... One study by Martin Selig-man and Angela Duckworth concluded that an individual’s IQ, or intelligence quotient, accounts for only a third of any difference in academic performance when compared with peers. The rest has to do with qualities such as perseverance, self-discipline, hard work, creativity and luck. ...
... to serve as the starting point for a discussion that isn't properly subsumed under that topic.
-----------------------------
I really don't think this is a big story. As already said IQ > Intelligence > Better Decision Making > Longevity.
I'd interject:
IQ = General problem solving Intelligence > Better on average Decision Making > Higher income and socio-economic status on average > better mental an physical health >Longevity.
There are a few large and long running studies of the effect of socio-economic status on health and well being. I see this paper as the type of research someone does because they've got to come up with something 'new' after reading a butt-load of studies that already show the same thing.
I really don't think this is a big story. As already said IQ > Intelligence > Better Decision Making > Longevity.
I'd interject:
IQ = General problem solving Intelligence > Better on average Decision Making > Higher income and socio-economic status on average > better mental an physical health >Longevity
Well, if you interpret such a relationship as a rule, then sure it's 'wrong'. But like all trait-related correlations, they're heuristics, so a correlation means there's a general tendency, not a black-and-white relationship. That's because traits are generally a continuous spectrum, that is some have none and other have loads and there's a big bunch in the middle with the average amount. Generally they're normally distributed.
So you'll always get really smart people who don't make millions (despite trying to) and people of average intelligence doing really well. Apart from anything else, there's luck, the desire to amass wealth and/or power, how big a head start you get or don't get, and so on.
Plus, 'conscientiousness' plus IQ is a better predictor of success in life (in our material western world), than either alone, although IQ beats industriousness on it's own.
MENSA members who think they're hard done by the world, although not a representative sample of a population, might be un-industrious, unlucky or non-materialistic. Who knows?
As a Mensan of some four decades' standing now, I can offer comments on some of the issues raised or implied above ...
I can assure you that Mensans (and / or high-IQ folks in general ... ) aren't uniformly nerds, bookworms, academics, overachievers, financially well-off, mad scientists in waiting, etc., etc. They're as varied a bunch as any other group.
The sole characterization I, along with other Mensans I've known, have ever consensually accepted at face value is that we're a group who 'get' each other's jokes. This isn't just a trite quip, because a certain sort of playfulness is one of the few attributes demonstrably widespread among high IQ folks. Not all of them openly display it, though, and not all of them are easy-going enough to let it show at all ...
There are some mysteriously common presumptions and misconceptions about Mensans / high IQ folks that rankle me to no end ...
[ COMMENTS HIDDEN SO AS TO LEAVE SKIPPING VS. READING TO YOUR CHOICE ... ]
Such irritants include:
* A presumption of deterministic linkage between higher IQ and financial 'success'
It's surprisingly common (and strongly irritating) for people to ask, "If you're so intelligent, why aren't you rich?" This is the #1 question Mensans and high IQ folks get asked. For some, it's a highly-ranked reason to not advertise one's rated IQ.
Assuming Mensans should necessarily be / become millionaires is akin to assuming anyone over 7 feet tall should be / become a basketball star or anyone strikingly good-looking should be / become a movie star or supermodel. It doesn't work like that; there's more to it. Such presumptions imply higher IQ folks have an obvious destiny toward which they must be driving themselves. That's just as much BS with respect to them as it is for anyone else.
The most typical retort (to the query above) I've heard among high IQ folks is along the lines of a semi-facetious, "Maybe I'm intelligent enough to avoid getting conned into giving a rat's ass about the rat race."
There's more than a little truth in this wisecrack. In my experience, high IQ folks seem happy being comfortably content with whatever life / lifestyle they've developed, regardless of where it registers on anyone else's comparative / competitive scale. I'm not sure how to describe what's behind this. My working theory is that it has more to do with being privileged to set one's own terms for adequate success rather than blindly trying to 'win' in terms of everyone else's scorecard.
* A presumption that high IQ folks are adept at any / all complicated or competitive endeavors
Handing me a Rubiks Cube to solve is an open invitation for me to insist you shove it up your anal orifice. The same goes for chess, bridge, cryptograms, crosswords, math games, puzzles, and all the other diversions I (speaking only for myself ... ) don't give a rat's ass about. This doesn't mean I'm just being defensive. I am - or have been, prior to quitting out of boredom - pretty good at some of these pursuits. I'm frankly bad at some, and there are many others that never interested me in the least.
* A presumption high IQ folks must be polymaths and / or walking encyclopedias
Some arguably are (one, the other, or both ... ), but proportionally no more than one finds in the population at large.
* A high IQ is a great thing
Any deviation from the norm entails a downside, particularly in a social context predicated on commonality, if not outright conformity. For some people, at least at some times, a higher IQ can prove to be a relative disadvantage and / or source of stress. I'd claim this is the #1 thing most folks don't realize or can't recognize.
What struck me about the originally-cited study is that its results suggest a possible correlation between higher IQ and purely physical / somatic outcomes - some of which don't necessarily correlate with (e.g.) the sorts of enhanced socio-economic opportunities higher IQ folks are presumed to enjoy more, or more often, than anyone else.
As a Mensan of some four decades' standing now, I can offer comments on some of the issues raised or implied above ...
I can assure you that Mensans (and / or high-IQ folks in general ... ) aren't uniformly nerds, bookworms, academics, overachievers, financially well-off, mad scientists in waiting, etc., etc. They're as varied a bunch as any other group.
The sole characterization I, along with other Mensans I've known, have ever consensually accepted at face value is that we're a group who 'get' each other's jokes. This isn't just a trite quip, because a certain sort of playfulness is one of the few attributes demonstrably widespread among high IQ folks. Not all of them openly display it, though, and not all of them are easy-going enough to let it show at all ...
There are some mysteriously common presumptions and misconceptions about Mensans / high IQ folks that rankle me to no end ...
[ COMMENTS HIDDEN SO AS TO LEAVE SKIPPING VS. READING TO YOUR CHOICE ... ]
Such irritants include:
* A presumption of deterministic linkage between higher IQ and financial 'success'
It's surprisingly common (and strongly irritating) for people to ask, "If you're so intelligent, why aren't you rich?" This is the #1 question Mensans and high IQ folks get asked. For some, it's a highly-ranked reason to not advertise one's rated IQ.
Assuming Mensans should necessarily be / become millionaires is akin to assuming anyone over 7 feet tall should be / become a basketball star or anyone strikingly good-looking should be / become a movie star or supermodel. It doesn't work like that; there's more to it. Such presumptions imply higher IQ folks have an obvious destiny toward which they must be driving themselves. That's just as much BS with respect to them as it is for anyone else.
The most typical retort (to the query above) I've heard among high IQ folks is along the lines of a semi-facetious, "Maybe I'm intelligent enough to avoid getting conned into giving a rat's ass about the rat race."
There's more than a little truth in this wisecrack. In my experience, high IQ folks seem happy being comfortably content with whatever life / lifestyle they've developed, regardless of where it registers on anyone else's comparative / competitive scale. I'm not sure how to describe what's behind this. My working theory is that it has more to do with being privileged to set one's own terms for adequate success rather than blindly trying to 'win' in terms of everyone else's scorecard.
* A presumption that high IQ folks are adept at any / all complicated or competitive endeavors
Handing me a Rubiks Cube to solve is an open invitation for me to insist you shove it up your anal orifice. The same goes for chess, bridge, cryptograms, crosswords, math games, puzzles, and all the other diversions I (speaking only for myself ... ) don't give a rat's ass about. This doesn't mean I'm just being defensive. I am - or have been, prior to quitting out of boredom - pretty good at some of these pursuits. I'm frankly bad at some, and there are many others that never interested me in the least.
* A presumption high IQ folks must be polymaths and / or walking encyclopedias
Some arguably are (one, the other, or both ... ), but proportionally no more than one finds in the population at large.
* A high IQ is a great thing
Any deviation from the norm entails a downside, particularly in a social context predicated on commonality, if not outright conformity. For some people, at least at some times, a higher IQ can prove to be a relative disadvantage and / or source of stress. I'd claim this is the #1 thing most folks don't realize or can't recognize.
What struck me about the originally-cited study is that its results suggest a possible correlation between higher IQ and purely physical / somatic outcomes - some of which don't necessarily correlate with (e.g.) the sorts of enhanced socio-economic opportunities higher IQ folks are presumed to enjoy more, or more often, than anyone else.
I'm sure you're much more pleasant than other Mensa members we've known - who tended towards such obnoxiousness that both my husband and I took the test just so we could have the pleasure of refusing membership. (Yup, we're rebels. )
What you say does sound consistent with the experiences of other intelligent people, though.
I'm sure you're much more pleasant than other Mensa members we've known - who tended towards such obnoxiousness that both my husband and I took the test just so we could have the pleasure of refusing membership. ...
I know neither my blood-type nor my IQ. By East-Asian standards, this is highly irregular, the first being akin to one's star sign and the second (among the younger middle classes at least) one's collar size.
I bear no animus to the testing of intelligence, but I do wonder where the benefit in knowing lies? Given the fetishisation of intelligence in the modern world, I can understand raw curiosity, but only curiosity of the same type as one might have towards getting a DNA test to discover your genetic ancestry--it'd be interesting to know yet change nothing.
Oh, I agree, but it seems to collect at a higher than average rate at our regional chapter of Mensa. It's not being intelligent that's the cause. More like joining an organization to lord it over others.
BTW, I feel pretty certain that most FTMB members would pass the tests easily.
... I bear no animus to the testing of intelligence, but I do wonder where the benefit in knowing lies? Given the fetishisation of intelligence in the modern world, I can understand raw curiosity, but only curiosity of the same type as one might have towards getting a DNA test to discover your genetic ancestry--it'd be interesting to know yet change nothing.
Not surprisingly, the motivations / expectations / intentions vary by individual. Simple curiosity of the sort you cite is a very common motivation. I've known folks who've taken Mensa-supervised tests with the intention of a good score merely providing (e.g.) self-validation, a feather in their cap, or even something handy to cite when useful - (e.g., in a job interview), whereas a disappointing score can simply be forgotten.
Your DNA testing analogy is a good one, but only up to a point. A DNA ancestry analysis provides relatively context-free data into which you can read whatever you wish. There's no ranking or scaling involved.
A normed IQ test yields a score which by definition reflects a relative standing with respect to others (if only in the narrow context of that particular test).
This aspect of relative standing is, I believe, the reason some people get 'way too 'personally invested' in their IQ scores (whether scoring good or bad; whether reacting positively or negatively).
Yes - I've seen people get all full of themselves after a good score (as Ulalume mentions). I've also seen folks get morose after a disappointing one.
It's just a measurement based on a certain set of metrics. What it may mean or portend is up to you ...
I have a question (given that you clearly know far more than me on this subject).
In your experience, are those familiar with IQ tests and results able to make pretty good guesses about people's IQ without a test; in other words, are there often external signs (language use, behavior, perhaps) that enable general estimations about their likely IQ range--or are 'surprises' actually very common?
I once came top of my school class at an I.Q. test (I would have been about 8) because I was the only kid who realised that unlike all of the other pages in the test that had the questions printed just on one side, the last page was a two sider ... my Mum was thrilled to bits and bought me an Empire Strikes Back troop transporter as my reward .
I can relate to all EnoilaGaia's comments about having a high IQ.
My worse experience was at a job interview for promotion - the interviewer said "I understand you're in Mensa" when I confirmed the fact he quite openly said "Well we don't want any smart-arsed bastards in my team"
I can relate to all EnoilaGaia's comments about having a high IQ.
My worse experience was at a job interview for promotion - the interviewer said "I understand you're in Mensa" when I confirmed the fact he quite openly said "Well we don't want any smart-arsed bastards in my team"
My worse experience was at a job interview for promotion - the interviewer said "I understand you're in Mensa" when I confirmed the fact he quite openly said "Well we don't want any smart-arsed bastards in my team"
Quite. Sometimes the best thing is to keep quiet about it. I've certainly learnt that if you are presented an aptitude test as part of an job interview, it might pay to not do really well, just well enough.
You really don't want to come over as smarter than your prospective employer. Despite companies claiming they hire only the best people, they in general only hire people they feel are not quite as smart as them (the actual interviewers). One of the biggest problems with any kind of aptitude test (either trait or IQ) is that most managers really don't want to find out they're not the best at everything. (It's why Myers-Briggs is popular. It's cheap and doesn't have a kind of graded scale you can be best or worst at. Sadly it's useless, with no repeatability worth a damn and no predictive utility.)
I have a question (given that you clearly know far more than me on this subject).
In your experience, are those familiar with IQ tests and results able to make pretty good guesses about people's IQ without a test; in other words, are there often external signs (language use, behavior, perhaps) that enable general estimations about their likely IQ range--or are 'surprises' actually very common?
For myself * , I think you can get a good idea of people's intelligence (if not an actual IQ score), if you get enough information - by which I mean dialogue with the person which might contain clues. How people approach (novel) problems and situations is often a giveaway and I've certainly, in talking with people, seen some realise they've 'said too much', then relax as I 'took no notice'.
I find it's best to take no notice of people's jobs and positions if you're going to consider this - most often those in management roles are just those who really really want them and being smart doesn't always mean you want the hassle of a higher profile. You'll often find very bright people in quite 'lowly' positions, often, quite happy with their lot.
Nah, he's neither of those things .. he just never employed university students .. he reckoned they were cocky and thought the world owed them a living, still a broad generalisation, perhaps he'd employed too many crap ex Uni students ?
... In your experience, are those familiar with IQ tests and results able to make pretty good guesses about people's IQ without a test; in other words, are there often external signs (language use, behavior, perhaps) that enable general estimations about their likely IQ range--or are 'surprises' actually very common? ...
With regard to your explicit phrasing - focused on familiarity with the mechanics / testing ...
People who administer IQ tests don't necessarily interact with the test-takers enough to obtain any impression to evaluate. If the testing is augmented with social interaction beyond the testing session per se, it's possible. I can recall Mensa proctors commenting (based on pre- or post-test interactions) that person X seemed a likely candidate, but then again I can recall them later mentioning a guess had been wrong. In this context, I'd have to say 'no'.
If you're asking about a more general scenario (e.g., everyday social interaction) I'd still have to say 'no' - certainly not anything reliable enough to serve as a general rule or heuristic. I've known high-functioning folks who projected impressions of dullness, air-headedness, and other characteristics that obscured recognition of their actual intellectual capabilities. By the same token, I've encountered relatively 'average' people who project impressions that lead one to over-estimate what their capabilities really were.
Beyond that, high-functioning folks are just as likely as anyone else to have physical, emotional, behavioral, etc., characteristics that wouldn't exactly shout 'intelligent' at face value.
As I said earlier - it's a varied lot.
I recall being a Mensa officer in the 1980's, co-hosting a multi-day regional gathering. Owing to my role, I had to circulate and attend to everyone present - many of whom were Mensans unfamiliar to me with non-Mensan spouses or companions in tow. My (private) guesses as to which one was the Mensan were as often wrong as correct.
There are strongly suggestive cues, but no definitive clues ...
... I find it's best to take no notice of people's jobs and positions if you're going to consider this - most often those in management roles are just those who really really want them and being smart doesn't always mean you want the hassle of a higher profile. You'll often find very bright people in quite 'lowly' positions, often, quite happy with their lot. ...
My late best friend (definitely Mensa-qualified; I saw the documentation to prove it) and I were both technical professionals who treated our respective work activities as 'my game'. In other words, our work was something we really liked doing and took pleasure in doing well. Both of us threatened to resign on multiple occasions when employers tried to move us up into management. I've known numerous high-functioning folks who similarly prioritized 'my game' over 'my gain'.
Nah, he's neither of those things .. he just never employed university students .. he reckoned they were cocky and thought the world owed them a living, still a broad generalisation, perhaps he'd employed too many crap ex Uni students ?
Companies that are smart, might employ graduates while they're still in their first year (after appropriate interviews etc) and make them work holidays starting at the bottom end of the operation. There's a lot to be said for practical experience and it doesn't hurt to learn that none of us are too good for the jobs on the shop floor.
Beyond that, high-functioning folks are just as likely as anyone else to have physical, emotional, behavioral, etc., characteristics that wouldn't exactly shout 'intelligent' at face value.
IQ is, as you've said, a set of general problem solving abilities. It's not a character trait and it's character traits that determine how ambitious you are (or not) and what you want from life and form the impression you give to others and so on.
I've spent too long as an electronics design eng. and the shine has gone of 'my game' which is why I'm on a 'new game' - although I may yet go contracting for 'my gain' as I'd like to pay for some Coalettes' tuition fees.
Nokia at one time (and may still do) used to have a parallel 'technical' career path for technical people, so they could attain seniority and better rewards without having to do 'administrative' or man management. Quite sensible.
Yup. I'd qualify that by designating most regulars.
Hi IQ can be a curse tho. The ability to hold multiple perspectives confuses the fuck outta me. Not that I class my online avatar as one of the hy kyoos. I didn't even know 'outta' required a double t. And I need a strong drink just to participate.
I hope to be a better husband and father than the next man. Those are the limits of my ambition.
I can relate to all EnoilaGaia's comments about having a high IQ.
My worse experience was at a job interview for promotion - the interviewer said "I understand you're in Mensa" when I confirmed the fact he quite openly said "Well we don't want any smart-arsed bastards in my team"
I've had some similar discriminatory / belittling experiences, but nothing quite so stark and offensive as yours.
I'd have to say my worst experience was at the beginning and self-inflicted. It was the very outset of the 3rd grade (as I was approaching my 9th birthday). I'd spent two school years as a moderately above-average (B's and some A's) and endlessly mischievous student who'd labored to deal with routine school matters such as simply understanding what teacher was writing on the blackboard. At the start of the 3rd year my vision was tested for the very first time - revealing I was so myopic the optometrist offered to certify me as legally blind. Comically thick lenses removed the perceptual deficit, and the strict habits and tactics originally developed as unavoidable crutches (e.g., studiously paying attention to context / details; carefully listening) suddenly became empowering skills. The final innovation was the arrival of the World Book Encyclopedia in our home, which I immediately began devouring.
Unshackled input bandwidth, effective / efficient processing routines, and a monster database - all at once.
I suddenly (and I mean suddenly) transformed into Kid Brainiac. This transition was quite unsettling - particularly on the social front. Before too long I recognized (and was continually told ... ) I was 'different' from my classmates / friends. This led to a protracted period of some months during which I got more and more stressed out (on my own; in isolation) over this 'difference'.
Then the paranoia really set in ... I started questioning whether I was really just another one of the kids. Before it was over I was wrestling with the notion I must be a 'plant' from elsewhere (typical description - robot from Mars, based on a catty classmate jibe). This led to wondering who or what was 'behind' my situation, whether I was supposed to be aware of it, what might happen if 'they' discovered I 'knew', etc., etc. I was looking over my shoulder, losing my appetite, and staying awake at night in fear.
It finally passed, owing to (a) realizing the growing advantages of my position and nascent reputation and (b) understanding the 'difference' was within the scope of human variation and didn't necessarily mean I had to be alien.
If it had been 40 years later, and I'd told the adults what was going on, I'd have been subjected to therapy and / or psycho-medication(s) in a heartbeat. Thank heaven I kept it to myself and worked through it ...
I've had some similar discriminatory / belittling experiences, but nothing quite so stark and offensive as yours.
I'd have to say my worst experience was at the beginning and self-inflicted. It was the very outset of the 3rd grade (as I was approaching my 9th birthday). I'd spent two school years as a moderately above-average (B's and some A's) and endlessly mischievous student who'd labored to deal with routine school matters such as simply understanding what teacher was writing on the blackboard. At the start of the 3rd year my vision was tested for the very first time - revealing I was so myopic the optometrist offered to certify me as legally blind. Comically thick lenses removed the perceptual deficit, and the strict habits and tactics originally developed as unavoidable crutches (e.g., studiously paying attention to context / details; carefully listening) suddenly became empowering skills. The final innovation was the arrival of the World Book Encyclopedia in our home, which I immediately began devouring.
Unshackled input bandwidth, effective / efficient processing routines, and a monster database - all at once.
I suddenly (and I mean suddenly) transformed into Kid Brainiac.
Ha! That happened to me too. My parents didn't discover that I was hopelessly short-sighted until I was about 8. Once I had glasses, suddenly I was 'the little professor'. The teachers hated me because I pointed out all their spelling mistakes.
I have a question (given that you clearly know far more than me on this subject).
In your experience, are those familiar with IQ tests and results able to make pretty good guesses about people's IQ without a test; in other words, are there often external signs (language use, behavior, perhaps) that enable general estimations about their likely IQ range--or are 'surprises' actually very common?
I've never administered such a test but have taken a few in my time, if that counts. My way of estimating a person's intelligence has to do with the flexibility of their thinking and how much they enjoy it. These are qualities shown by many regular posters here, IMO. The ability to access information and grasp complex subjects are part and parcel of this - again, IMO.
I was another who had some trouble over my IQ score, not with employers but at school. I was a weird kid (hence I was always being tested for this and that) and had trouble conforming to the program. When they found out my IQ score, many teachers just assumed I must be lazy and/or rebellious and was treated as such.
I was neither (well, maybe a little rebellious ) Truth is, I just seem to have a different way of processing information.
I've had some similar discriminatory / belittling experiences, but nothing quite so stark and offensive as yours.
I'd have to say my worst experience was at the beginning and self-inflicted. It was the very outset of the 3rd grade (as I was approaching my 9th birthday). I'd spent two school years as a moderately above-average (B's and some A's) and endlessly mischievous student who'd labored to deal with routine school matters such as simply understanding what teacher was writing on the blackboard. At the start of the 3rd year my vision was tested for the very first time - revealing I was so myopic the optometrist offered to certify me as legally blind. Comically thick lenses removed the perceptual deficit, and the strict habits and tactics originally developed as unavoidable crutches (e.g., studiously paying attention to context / details; carefully listening) suddenly became empowering skills. The final innovation was the arrival of the World Book Encyclopedia in our home, which I immediately began devouring.
Unshackled input bandwidth, effective / efficient processing routines, and a monster database - all at once.
I suddenly (and I mean suddenly) transformed into Kid Brainiac. This transition was quite unsettling - particularly on the social front. Before too long I recognized (and was continually told ... ) I was 'different' from my classmates / friends. This led to a protracted period of some months during which I got more and more stressed out (on my own; in isolation) over this 'difference'.
Then the paranoia really set in ... I started questioning whether I was really just another one of the kids. Before it was over I was wrestling with the notion I must be a 'plant' from elsewhere (typical description - robot from Mars, based on a catty classmate jibe). This led to wondering who or what was 'behind' my situation, whether I was supposed to be aware of it, what might happen if 'they' discovered I 'knew', etc., etc. I was looking over my shoulder, losing my appetite, and staying awake at night in fear.
It finally passed, owing to (a) realizing the growing advantages of my position and nascent reputation and (b) understanding the 'difference' was within the scope of human variation and didn't necessarily mean I had to be alien.
If it had been 40 years later, and I'd told the adults what was going on, I'd have been subjected to therapy and / or psycho-medication(s) in a heartbeat. Thank heaven I kept it to myself and worked through it ...
I didn't realise that not everyone could see what was written on the board until I had an eye test when I was 13. I had to invent my own form of maths and my spelling was teribul.
I went from dumb kid to smart kid but the damage had already been done and I had no interest in education. It was only after leaving school, with mediocre O levels, that I read my first book and haven't stopped since.
I always felt different but it never bothered me as I was happy in my own little world which mostly consisted of taking the dog for long walks and learning about the outside world.
I loved college - HND in Marine Electronics - and found it very easy to absorb information but this lead to employment where, once again, I was only interested in "my game" which didn't go down too well with many managers.
Turned out alright in the end thought
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
)
