Measuring Intelligence - 5 Reasons For New Thinking on IQ

Measuring Intelligence - 5 Reasons For New Thinking on IQ Measuring Intelligence 5 Reasons For New Thinking on IQ Image Source: iStockIN ANY discussion of  measuring intelligence, the Intelligence Quotient or IQ score usually plays a significant part. But if any  one thing in human history has had the most undesirable consequences arising from the name given to it, ‘Intelligence Quotient’ or IQ must surely be one of the strongest candidates for the dubious honour.Coined by psychologist William Stern the ‘Intelligence Quotient’, is a score derived from one of a number of standardised  tests designed for  assessing and measuring intelligence in humans. The first IQ test was developed by psychologist named Alfred Binet to help identify students who required extra help. Refined by Stanford Professor Lewis Terman, this became the “Stanford-Binet” test that’s still used today.If intelligence can be taken to mean the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills, it is a good thing that a standardised  process for attempting to measure it exists.The problem tends to arise when the num erical score of the IQ has been usedâ€"as it often has beenâ€"as a predictor of success.  The key words and phrases in the above paragraph are “acquire and apply”, “knowledge and skills”, “measure”, “numerical score”, and “predictor of success”â€"and the phrases create a dissonance arising from the juxtaposition of scientific, data-based accuracy with the imprecision of “prediction” and the abstract concept of “success“.Of course, that was something of a word game, and proves nothing. What can’t be denied is the rise in those who criticise  the limitations of IQ and other standardised  tests; key business figures who are beginning to reject the tests outright; and researchers who are working to establish alternatives.Here are five main reasons why IQ needs to reassessed: (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 1. The Minority EffectIN  IQ tests, the median score is IQ 100, and there are standard deviations of 15 points greater or less. Appro ximately two-thirds of the population will score between IQ85 and IQ115. Above 5 percent of the population scores above IQ 125, and 5 percent below IQ 75.As noted by the Seattle-based writer Emerson Jane Browne, who researches and blogs about cognitive science and neuroscience, IQ scores recreated visually create a bell curve shape [see graph below], with long, steep tails on either end.Image Source: Wikimedia CommonsThe consequence is that there are “no negative or even neutral words” to describe IQs more than two standard deviations from the mean [i.e, greater than 130, lesser than 70].Those more than two standard deviations below the mean are considered by greater society as falling outside the norm, “and require additional assistance to adapt and be successful in society”.Meanwhile, those with IQ scores in excess of 130 are singled out as gifted, exceptional and above averageâ€"“only positive words” are used, and particularly for the 146+ bracket: thereby creating an other minority, but not one that is viewed with “the same compassion and understanding”.“The rating is out of balance. It exaggerates the positive aspects of the IQ without respecting the difficulties,” writes Browne, underscoring the views of the CIVIQ Society, which admits only those with IQs of greater than 14: “That high intelligence is a gift with only positive implications is a common misconception: it brings up facilities (talents, strengths and interests) on one hand, but often also specific difficulties and needs on the other.”2. IQ Does Not Predict SuccessTHE IQ threshold for Genius is 140; and Extraordinary Genius is 160. People often draw a direct correlation between genius IQs and success and achievement in the cases of, for example, Beethoven (165); Bill Gates, Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin (all 160); and Thomas Edison (145). This overlooks a number of other key factors that do these iconic characters a great disservice, and also place burdens of ex pectation on those with equivalent IQ scores.What united all those successful people was their persistence in the face of setbacks, failures and disadvantage. Einstein did not speak until he was four years old; Bill Gates’s first business failed; Edison worked at thousands of prototypes for the lightbulb before succeeding; Franklin dropped out of school at the age of 10; and Beethoven was told he would fail.Their fierce persistence paid off, but it was as much hard work and guts, as high IQ, that secured their success. Fortunately, persistence tends to be a trait of people who score highly on IQ tests, but not everyone with a high IQ is a success.Lewis Termans study of 1,500 California pupils with IQs greater than 140, begun in 1926 and extending into the longest-living subjects eighth decade, found that while the groups average salary was twice that of the average white-collar job, many pursued professions such as policing, seafaring and secretarial work. (adsbygoogle = window.a dsbygoogle || []).push({}); 3. IQ Does Not Predict RationalityA STUDY by Keith Stanovich at the University of Toronto found that rational thinking was independent of IQ.Stanovich looked into the “my-side bias”, the tendency to cling to our assumptions and reinforce our attitudes, and found that avoiding this, a strength of rational thinking, was no more likely to be done by smarter people than by those with average IQs.4. IQ Does Not Predict WisdomIN 2014, Igor Grossman at the University of Waterloo, Canada, devised a means of predicting success and happiness that was based not on intelligence but wise reasoning and wisdom.Grossman presented his randomly chosen volunteers with social dilemmas, drawn from reality, and observed and recorded their reasoning; their tendency to bias; the construction of their arguments; and whether they were prepared to accept the limits of their knowledge.In the study, Grossman found that wise reasoning was associated with greater life satisfaction, better social relationships, more positivity and less negativity in speech, less “depressive rumination” and greater longevity.Grossman has also begun testing his view that wisdom is not fixed, through simple experiments such as talking through problems in the third person, and assessing how this emotional distance can reduce prejudice and leader to wiser arguments. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 5. Larger Companies Losing Faith in Standardised TestsLASZLO Bock, senior vice president of people operations at Google, suggested that IQ had had its day as a means of measuring intelligence, when he told The New York Times in 2014 that the company was no longer looking at grade point averages, test scores, and even IQ.“For every job,” he said, “the No. 1 thing we look for us general cognitive ability, and its not IQ. Its learning ability. Its the ability to pull together disparate bits of information.”The other qualities valued at Google, in descending or der, are leadership (but not the traditional evaluationâ€"“when faced with a problem, and youre a member of a team, do you, at the appropriate time, step in and lead. And just as critically, do you step back and stop leading…?”); intellectual humility (“without humility you are unable to learn”); and finally, expertise.Possession of those qualities is seen at Google as being achievable even without third level education. Bock reveals that the proportion of people at Google without college education was as high as 14 percent on some teams.IT IS undeniable that IQ tests have their scientific uses, but they are by no means a satisfactory design for life. While they may provide a sound indication of cognitive ability, it would be a mistake to over-emphasise their reliability in measuring intelligence.Employers and hirers must work harder to devise more rounded indications of employee suitability.To do anything else would be rather at odds with the wisdom that Igor Grossman has found so central to a long, happy and successful life. Measuring Intelligence - 5 Reasons For New Thinking on IQ Measuring Intelligence 5 Reasons For New Thinking on IQ Image Source: iStockIN ANY discussion of  measuring intelligence, the Intelligence Quotient or IQ score usually plays a significant part. But if any  one thing in human history has had the most undesirable consequences arising from the name given to it, ‘Intelligence Quotient’ or IQ must surely be one of the strongest candidates for the dubious honour.Coined by psychologist William Stern the ‘Intelligence Quotient’, is a score derived from one of a number of standardised  tests designed for  assessing and measuring intelligence in humans. The first IQ test was developed by psychologist named Alfred Binet to help identify students who required extra help. Refined by Stanford Professor Lewis Terman, this became the “Stanford-Binet” test that’s still used today.If intelligence can be taken to mean the ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills, it is a good thing that a standardised  process for attempting to measure it exists.The problem tends to arise when the num erical score of the IQ has been usedâ€"as it often has beenâ€"as a predictor of success.  The key words and phrases in the above paragraph are “acquire and apply”, “knowledge and skills”, “measure”, “numerical score”, and “predictor of success”â€"and the phrases create a dissonance arising from the juxtaposition of scientific, data-based accuracy with the imprecision of “prediction” and the abstract concept of “success“.Of course, that was something of a word game, and proves nothing. What can’t be denied is the rise in those who criticise  the limitations of IQ and other standardised  tests; key business figures who are beginning to reject the tests outright; and researchers who are working to establish alternatives.Here are five main reasons why IQ needs to reassessed: (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 1. The Minority EffectIN  IQ tests, the median score is IQ 100, and there are standard deviations of 15 points greater or less. Appro ximately two-thirds of the population will score between IQ85 and IQ115. Above 5 percent of the population scores above IQ 125, and 5 percent below IQ 75.As noted by the Seattle-based writer Emerson Jane Browne, who researches and blogs about cognitive science and neuroscience, IQ scores recreated visually create a bell curve shape [see graph below], with long, steep tails on either end.Image Source: Wikimedia CommonsThe consequence is that there are “no negative or even neutral words” to describe IQs more than two standard deviations from the mean [i.e, greater than 130, lesser than 70].Those more than two standard deviations below the mean are considered by greater society as falling outside the norm, “and require additional assistance to adapt and be successful in society”.Meanwhile, those with IQ scores in excess of 130 are singled out as gifted, exceptional and above averageâ€"“only positive words” are used, and particularly for the 146+ bracket: thereby creating an other minority, but not one that is viewed with “the same compassion and understanding”.“The rating is out of balance. It exaggerates the positive aspects of the IQ without respecting the difficulties,” writes Browne, underscoring the views of the CIVIQ Society, which admits only those with IQs of greater than 14: “That high intelligence is a gift with only positive implications is a common misconception: it brings up facilities (talents, strengths and interests) on one hand, but often also specific difficulties and needs on the other.”2. IQ Does Not Predict SuccessTHE IQ threshold for Genius is 140; and Extraordinary Genius is 160. People often draw a direct correlation between genius IQs and success and achievement in the cases of, for example, Beethoven (165); Bill Gates, Albert Einstein and Benjamin Franklin (all 160); and Thomas Edison (145). This overlooks a number of other key factors that do these iconic characters a great disservice, and also place burdens of ex pectation on those with equivalent IQ scores.What united all those successful people was their persistence in the face of setbacks, failures and disadvantage. Einstein did not speak until he was four years old; Bill Gates’s first business failed; Edison worked at thousands of prototypes for the lightbulb before succeeding; Franklin dropped out of school at the age of 10; and Beethoven was told he would fail.Their fierce persistence paid off, but it was as much hard work and guts, as high IQ, that secured their success. Fortunately, persistence tends to be a trait of people who score highly on IQ tests, but not everyone with a high IQ is a success.Lewis Termans study of 1,500 California pupils with IQs greater than 140, begun in 1926 and extending into the longest-living subjects eighth decade, found that while the groups average salary was twice that of the average white-collar job, many pursued professions such as policing, seafaring and secretarial work. (adsbygoogle = window.a dsbygoogle || []).push({}); 3. IQ Does Not Predict RationalityA STUDY by Keith Stanovich at the University of Toronto found that rational thinking was independent of IQ.Stanovich looked into the “my-side bias”, the tendency to cling to our assumptions and reinforce our attitudes, and found that avoiding this, a strength of rational thinking, was no more likely to be done by smarter people than by those with average IQs.4. IQ Does Not Predict WisdomIN 2014, Igor Grossman at the University of Waterloo, Canada, devised a means of predicting success and happiness that was based not on intelligence but wise reasoning and wisdom.Grossman presented his randomly chosen volunteers with social dilemmas, drawn from reality, and observed and recorded their reasoning; their tendency to bias; the construction of their arguments; and whether they were prepared to accept the limits of their knowledge.In the study, Grossman found that wise reasoning was associated with greater life satisfaction, better social relationships, more positivity and less negativity in speech, less “depressive rumination” and greater longevity.Grossman has also begun testing his view that wisdom is not fixed, through simple experiments such as talking through problems in the third person, and assessing how this emotional distance can reduce prejudice and leader to wiser arguments. (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); 5. Larger Companies Losing Faith in Standardised TestsLASZLO Bock, senior vice president of people operations at Google, suggested that IQ had had its day as a means of measuring intelligence, when he told The New York Times in 2014 that the company was no longer looking at grade point averages, test scores, and even IQ.“For every job,” he said, “the No. 1 thing we look for us general cognitive ability, and its not IQ. Its learning ability. Its the ability to pull together disparate bits of information.”The other qualities valued at Google, in descending or der, are leadership (but not the traditional evaluationâ€"“when faced with a problem, and youre a member of a team, do you, at the appropriate time, step in and lead. And just as critically, do you step back and stop leading…?”); intellectual humility (“without humility you are unable to learn”); and finally, expertise.Possession of those qualities is seen at Google as being achievable even without third level education. Bock reveals that the proportion of people at Google without college education was as high as 14 percent on some teams.IT IS undeniable that IQ tests have their scientific uses, but they are by no means a satisfactory design for life. While they may provide a sound indication of cognitive ability, it would be a mistake to over-emphasise their reliability in measuring intelligence.Employers and hirers must work harder to devise more rounded indications of employee suitability.To do anything else would be rather at odds with the wisdom that Igor Grossman has found so central to a long, happy and successful life.