IQ and aging - personal, conflicting thoughts

[quietgirl]

15 standard deviation is the norm.

I don't think anyone here, unless through an academy, has taken a validated IQ test (that is, a very small minority). Something like KAIT or WAIS, or some other modern IQ test. I say this because there is a heavy emphasis on the relation to visual learning, which should compose less than 1/4 of any reliable IQ test.

Course, it is possible that the average person here would, apparently, be a doctor in theoretical/engineering physics... something that about a rather extreme amount of people in the world... I simply doubt it.

Would an IQ test administered by a school psychologist count as a validated one? Because that's initially the test I took. I am a child of a mother who studied psychology and a step mother who is a school psychologist. I've been psychoanalyzed to death partly as their hobby. Plus, my family has been in family counseling for quite a few years.

I'm a little offended by the comment regarding a doctorate in theoretical physics, though. I hope it wasn't directed my way. Considering the amount of NT's and NF's on this board, I would think there would be a disproportionate interest in theoretical studies as compared to the general population.

 

[FDG]

I think I could do that. I have a friend that is getting a summa cum laude Maths degree and is aiming towards a doctorate in the same field, and we used to have similar grades throughout high school, and have similar results in competitions (even though he would get better results in maths, and I'd get better results in physics).

 

[ptgatsby]

Would an IQ test administered by a school psychologist count as a validated one? Because that's initially the test I took. I am a child of a mother who studied psychology and a step mother who is a school psychologist. I've been psychoanalyzed to death partly as their hobby. Plus, my family has been in family counseling for quite a few years.

I'd have to know what test it is - however, you are likely to have had a pretty decent test relatively speaking. Age also matters, however, as many high IQ kids average out over time (140 to 120-130 isn't that unusual)... I would generally consider it to be validated if it was done by a clinician.

Validated here means tested and normalised properly, meaning that it is able to produce an IQ that can be compared to other tests... not to mean others are invalid. It just means that it is difficult to compare some measures of IQ against others.

I'm also not saying that the individual claims as false as much as saying that we seem to project IQ inflation, where having 110-120 can appear low, when statistically it is in the top 10-25% of the population. This thread, in general, would suggest that the majority are in the top 5% of the population. This is... unusual. It tends to undervalue the actual scores...

I'm a little offended by the comment regarding a doctorate in theoretical physics, though. I hope it wasn't directed my way. Considering the amount of NT's and NF's on this board, I would think there would be a disproportionate interest in theoretical studies as compared to the general population.

Those doctorates average 140-150, which is why I picked them (relative to more common doctorates like medical, philosophy and such). No other reason

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

This thread, in general, would suggest that the majority are in the top 5% of the population. This is... unusual. It tends to undervalue the actual scores...

My initial post may have initiated some kind of self-selection. There is about 1:10 reply/view ratio on most threads on this board.. and we don't know how many views upper category vs viewing a particular sub-category.

Those doctorates average 140-150, which is why I picked them (relative to more common doctorates like medical, philosophy and such). No other reason

Where did you get the doctorates? IQ doesn't imply any particular employment.

 

[cascadeco]

This thread, in general, would suggest that the majority are in the top 5% of the population. This is... unusual. It tends to undervalue the actual scores...

Well, the members on this site would be far from your random sampling of the population as a whole....it actually doesn't surprise me at all that a forum like this would have a high % of people in the top 5% of the general population, in terms of IQ or other standardized tests.

I mean, heck....out of my whole circle of friends/acquaintances, very few of them even participate in ANY internet forum, let alone one based on psychology!!!

 

[ptgatsby]

Where did you get the doctorates? IQ doesn't imply any particular employment.

IQ does stratify across employment, with education being one of the better examples of it. It's not good at placing people at, say, a clerical job in a financial institution and an engineering firm, but it is good at placing people inside clerical work vs janitorial work.

Well, the members on this site would be far from your random sampling of the population as a whole....it actually doesn't surprise me at all that a forum like this would have a high % of people in the top 5% of the general population, in terms of IQ or other standardized tests.

I mean, heck....out of my whole circle of friends/acquaintances, very few of them even participate in ANY internet forum, let alone one based on psychology!!!

That is true, and it is likely that we would have a large bias towards higher IQs. However, it is unusual that it is nearly to the exclusion of all others without the equivalent job placement and general education correlations.

Santtu is probably right - a bias of higher IQs forum wide with respondents answering only if they make the average that has been posted here, which may or may not be artificially high. (Meaning, if many do not have g loaded tests and thus inflated scores, then others with genuine but not inflated scores won't post.)

 

[wildcat]

IQ is an apology of the well to do to do nothing.

 

[xNFJiminy]

Santtu is probably right - a bias of higher IQs forum wide with respondents answering only if they make the average that has been posted here, which may or may not be artificially high. (Meaning, if many do not have g loaded tests and thus inflated scores, then others with genuine but not inflated scores won't post.)

I don't think most of the general population has had a reliable, normalised IQ test (I've only taken free online ones for fun, and got a range of 25 within one week). Out of those that have, many or most will have had one specifically because they've been suspected as being unusually good or unusually bad at that sort of cognition, and probably are unusually good or unusually bad.

 

[FDG]

I don't think most of the general population has had a reliable, normalised IQ test (I've only taken free online ones for fun, and got a range of 25 within one week). Out of those that have, many or most will have had one specifically because they've been suspected as being unusually good or unusually bad at that sort of cognition, and probably are unusually good or unusually bad.

Exactly. Most people that end up knowing their IQ is because one of the two options listed above.

 

[CzeCze]

That test is pretty interesting.

Course, try answering every single question wrong and you end up with an IQ of 79. I assume that's the floor... but it makes me suspect their distribution.

(Sadly, I did worse on that test than the Mensa tests... I'm not quite sure what that means )

Wow that test was a pain in the ass. I should have known better than to take it at 3:45am before going to bed. I couldn't answer the last 6...

uch:

I tend to take online IQ tests between 1-5 am, usually when I am procrastinating.

And I know I'm coming into this late, Your IQ is not set in stone and will go up or down with training. It's like any other standardized test in that way. I think of it as studying for the SAT but with not as much "give" (or helpful shortcuts)

What IQ is measuring or what the IQ drop by age shows is just that you aren't using your brain as much, or in new and challenging ways, and your brain has simply gotten a little sluggish.

Try Brain Age! On the Nintendo DS!

Hahaha, seriously this thead almost sounds like a wind-up for an ad for some 'brain stimulating' products.

Also, IQs for children are skewed or graded on a major curve (something like dividing or multiplying by actual age) I think the IQ you get when you are a child has to be 'accounted for inflation' and then you can compare it to what the score would mean if you were an 'adult'.

I have concur about the different definitions of 'intelligence'. I have known many people with classically high intellects (meaning above average to extremely well on standardized tests including IQ).

I was frankly disappointed because when it came to discussions about their views on the world and identifying what the world's problems are, their answers were very pedestrian to daresay, a bit crass and/or typically elitist.

I don't see how IQ is correlative to reaching the 'correct views' on life or attain 'correct thinking' because, seriously, they don't agree with me AT ALL.



But yes, you get the actual cogent point somewhere in here. (Yes you really do, and if you don't, everyone else gets the point so don't be foolish and admit you're the only one who can't clearly see my point..they're all gonna laugh at you)

And with that, I really am going to bed now.

:zzz:

 

[scantilyclad]

-what is your IQ and your confidence with it?
I took the WISC-III test once when i was 11 and then again when i was 17. I scored 158 when i was 11 and 154 when i was 17.
Usually when i take online IQ tests i score in the 140s or if i'm really distracted i score in the 130s. I'm not really confident about my IQ because i often feel like a lot of people around me are a lot smarter, so just putting a number to my intelligence doesn't seem to prove anything..

-how much does your view of "intelligence" align with contemporary IQ views on general intelligence factor?
I think there are far too many different forms of intelligence for IQ to matter that much.

-are multiple intelligences a better representation of people's traits, or a hoax to cater to feelings of the dumb, or something in between?
Multiple intelligence tests are okay i guess, but i still don't think they are really proving anything.


-have you wished to be of different IQ?
Honestly i don't really sit around thinking about my IQ, so no.

-have you noticed a drop in IQ? If so, have you done a conscious effort to negate the effect? If not, what abilities or perceptions have helped to turn the situation around?
Well it dropped a few points from the time i was 11 to 17, i'm 21 now, so it could have possibly gone down even more if the trend was the same.

-has type awareness brought different view on IQ? how so?
nope. i see that some types might score higher than others, but i don't know how accurate that is.

-have you aimed for the best job available to your intelligence?
Probably not. I'm a stay at home pregnant woman. Cooking and cleaning doesn't really take a whole lot of brain power to be perfectly honest. I hate working, and i find that any job i work i'm under appreciated for hard work, so i don't even bother anymore. I'd like a job working as some sort of anti drug counselor or something, i don't know if that would be the best job for my intelligence or not, but i think you should do what you love and love what you do and not worry about being intelligent or not being intelligent enough for something.

 

[wildcat]

IQ measures how much money you have in your pocket.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

IQ measures how much money you have in your pocket.

I don't find so short and vague comments very enlightening. Wouldn't you like to put your ideas in a more definitive form?

Well-formed arguments can become a subject of scrutiny, of course. That's completely unlike the treatment you would get for vague, unfitting and mysterious remarks.

 

[wildcat]

I don't find so short and vague comments very enlightening. Wouldn't you like to put your ideas in a more definitive form?

Well-formed arguments can become a subject of scrutiny, of course. That's completely unlike the treatment you would get for vague, unfitting and mysterious remarks.

Money in pocket = rich.

Mysterious, eh?

Rich = Well off.

WELL OFF

1. influential
2. propertied
3. in easy circumstances
4. well to do
5. possessed of a competence
6. in good conditions
7. well born
8. well bred

WELL BORN

high born
of good descent

See the 100 people who paid the highest taxes = made most money, last year. It is in the yesterday paper.

And who are they?

well born
of good descent
of high birth

Is it different say, in America?
Not any more.

Ever heard of the Waspies? They have their own universities. They have their own country clubs.
How many Catholics? How many Jews?

A Finnish officer could not enter an American country club. Why? He had a Swedish Family name. To a Waspie ear Swedish sounds German, and German sounds Jewish.

To add insult to injury they have these IQ tests. Ready and taylor-made for the Waspie offsprings.

IQ measures how much money you have in your pocket.

Happy now?

And yes, IQ declines with age.
Intelligence does not.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I see, wildcat. Interesting view you have. The amount of money earned is indeed one of they key points how success is measured. The main motivation for measuring IQ is to predict someone's success. So I understand how these two are interrelated. Still, it takes several decades for a person to accumulate the level of wealth indicated by their IQ.

Family background, socioeconomic factors, etc have a greater influence to a person's future wealth. If someone were to construct a test to measure a person's chance to becoming rich, they would start with the background factors, rather than measuring their ability to solve problems.

Person's problem solving ability is more of a equalizing factor between families of different wealth. Still, I don't see a problem with some families being better off than the others.

I would see the IQ as a tool of the class strugle, rather than the tool of the elite.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

So now I got the results of my professionally administred IQ test, and it's disappointing, but also enlightening.

I've been extremely hesitant to see a psychologist to resolve my issues with what I think as burnout and depression, or perhaps something else.

I think the picture is coming together.

I got an IQ of 108 (15 std dev).

It's in the extreme lower end of the test score's I've ever received, although not the lowest. That record is reserved for a test that measured verbal intelligence in english language, and that only.

Something is severely impairing my mental functioning. I still retain the knowledge and the values from times when I've been smarter, and I've gotten a professional evaluation of myself as late as 5 months ago, with the career advisor recommending me career paths in the most demanding employments possible.

Unfortunately my self-image is too much tied to my intelligence to let go of this. I understand my biases. Still, I can't but to list those factors that I recognize and objectively know to have influenced my perceptions on this matter.

test score lowering factors:
-having been tired that morning
-having drunk heavily two days before the test
-depression, just with sadness changed to apathy
-relative lack of optimally challenging employment during the year
-unfamiliarity with pen-and-paper test
-failed time-management plan during the test. Did too much double-checking.

Possible reasons to explain the low outcome as it is:
-inflated scores on online tests (?)
-my intelligence (or aptitudes) are focused on other intelligences

I know that this makes a silly impression

I just wanted to be open and honest with you, so you can see me wanting to explain something that I want for myself. I know exactly how silly it seems for people to want something so much and making up explanations. Still, I'm giving myself the benefit of doubt. I'll figure out what's wrong with me and what I did wrong, and I'll correct what I find.

This is not a trivial matter; I have wanted to go for the best jobs since I were kid. These jobs are demanding on self-discipline both before and during the employment, they're demanding on general and emotional intelligence, willingness to achieve, and other personal qualities. Some employments have a de facto IQ entrance requirement, with the demands of the job being increasingly hard on the people with lower IQ. There's some point where the job is just too damn hard to be of any enjoyment, even if that's the job you've wished for.

edit: and now, 138 on a web test (15 std dev). Is that more telling of the web tests or anything.. still, everything remains inconclusive to me. Mind you, these web results are consistenly lower than they used to be, too; I used to get in the range of 142-145 before (15 std dev), or about 168-172 (24 std dev) in culture fair tests and usually about 120-125 (std dev 15) in completely english biased tests, even tho lower scrores also occured.

edit: moreover, it's not my job to be objective and realistic about myself in such a manner so as to contend with bad results. This is a signal from something bad, perhaps a wrong development - which I ought to reverse.

 

[ptgatsby]

-depression, just with sadness changed to apathy

This one is huge. When taking a test online, something you are familiar with, you are likely also in a better frame of mind. Stress will not mix well with your depression. This alone could skew your test down a full 10 points, a crazy amount relatively speaking.

(I have to ask - do you know which test it was?)

However, I must admit in all honesty, this is not all that unusual to find. Web tests are very aptitude based - and so you may have particular aptitudes that test well online but less well in person.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I asked a friend who is a Mensa member.. he knew that there was a new test in use in Finland this fall / winter, but he couldn't name it. He suspected it was something made especially for Mensa, but I'm not that sure. There is a reason he wants to be silent about it; there's some controversy over a Mensa member who was able to order him/self the test manual with a scoring key. Given the test name, one could attempt for similar kind of deception.

Edit: So it's this Mensa test that I participated in. I don't remember myself what was said of it.

The test consisted (as far as I can remember) solely from pattern filling tasks. There was a practice question with arithmetics, but none in the scored questions. All multiple choice. The patterns consisted of 3x3 (and perhaps bigger) squares with all (or most) of the tiles filled, with one tile being asked in each task. There was 4 or 5 options for each question.

 

[Night]

I asked a friend who is a Mensa member.. he knew that there was a new test in use in Finland this fall / winter, but he couldn't name it. He suspected it was something made especially for Mensa, but I'm not that sure. There is a reason he wants to be silent about it; there's some controversy over a Mensa member who was able to order him/self the test manual with a scoring key. Given the test name, one could attempt for similar kind of deception.

Sounds like what happened with the Mega Society entrance exam a few years back.

Waste of time.

 

[Maverick]

-what is your IQ and your confidence with it? 140+
-how much does your view of "intelligence" align with contemporary IQ views on general intelligence factor? identical
-are multiple intelligences a better representation of people's traits, or a hoax to cater to feelings of the dumb, or something in between? something in between, though "g" is still the unifying factor
-have you wished to be of different IQ? yes as a kid. I did drugs such as marijuana to try to be more stupid in order to relate to others. It worked.
-have you noticed a drop in IQ? If so, have you done a conscious effort to negate the effect? If not, what abilities or perceptions have helped to turn the situation around? No
-has type awareness brought different view on IQ? how so? No
-have you aimed for the best job available to your intelligence? Yes and I got it