...

[EcK]

I never said I was the biggest supporter of IQ ever, but dismissing something without giving a better solution is both easy and pointless.
I agree about the fact that some not-so-brilliant people have higher iq than more 'intelligent (more able to adapt and stuff) people.
You also have to take into account the fact that people who don't have much to offer past their status as intellectuals for example will tend to , pass the test alot of times and pick the higher score, exagerate their iqs (using the already pumped up score as their norm), use sd 16 or 18 tests instead of sd15 tests, use internet tests... bla bla bla.

it's a quite standardized test, scores of 'alternative versions' are just as meaningless as scores obtained in different situations than the one first used to set up the base 100 ('first time' test for the majority, increased stress of not being 'confy at home', no possibility to 'do it again after coffee', etc.)

 

[VictorClimacus]

about your first statement I'm not saying you're wrong (yes I am) but you're using baseless statements while studies actually show the exact opposite.
There's a statistically significant correlation between mbti type and iq, especially if you look at S/N. Now statistics are what they are, they don't speak for any individual but express trends in populations.
nts are, as a group , actually smarter in terms of IQ, but the difference between S and N is way more significant.

Some time ago I did encounter statistics about the advantage that a person has if he's I or (and!) N-dominant when it comes to IQ scores. But these came from a couple of blogs, and neither referenced the original source(s). I didn't try too hard to track them down (Maybe you have?), and don't as much doubt they exist as I feel they're still scant evidence for a statistically significant IQ/MBTI relationship regardless.

My estimation of the correlation (or lack thereof) between the two is based mostly on personal experience. It may qualify as a big, stinking "I know someone who" fallacy, but the fact is that I know as many or more high-IQ sensors than intuits. ESTJ, ISFJ, ISTP, ESTP--these guys are each 130+ and get overlooked for their brainpower nonetheless (largely because of their more down-to-earth personalities). Maybe it's my Fi talking--a subconscious desire to fight for their recognition--but the evidence in my own life, as subjective as it is, points away from strong correlations. The rest of my closest friends--an ENTJ, four INTJs, an ENFP, and an INFJ--may be advantaged over the sensors when it comes to taking IQ tests (and I agree with you that N and I are advantages when it comes to abstract reasoning AND to standardized testing), but their IQs are less exceptional (the INFJ and one of the INTJs may be 130+) than my Sensor friends. The rest fall into the 120-125 range and yet, because of their "techie" interests and skill at strategy games, get more attention within my circle of friends for being the exceptionally smart ones.

Now maybe I'm hyping up my sensor friends because I, as an intuitive, have only made friends with sensors who stand out farther from "typical" sensors than my intuitive friends do from the center of their bell curve.

Nonetheless, I need to see solid evidence to change my mind. So far, what I've seen on the web is just kinda sketchy and scarce. A moderate difference between S and N, a slight one between E and I and even a borderline-insignificant one between F and T and perhaps even P and J wouldn't be so surprising. Theoretically it makes sense that the INTJ would be ideally-equipped to tackle the very particular rigors of an IQ test. But even if this is the case, my first reaction is that what we will have uncovered is not evidence of Personality's influence on Intelligence, but a sign that our measuring devices need to be improved so that these two aspects of the individual can be analyzed more independently and with greater clarity. In other words, I am more apt to believe that either intelligence and personality interact in depths and on planes that IQ tests are incapable of measuring, or that the two are in fact independent of each other.

So...maybe my two cents are more theoretical and perhaps even--gasp!--emotionally-charged than scientific, but the empirical evidence for a correlation seems scant to my eyes anyway. Plus, well, speaking of science, my Te's too low for me to care about finding out as much as arguing my wants

...Is that a sign of lesser intelligence?

 

[animenagai]

This is one majorly long thread, so I'm sorry if this has already been posted.

Anyone have links to actual data showing each type and their average IQ's? I gave it a search both on normal google and google scholar, but the only stuff I could find had crazy mumbo jumbo psych talk, pretty sure their IQ test results use some other, more fancy system.

 

[redacted]

I recently looked over my scores on the WAIS-III I took when I was in high school, which made me think about this -- I scored 33 points different in the two subcategories (verbal IQ and performance IQ), and would venture a guess that N/S dichotomy may correlate with those subcategories to some significant extent. (Ti and Te might correlate well too.) It would be interesting to see some statistics on that.

 

[WorldSocionics]

Psychopaths, not sociopaths. A sociopath is diagnosed from the sociological point of view i.e. antisocial behaviour and can easily be correlated with AsPD. A psychopath is diagnosed from the psychological (soon to be neurological "neuropath") point of view i.e. the traits found in "aggressive narcissism" as well as (to a lesser extent) "social deviancy". The former set of traits do have correlations with high IQ. Many criminals are sociopathic, but a very small minority are psychopathic.

 

[guesswho]

In my opinion INTs should score highest on the classic IQ tests. It would make sense wouldn't it?

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

In my opinion INTs should score highest on the classic IQ tests. It would make sense wouldn't it?

Ti is very good at noticing patterns and calculating logical details. So aided by Ne, us INTPs should theoretically be pretty good at theclassic tests that mostly involve patterns and logical problems. But of course any type can be dumb, and we might just prefer Ti but be no good at it.

 

[rav3n]

Not to knock feeler IQ but I'd be curious what the findings would reflect at some of the top ten ranked Universities, instead of at Central Michigan University (somewhere below a global ranking of 1000).

 

[entropie]

Some time ago I did encounter statistics about the advantage that a person has if he's I or (and!) N-dominant when it comes to IQ scores. But these came from a couple of blogs, and neither referenced the original source(s). I didn't try too hard to track them down (Maybe you have?), and don't as much doubt they exist as I feel they're still scant evidence for a statistically significant IQ/MBTI relationship regardless.

My estimation of the correlation (or lack thereof) between the two is based mostly on personal experience. It may qualify as a big, stinking "I know someone who" fallacy, but the fact is that I know as many or more high-IQ sensors than intuits. ESTJ, ISFJ, ISTP, ESTP--these guys are each 130+ and get overlooked for their brainpower nonetheless (largely because of their more down-to-earth personalities). Maybe it's my Fi talking--a subconscious desire to fight for their recognition--but the evidence in my own life, as subjective as it is, points away from strong correlations. The rest of my closest friends--an ENTJ, four INTJs, an ENFP, and an INFJ--may be advantaged over the sensors when it comes to taking IQ tests (and I agree with you that N and I are advantages when it comes to abstract reasoning AND to standardized testing), but their IQs are less exceptional (the INFJ and one of the INTJs may be 130+) than my Sensor friends. The rest fall into the 120-125 range and yet, because of their "techie" interests and skill at strategy games, get more attention within my circle of friends for being the exceptionally smart ones.

Now maybe I'm hyping up my sensor friends because I, as an intuitive, have only made friends with sensors who stand out farther from "typical" sensors than my intuitive friends do from the center of their bell curve.

Nonetheless, I need to see solid evidence to change my mind. So far, what I've seen on the web is just kinda sketchy and scarce. A moderate difference between S and N, a slight one between E and I and even a borderline-insignificant one between F and T and perhaps even P and J wouldn't be so surprising. Theoretically it makes sense that the INTJ would be ideally-equipped to tackle the very particular rigors of an IQ test. But even if this is the case, my first reaction is that what we will have uncovered is not evidence of Personality's influence on Intelligence, but a sign that our measuring devices need to be improved so that these two aspects of the individual can be analyzed more independently and with greater clarity. In other words, I am more apt to believe that either intelligence and personality interact in depths and on planes that IQ tests are incapable of measuring, or that the two are in fact independent of each other.

So...maybe my two cents are more theoretical and perhaps even--gasp!--emotionally-charged than scientific, but the empirical evidence for a correlation seems scant to my eyes anyway. Plus, well, speaking of science, my Te's too low for me to care about finding out as much as arguing my wants

...Is that a sign of lesser intelligence?

I am personally a fan of the Sensors are more intelligent theory aswell. The thing is, it's ultimatively hard for me sometimes to express a thing I have understood my way, in a way understandable for a general audience. I even have problems to understand certain concepts, for example modells in 3D-Geometry, I sometimes need like years to teach myself that a thing is like it is, without me really being able to abstract it. This for example a topic with equations about mechanical stability, for example bar theory. Rigid Frame Statics was one of the most difficult things for me to visualize and I often experience this issue with sometimes rather simple physical or mathematical modells, I just cant grasp because I dont think straight.

I read on another forum once, where an INTJ and an ENTP had to solve an equation. The entp bended and twisted the equation so he can solve everything for one variable. He caluclated billions of mistakes in it while twisting and turning it for the variables and in the end his solution was wrong. The INTJ just put in the values he already knew, then made the equation more easy and solved it for the wanted variable. I can understand why the entp did that, cause he wanted a big picture equation. One you can use later with other variables aswell to solve them quickly. But what he did forget is that sometimes an equation of this kind is not possible or even not needed and his demand for "doing it with style" just will get into his way. I experience "doing it with style" issues regulary with mathematical problems, I need to solve.

I doubt a prim Ne is prone to scoring high on IQ. I tend to score around 125 on those online-based ones in english, for what they are worth. But I doubt I have a very high IQ or am uncommonly bright. I am rather uncommonly retarded in many aspects. The only thing I am quite good at, is a good imagination. That goes like a redline thru all my life and has helped me in many different ways and stages of life.

 

[FDG]

I even have problems to understand certain concepts, for example modells in 3D-Geometry, I sometimes need like years to teach myself that a thing is like it is, without me really being able to abstract it.

Just a small objection, I don't believe that being really good at 3D visualization is something sensors are necessarily better at (on average) than intuitives. I know that this kind of "intelligence" is my biggest strength, for example (while OTOH I'm almost never able to solve "linguistic riddles"), while a good number of ISXJs I know can't really understand space in a 3D fashion (but they're better able to understand small-scale details in 3D, like how/if a car can fit in a given parking slot...which I suck at).

 

[entropie]

Ya you're right. Example I've choosen isnt the best. I rather wanted to say that because of the connection sensors can have to the real world they could be better at what they are doing. But I think there are a lot of shades of grey that one needs to apply here so you cant really say that for sure.

At parking I am the master btw, my girlfriend tends to get a heartattack when I drive high-speed in small parking lots saying afterwards "Told you it would fit" . My gf is not good at it aswell, she's infp so maybe it's a Te thing; with Te saying we really need to check if we'll fit into this parking lot, while my Fe tells me, if it doesnt fit it will only cost 1 or 2 mirrors

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

Intelligence is a very difficult thing to define, if not impossible.

 

[Oaky]

^The widely known definition of intelligence is the relative swiftness in which one understands something based on his own thoughts alone.

 

[entropie]

what he said ?

 

[Mr. Sherlock Holmes]

^The widely known definition of intelligence is the relative swiftness in which one understands something based on his own thoughts alone.

No, I mean what really makes someone intelligent. Because everyone understands diffferent things with different speeds and all, is someone who understands algebra really well but is useless at mechanics more or less intelligent than someone who understands how a mechanical system operates? And sometimes intelligence is speed, whereas other times it's your ability to retain information etc. It's not easy to measure in any case, because different people will consider different things more intelligent than others.

 

[entropie]

My intelligence always is driven by insticts. For example I get the most intelligent if I ran out of fire to lit me a cigarette:

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_DanpeJjDg"].[/YOUTUBE]

 

[JoSunshine]

Is there any significant correlation? On average, who is the smartest type?...these two seem to suggest that Feeling and Intuitive types have higher I.Q.s.

I agree with this...because I'm a freaking genius!

 

[skylights]

^ !

@ entropie's video... lol... i think Ne doms have a special kind of "troubleshooting" intelligence, we're really good to have around when things don't work like they ought to, and you need a different solution, lol.

i think the comments about Sensors lately are interesting, and have to agree 100% with holmes. intelligence is a very broad concept... and it seems like most people end up exhibiting balance in terms of abilities. people great interpersonally and spatially are usually not the best mechanically. i like gardner's multiple intelligences.

IQ tests only tests a few facets, and those facets favor intuitive people. But I know people that score very high on an IQ test that I don't particularly find intelligent at all, and people that score lower that seem to be much more intelligent to me overall.

agree. intuitives in particular can be a special kind of reality-retarded. they're like this couple i saw the other day, with a mensa license plate and a giant dent in their side door. :rolli:

Not to knock feeler IQ but I'd be curious what the findings would reflect at some of the top ten ranked Universities

i think it's legit to say a Feeler probably isn't going to have as high of an IQ. how is Fi or Fe going to help us on a standardized test? they're not, really. but it's stupid to leave them off measurements of intelligence, imo, because if you don't have good people skills, it's evident that you're lacking a certain kind of understanding.

I doubt a prim Ne is prone to scoring high on IQ.

i've never taken an IQ test proper, but i've been kicking standardized test ass since elementary school. i think Ne is useful in getting you to an answer - as in, coming up with ideas how you can get there, even if you don't really know - it's just probably going to be the "wrong" way of getting there. fortunately you don't have to bubble in how you solved the problem...

i dunno how Te would make you better at parking but i correlate too. vis-spat is my highest of the multiple intelligences and i pride myself on my parallel parking skillz.

 

[entropie]

i've never taken an IQ test proper, but i've been kicking standardized test ass since elementary school. i think Ne is useful in getting you to an answer - as in, coming up with ideas how you can get there, even if you don't really know - it's just probably going to be the "wrong" way of getting there. fortunately you don't have to bubble in how you solved the problem...

i dunno how Te would make you better at parking but i correlate too. vis-spat is my highest of the multiple intelligences and i pride myself on my parallel parking skillz.

Hehe, there you see that prolly all theories about IQ go to hell at some point.

 

[Oaky]

No, I mean what really makes someone intelligent. Because everyone understands diffferent things with different speeds and all, is someone who understands algebra really well but is useless at mechanics more or less intelligent than someone who understands how a mechanical system operates? And sometimes intelligence is speed, whereas other times it's your ability to retain information etc. It's not easy to measure in any case, because different people will consider different things more intelligent than others.

Memorisation of knowledge and intelligence would not be the same thing. And as such someone who is knowledgeable may seem intelligent when he may not be. Also is the case of level of understanding of various different topics. If one understands something and another does not it does not make the person who understands it more intelligent. The more intelligent however, would understand it more effectively quicker than the other person with his own thoughts. It would all be a matter of how complex your mind works to figure something out as well as it's speed.