IQ, assuming 15 points per standard deviation). Most people I meet who claim 150 or 160 and I also ask their SAT score, have the equivalent of about a 130: really smart, and smarter than 98% of people, but not stratospherically smart as implied by their (often found on the internet) "IQ test".'

My IQ tests really high, around 150-165 is the range from online and paid tests. I enjoy mensa challenges as long as they are analytical in nature and not how many words can you make out of these letters. graduated in bottom quarter of class and got a 1200 on SATs. I didn't study, I didn't even try in school. It all bored the crap outta. I slept through some classes to the point where the teacher stopped calling on me.

I also gave up on college when I made as much with an associates as someone with a bachelor's makes out of college. I also progressed just as quick and also worked my way to the lead surrounded by people with bachelors who all think I am a genius and they are mere mortals. Not to mention my degree is in electronics and my field is computer programming. I am completely self taught in programming.

 

[uumlau]

My IQ tests really high, around 150-165 is the range from online and paid tests. I enjoy mensa challenges as long as they are analytical in nature and not how many words can you make out of these letters. graduated in bottom quarter of class and got a 1200 on SATs. I didn't study, I didn't even try in school. It all bored the crap outta. I slept through some classes to the point where the teacher stopped calling on me.

I also gave up on college when I made as much with an associates as someone with a bachelor's makes out of college. I also progressed just as quick and also worked my way to the lead surrounded by people with bachelors who all think I am a genius and they are mere mortals. Not to mention my degree is in electronics and my field is computer programming. I am completely self taught in programming.

Yeah, SATs are more "reliable" than IQ tests (very large sample size!), but aren't as valid w/r to IQ, as they require an education context to be representative.

Also, I suspect you're typical of ISTPs in that they tend to be severely underestimated, academically speaking, because their intellectual strengths aren't strictly academic (especially w/r to the SFJ and STJ varieties of academics).

 

[Chrysanthe]

INxP: I used to be somewhat intelligent. But I've never been as mentally lazy as I am now. I actually fare quite well on IQ tests and maybe even the SAT/ACT compared to the rest of America (whatever that means) but my theoretical brain potential doesn't really appear anywhere else.

 

[Neshama]

Strictly speaking of IQ it's likely INTP. Research seems to suggest that thinkers have a higher average number of gifted individuals than related feeler types, like INTPs compared to INFPs, but both of those types in particular have a high percentage of gifted individuals.
Here is a chart.

And a link for a discussion of why.

Which Is The Smartest MBTI Type? | Slayerment

Keep in mind that people from all personality types can be gifted, but we're talking about averages. Also, real world success and IQ aren't the same. Extroverts with high emotional intelligence and a positive attitude tend to have higher paying jobs on average.

MBTI Socioeconomic Infographic | Career Assessment Site

One reason INTJs may seem like the smartest type, and they are up there, is because INTPs don't apply themselves to real world accomplishments as often, so you have a higher number of visible INTJ intellectuals. ISTPs are a nice mix of outgoing and competitive, with Ti dominance, so again you get a higher number of public figures, like Steve Jobs, who many think was an ISTP.

 

[uumlau]

Strictly speaking of IQ it's likely INTP. Research seems to suggest that thinkers have a higher average number of gifted individuals than related feeler types, like INTPs compared to INFPs, but both of those types in particular have a high percentage of gifted individuals.
Here is a chart.

And a link for a discussion of why.

Which Is The Smartest MBTI Type? | Slayerment

Keep in mind that people from all personality types can be gifted, but we're talking about averages. Also, real world success and IQ aren't the same. Extroverts with high emotional intelligence and a positive attitude tend to have higher paying jobs on average.

MBTI Socioeconomic Infographic | Career Assessment Site

One reason INTJs may seem like the smartest type, and they are up there, is because INTPs don't apply themselves to real world accomplishments as often, so you have a higher number of visible INTJ intellectuals. ISTPs are a nice mix of outgoing and competitive, with Ti dominance, so again you get a higher number of public figures, like Steve Jobs, who many think was an ISTP.

Most of this data has been discussed elsewhere on this forum and others. The main problem is that it didn't test to see if people were gifted or not, but rather conducted a survey on a "gifted" program. These were the people who were interested in being a part of a gifted program. I'm sorry, I cannot imagine even the most gifted and intelligent ESFP teenagers being "interested" in a gifted program on average, though obviously some will be.

The monetary statistics come from an online site whose tests survey the respondents. Problem number 1 is that it asked for "household" income, not personal income. Problem number 2 is that there is no controlling for age/experience. I can imagine plenty of younger, single people just starting out in life, and of these, the ones investigating typology are going to be the INxx types. And I can imagine plenty of older, married, established people having to discover their MBTI type as part of a "team building" exercise at their place of work. So yeah, you're going to get a lot of INxx types looking like they're financially struggling (they're predominantly kids in college or just out of college) while the ESxx types who wouldn't look into typology unless explicitly told to finally do so as part of work later in life when they have plenty of money. It should be possible to publish results that correct for age, but I doubt that's going to happen. Not that it would reverse the trends you see here, but it would make them much less drastic.

This doesn't mean that the conclusions drawn from these flawed sets of data are incorrect, per se. They're just not as strongly supported by the data as people might think. Keep in mind, these same two sets of data are brought up over and over again in threads like these. No one is actually doing any research on the topic. While the statistics do use many data points, we conceptually have only two data points: these two flawed studies. They're suggestive, but not conclusive.