I was thinking about my best friend Dave today December 2, 2017, we would have been chatting about Christmas and making arrangements to go see the windows at Macy's downtown. Due to a twist of fate, due to his sensitivity to his surroundings, due to how cruel people were to him Dave is not here anymore, I wonder that as he tested "Gifted and Talented" at Marina Middle School in the early 1970s when I had tested "Genius" a few years before. I was always a bit jealous at the time as he had to only go to his school and take the test. I remember that day, the news and the enormous smiles from absolutely everyone. That day of conversation was both full of laughter and excitement as the results came to his home, and in that winning moment, as the words that had been drafted found there verbal receipt, he was in!! Of course, the chortle became a bit more gagging as it sank in and his face turned a bit pale at the curriculum that he would be faced with as he began his new school year at his brand new school in the Marina, as the news was littered with instructions and those days of preparation were indeed going to be long ones.
He laughed and said a common blurb as he bragged with fear in his eyes for me as he then recalled that I had tested genius just a few years before. After a gulp he just stared for a moment, his eyes large with wondering my life path, however that is a story for another time, if ever.
To my subject: Many people today are unfamiliar with the testing that happened in San Francisco following such a dynamic era in our City by the Bay. As the 'Summer of Love' brought many to term across this great nation not many ever speak on account of the kids that lived it as children, in other words, born and raised in the midst of the happening of the biggest movement that this country has ever seen. We (us kids born in the hinge) had all seen so much and had to grow-up so fast that at-least for Dave and I the 1960s were defining to our lives. The posture of today is to allow this country to know that should you want your child to be part of the 'Gifted and Talented' program you should practice. The programs still exist however I never here of any kids achieving the testing let alone any news and/or information on the fact that kids can practice for the tests themselves. All I have heard of late on the television are about genius schools, which is a bit odd since you have to test genius first to have had any school even consider you for their curriculum let alone consider you for enrollment. So the bottom line is simple, you must test genius, you must test gifted and talented and anything less is just that, less.
Rebecca, Kathleen, Johno and Lauren, to be perfectly clear, I tested genius just as Dave test gifted and talented. Now for your pleasure please take the time to read through the testing programs as there practice tests, and please understand for the final time that testing genius when I was just a little kid was not a joke.
Here are the current practice-tests being run-out-of New York City. Good luck and remember, practice makes perfect!!
Gifted and Talented: Practice Tests & Sample Questions - TestPrep ...
www.testprep-online.com/gifted-children-tests.aspx
TestPrep-Online is a global leader in test preparation. We are proud to provide high quality products for a low, affordable price. Give your child a competitive edge by preparing them for the OLSAT, NNAT, CogAT, NYC Gifted and Talented Test, or SCAT. If playback doesn't begin shortly, try restarting your device.
Gifted and Talented Practice Tests
TestPrep-Online is here to help your child practice and prepare for gifted and talented testing. Browse through our grade-specific practice resources, which are immediately accessible online.
Prepare for the 2016-2017 Testing Season
The 2016-2017 school year has arrived, and TestPrep-Online is here to help your child prepare for gifted and talented tests. With our help, your child will go into the test feeling confident and ready.Help your child start preparing now with TestPrep-Online's Premium Membership! With our Premium Membership, you will be able to access all of our practice materials, including practice tests, instructional videos, study guides, and score reports. We will assist you in creating the right study pack for your child's needs. Sign up now to gain access to the 12-month license and make use of our gifted and talented practice packs!
Gifted and Talented programs and schools are becoming increasingly popular across the United States. These programs are very challenging: they are taught at a faster pace, cover more material, and delve deeper into educational content. In order to be admitted, children often need to take a gifted program test.
In the United States, policies for gifted program admissions may vary based on state, city, or school district. Often, gifted tests are administered to all students in a certain grade. In some instances, a teacher or parent nominates a student believed to be gifted, and refers the student to take a gifted children test.
Gifted programs and schools are becoming increasingly more competitive from year to year, as outlined in a recent article in The New York Times:
In the United States, policies for gifted program admissions may vary based on state, city, or school district. Often, gifted tests are administered to all students in a certain grade. In some instances, a teacher or parent nominates a student believed to be gifted, and refers the student to take a gifted children test.
Gifted programs and schools are becoming increasingly more competitive from year to year, as outlined in a recent article in The New York Times:
With increasing competition, it is important to make sure that your child is prepared when test day arrives. TestPrep-Online provides thorough, realistic preparation material for some of the most common gifted children tests, such as the Otis-Lennon School Ability Test (OLSAT), Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT), Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT), New York City Gifted & Talented Test (NYC G&T), and the School and College Ability Test (SCAT).
What Is the CogAT?
The Cognitive Abilities Test (CogAT) is a multiple choice, primarily nonverbal test used to assess cognitive development among children in grades K-12. It is often used for admissions into gifted and talented programs in the US. The test is comprised of three batteries: the Verbal Battery, the Quantitative Battery, and the Nonverbal Battery. These batteries evaluate specific reasoning skills in order to predict future academic success. The CogAT assesses one's problem solving abilities, cognitive development, and the ability to learn new tasks. If you are located in Canada, your child may take the CCAT in place of the CogAT.What Is the OLSAT?
The Otis-Lennon School Ability Test (OLSAT) is a multiple choice test frequently used to identify students who are gifted and talented. Programs and schools for gifted and talented children frequently use the OLSAT to assess scholastic achievement among students. The test consists of verbal and nonverbalquestions, both of which evaluate a student's ability to handle academic tasks. The purpose of the OLSAT is to assess memory, the ability to see relationships and patterns, and speed of thought.What Is the NNAT?
The Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT) is a nonverbal test that assesses general ability and is often used to identify gifted and talented children. The NNAT questions are made up of symbols and/or shapes, require few instructions, and evaluate nonverbal reasoning and problem solving abilities in children aged 5 to 17. Since the NNAT requires minimal use of language and does not require reading, writing, or speaking, it is considered to be culturally neutral. The test utilizes abstract shapes and designs, allowing for unbiased scoring, regardless of the student's primary language as well as academic and socioeconomic background.What Is the NYC G&T?
The New York City Gifted & Talented Test (NYC G&T) is administered by the NYC Department of Education (DOE) to students aged 4-7 for entry into grades K-3. The test assesses New York City children to determine eligibility for NYC Gifted & Talented programs and schools. The test is made up of nonverbal questions from the NNAT and verbal questions from the OLSAT.What Is the SCAT?
The School and College Ability Test (SCAT) is an above-grade level testadministered by the Johns Hopkins Center for Talented Youth (CTY). The test is comprised of a verbal section and a quantitative section. All questions are multiple choice, and the test itself is computerized and available at computer test centers. The SCAT is used by CTY to identify gifted youth who demonstrate high academic potential. CTY offers various programs for gifted youth.Gifted and Talented Practice at TestPrep-Online
TestPrep-Online is a global leader in test preparation. We are proud to provide high quality products for a low, affordable price. Give your child a competitive edge by preparing them for the OLSAT, NNAT, CogAT, NYC Gifted and Talented Test, or SCAT.All of our study packs include realistic, full-length gifted and talented practice tests, detailed answer explanations, and thorough progress reports at the culmination of every test. Additionally, many of our premium packs include video tutorials and hundreds of additional sample questions. Our interactive online interface is easy to use, child-friendly, and readily accessible. View the video below to see how our website works:
"Nearly 5,000 children qualified for gifted and talented kindergarten seats in New York City public schools in the fall, 22 percent more than last year and more than double the number four years ago, setting off a fierce competition for the most sought-after programs in the system. Out of the children that qualified, not all were granted a spot in a NYC gifted school."
STOP!
Next; continued from the top of this page:
The East Coast is doing a disservice? These advertisement's on television are not serving the public, these commercials are insulting to the entire youth system and have made a mockery of all of us in the bay area, as you must test genius first, and that is not a pleasant experience as you will see in the first graph that is measured against you immediately, and, in-front of you.
Next; continued from the top of this page:
The East Coast is doing a disservice? These advertisement's on television are not serving the public, these commercials are insulting to the entire youth system and have made a mockery of all of us in the bay area, as you must test genius first, and that is not a pleasant experience as you will see in the first graph that is measured against you immediately, and, in-front of you.
Rennu Dhillion
Founder and CEO
510-713-2431
GENIUS KIDS
Infants, Toddlers, Preschool & PreK
https://geniuskidsonline.com
Genius Kids - Award Winning Accelerated Learning Franchise
"The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be kindled." – Plutarch
At Genius Kids, we believe that education and learning is a lifetime journey. Education is not about learning facts but about learning how to think confidently and being able to express creatively without fear. It is about learning to act with purpose to make good choices. Education is a lifelong process and Genius Kids makes it fun, exciting and enriching by equipping the child with critical life skills of confidence, communication and love for learning, incorporating smart board interactive technology and public speaking.
At Genius Kids, we believe that education and learning is a lifetime journey. Education is not about learning facts but about learning how to think confidently and being able to express creatively without fear. It is about learning to act with purpose to make good choices. Education is a lifelong process and Genius Kids makes it fun, exciting and enriching by equipping the child with critical life skills of confidence, communication and love for learning, incorporating smart board interactive technology and public speaking.
Visit us today and learn more about our award winning programs.
Importance of Public Speaking
What makes Genius Kids unique is our mission to develop leadership and communication skills in all our graduates. At Genius Kids, public speaking and speaking on the microphone starts right from the time your lil’ genius can walk. Our simple easy “Win With Words” learning recipes developed by Rennu Dhillon, introduces children to easy ways to overcome shyness, develop conversational skills, communication and confidence.
We believe that practicing and incorporating public speaking at a young age helps children overcome this fear, as the microphone and presentations become second nature to them.
We believe that practicing and incorporating public speaking at a young age helps children overcome this fear, as the microphone and presentations become second nature to them.
Blog by Rennu Dhillion Dsc.
The Pros and Cons of Learning Cursive
How many of you still wonder why schools are requiring that children learn to write in cursive when we are advancing so quickly with technology, iPad and computers. Well like anything controversial, there are two sides to every coin so let’s discuss the pro’s and cons of learning cursive.
Let’s begin with the pro’s. First and foremost, once we learn to write cursive, we are able to read cursive, and hence able to read historical documents such as the Declaration of Independence. I guess this would be a great skill for those seeking to advance into legal fields.
Cursive is believed to be a faster way of writing although I do not think many will agree with this.Internet plagiarism has increased with the use of computers and the ability to copy and paste, so traditional teachers are preferring the in-class writing assignments.
A 2010 study by the Carnegie Corporation of New York reported that reading skills can improve faster when children write the words they are learning to read.
Now let’s review the con’s. Like calligraphy, we are past cursive writing and things can be done easily and quicker on computers.
Writing is more a functional exercise so students should be able to do it the way they choose and not be told the style of writing to follow.
Many students take a longer time writing in cursive and this only adds more frustration to the endless amount of homework they already have.
Many students take a longer time writing in cursive and this only adds more frustration to the endless amount of homework they already have.
We need to prepare children for the future which is using technology and curve is not necessarily anything useful other than reading old documents.
What are your thoughts on this subject? Share your views
What is Self Esteem - Part 1
Date Posted: June, 28 2016, Posted By: Rennu Dhillon DSc.
Categories: Self-Esteem
Self-esteem is the belief we have about ourselves, our own self perception of who we are and what we think of ourselves. What we think about ourselves and our belief in our capabilities will directly and indirectly influence our motivation, attitude, behavior, and our emotional and physical aspects of our life. It is therefore critical that we as parents ensure that we develop self-esteem in our children.
If a child has a healthy self-esteem, they become stronger and are able to handles the challenges and peer pressure that they will face growing up. Believe it or not, it takes a lot of confidence to be a kid. They are faced with new schools, new friends, bullies, pressure of keeping up with at least 25-30 other kids in the class, comparison with a sibling or cousin and overall pressure to keep up with everyone their age. As parents, we tend to forget sometimes how much pressure our kids have to deal with and we forget that each child is different. It is important that we are conscious about their feelings and continue to work on building an “I CAN” attitude in each of them. Kids develop confidence not because parents tell them they're great, but because of their achievements, big and small. Hearing encouraging words from mom and dad is a real benefit. But words of praise mean more when they refer to a child's specific efforts or new abilities.
Here's how you can play important role in promoting healthy self-esteem in your child.
Activity 2:
Be conscious of the tone of voice, the body language and every expression you use in front of your child, they absorb everything. Avoid belittling comments or favoring one child over another or making comparisons with other kids and making them feel worthless.
Be conscious of the tone of voice, the body language and every expression you use in front of your child, they absorb everything. Avoid belittling comments or favoring one child over another or making comparisons with other kids and making them feel worthless.
Comments such as “what a stupid thing to do”, “why are you acting retarded”, or “why are you still not able to read like your brother did when he was your age”, are worse than physical blows. These emotional statements can be detriment for a lifetime. Be careful to choose your words, and be as compassionate as possible. Remember, we all make mistakes and no one is perfect.
Remand your child every day that you love them even when you do not love their behavior.
History of . . . .
Founded August 1, 2001, Genius Kids opened its first classroom in the Ardenwood Campus in Fremont, California with only 2 students under the guidance, passion & vision of the founder Rennu Dhillon. A pharmacist by education, with a Doctorate in Natural Sciences, and numerous specializations in Pubic Speaking, Etiqueet, Grooming & Learning Disabilities, Dhillon has spent several years training adults, marketing & recruiting. She was astounded at the lack of confidence & communication skills in candidates she would send for interviews. "On paper they had all the skills needed, but when it came to conducting a 1-1 interview or using interpersonal skills, it was shocking to see the lack of self-confidence", expressed Dhillon.
A brilliant academic student herself, Dhillon was raised in Kenya and United Kingdom, where focus is placed on early education. “I was shocked to see that formal education in the United States begins at age 5, & found the American elementary education not very challenging. I was introduced to drama, theatre & public speaking to me when I was 3 years old.” From her experience of struggling to find preschools that would give her own two daughters the strong foundation & education she had received herself, she felt there was a void in the preschools & after school programs for a well-rounded educational curriculum which would offer leadership development combined with fun academics.
She began to develop her own advanced learning programs, incorporating speech & public speaking into every aspect of learning. Early readers as young as 2 years 3 months old began to emerge, & soon Genius Kids students were winning competitions locally & nationally, along with being recognized for their well-rounded personalities. Word spread quickly and today (2016) Genius Kids boasts 28 campuses and growing.
In 2011, Genius Kids became a national and global franchise known which offers viable solutions to entrepreneurs seeking to venture into their own educational business models. Genius Kids centers offer the same curriculum consistent with what has been developed by Ms. Rennu through an online portal.
Rennu expressed. "1 am committed to take early education to the next level where every parent & educator realizes the importance of a well-balanced curriculum to ensure no child is left behind. After all, children are like sponges, absorbing everything they hear, see & do, if they are exposed during the window of opportunities between ages 0-6 years old!"
Dhillon is in the process of developing specific interactive programs for children with mild learning disabilities, to include Dyslexia, Autism, and ADD & ADHD. "The interactivity & simplicity of how we teach is perfect for struggling learners, and I have already seen phenomenal results with so many students."smiles Dhillon with pride and confidence at her award winning curriculum. More information on the Genius Kids franchise can be obtained by calling 510-364-4033.
Dhillon has conceptualized and developed over 3,000 learning recipes for all ages and every day thousands of children all around the world benefit from her passion and dedication to developing Future Leaders! Rennu has won several global, national and local awards and been featured on many TV networks and programs as an expert in Early Education and Public Speaking. She can be heard every week on Saturday on the local radio channel KLOK 1170 AM from 11 am to 12 noon hosting Genius Kids On Air Radio Show - www.klok1170am.com.
[PDF]
The Binet-Simon measuring scale for intelligence - Russell Sage ...
https://www.russellsage.org/sites/default/files/Ayres_BinetSimon%20Test_0.pdf
The Binet-Simon tests consist of a series of fifty-six tasks and questions adapted to the capabilities of normal children of from three to thirteen years of age, and their purpose is to pro- vide a measuring scale whereby the intellectual performance of the child tested may be compared with that of the average nor- mal child of ...[PDF]The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for Intelligence - Brandeis IR
bir.brandeis.edu/bitstream/handle/10192/28935/413%20p-5.pdf?sequence=1
by ES Kite - Cited by 2 - Related articles
The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale is composed of mental tests which measure the intelligence. Thesetests are short, direct ques- tions bearing upon simple matters of every-day life, gradually be- coming more difficult and involving new mental processes as the age of the child increases. To quote from Dr. H. H. Goddard's.[PDF]binet and simon's system for measuring the intelligence of children
https://mn.gov/mnddc/past/pdf/10s/10/10-BSS-FNK.pdf
by BYF KUHLMANN - Cited by 13 - Related articles
The present article is a condensation, with minor adaptations from Binet et Simon[PDF]History of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales - Houghton Mifflin ...
www.hmhco.com/~/media/sites/home/hmh-assessments/...binet/pdf/sb5_asb_1.pdf?...
and testing involving “normal” as well as mentally retarded examinees. In 1916, Lewis Terman authored The Measurement of Intelligence: An. Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the Use of the Stanford Revision and. Extension of the Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale (Terman, 1916). This manual presented translations ...[PDF]A Brief Binet-Simon Scale - Semantic Scholar
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/25e3/8c8a0cdb9df9b2035a9fb8cb7a5843f25f8f.pdf
by EA Doll - 1917 - Cited by 47 - Related articles
could be abbreviated without serious loss of efficiency as a measure of intelligence levels, there would indeed result a great gain for mental measurement and its many fields of application. It has long been recognized that the individual tests of the. Binet-Simon Scale do not present the same relative degrees of diffi-.[PDF]The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for Intelligence: Some ... - NCBI
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/.../pdf/psycholclin69693-0021.pdf
by LP Ayres - 1911 - Cited by 21 - Related articles
Leonard P. Ayees, Ph.D.,. Russell Sage Foundation. In 1908, the French psychologists Binet and Simonpub- lished their second and most famous series of tests for the diagnosis of the grade of intelligence of children. This series, translated and adapted for American use by Goddard and Whipple, has won for itself ...[PDF]the measurement of intelligence - Psychaanalyse
https://psychaanalyse.com/pdf/THE_MEASUREMENT_OF_INTELLIGENCE.pdf
by LM TERMAN - 1916 - Cited by 2302 - Related articles
parents interested in intelligence measurements, as at once the simplest and the best explanation of the newly- evolved intelligence tests, which has so far appeared in print. Ellwood P. Cubberley. PREFACE. The constant and growing use of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale in public schools, institutions for defectives,.[PDF]Intelligence Testing I.ppt [Read-Only] - Ipfw
users.ipfw.edu/abbott/120/Intelligence%20Testing%20I.pdf
Binet's approach was guided by the belief that experience plays a large role in determining one's intelligence. ▫ Galton framed the debate between these opposing views as “nature versus nurture,” where nature represents inheritance and nurture represents experience. The Binet-Simon Test. ▫. Individually administered ...THE STANFORD REVISION OF THE BINET-SIMON ... - PsycNET
psycnet.apa.org/journals/edu/6/9/551.pdf
by LM Terman - 1915 - Cited by 40 - Related articles
The purpose of this article is to summarize briefly an investi- gation undertaken for the improvement of the Binet scale, and to suggest some possible contributions of intelligence testing to the psychology of mental development. The work has extended over a period of five years and has involved the examination of 1700 ...THE BINET-SIMON MEASURING SCALE FOR ... - PsycNET
psycnet.apa.org/journals/edu/5/4/215.pdf
by SC Kohs - 1914 - Cited by 21 - Related articles
ABELSOX, A. R. The Measurement of Mental Ability of. "Backward" Children. Brit. J. Psychol. 1911, 4:26S-. 314. Thirteen tests suggested, six of them being very closely re- lated to those of Binet. 3a. MABTHA ADLER. Mental Tests vsed as a Basis for the. Classification of School Children. J. of Educ. Psychol. 1914, 5: 22-
[PDF]Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition - International ...
https://umw.dyslexiaida.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2016/.../SCHOOL-SLD.pdf
strengths and weaknesses? • What are appropriate educational recommendations? • What are appropriate accommodations? Instruments used for measuring cognitive abilities and intellectual functioning. • Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children –. 4. • Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – 4. • Woodcock-Johnson Tests of ...[PDF]Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV Conceptual and ...
www.iupui.edu/~flip/wiscdescription.pdf
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV (WISC-IV) is designed for children ages 6 - 16, while theWechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence-III (WPPSI-III) is designed for children age 4 - 6 1/2 years.Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition (WISC-IV)
www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09297040590951587
by IS Baron - 2005 - Cited by 31 - Related articles
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fourth Edition (WISC-IV) is the lat- est revision of a well-respected and widely used general intelligence test. ... A sample of 1,100 children was administered the arithmetic subtest.the wechsler intelligence scale for children ... - Wiley Online Library
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1962.tb01747.x/pdf
by S JONES - 1962 - Cited by 22 - Related articles
THE WECHSLER INTELLIGENCE SCALE FOR CHILDREN. APPLIED TO A SAMPLE OF LONDON PRIMARY SCHOOL. CHILDREN. BY SHEILA JONES. ([PDF]WISC-IV - Child Testing
www.child-testing.com/images/pdfs/gifted-testing-sample-report.pdf
Psychoeducational Solutions of Tampa Bay. “Helping children achieve their full potential through early detection.” WISC-IV. Wechsler Intelligence Scale For Children- Fourth Edition. Descriptive and Graphical Report. Area of Assessment: IQ and cognitive functioning ...Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fourth Edition - Springer
https://link.springer.com/10.1007%2F978-0-387-79061-9_3066
by R Grizzle - 2011 - Cited by 1 - Related articles
Download PDF (371 KB) ... The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Fourth Edition (WISC-IV; [17]) is the revision of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children – Third Edition (WISC-III; [13]). ... TheWechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R), the next revision of the WISC, was released in 1974 [9].Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale | Wechsler IQ Test
https://wechslertest.com/
Wechsler Intelligence Scale For Children Vs. Adults. David Wechsler (1896 - 1981) was an American psychologist whose work frequently specialized in intelligence testing. He developed two intelligence scales - the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children ([PDF]CHILDREN 3-12 YEARS OLD Child ... - University of Michigan
https://psidonline.isr.umich.edu/cds/questionnaires/cds-i/english/child.pdf
Length of Edit: ______. CHILDREN 3-12 YEARS OLD. Child Questionnaire. The University of Michigan. Survey Research Center. Institute for Social Research. Ann Arbor, MI ... CHILD SPEAKS ENGLISH GO TO A2, AND ATTEMPT ASSESSMENTS. 2. CHILD ... “Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children” and. “[PDF]Structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth ...
edpsychassociates.com/Papers/WISC-IVstructure%282010%29.pdf
by MW Watkins - Cited by 75 - Related articles
The structure of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—Fourth Edition ([PDF]the standardization of the wechsler intelligence scale for children1
www.iapsych.com/iqmr/seashore1950.pdf
by H SEASHORE - Cited by 96 - Related articles
quired for examination, the Scale is to be ad-. 1This report of the standardization is an expan- sion of technical sections in the test manual: David. Wechsler, Wechsler intelligence scale for children. New York: Psychological Corporation, 1949. Pp. 113. ministered ordinarily on the basis of only ten tests. For various statistical ...
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), developed by David Wechsler, is an individually administered intelligence test for children between the ages of 6 and 16. The Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014) is the most current version.
The WISC-V takes 45–65 minutes to administer. It generates a Full Scale IQ (formerly known as an intelligence quotient or IQ score) that represents a child's general intellectual ability. It also provides five primary index scores: Verbal Comprehension Index, Visual Spatial Index, Fluid Reasoning Index, Working Memory Index, and Processing Speed Index. These indices represent a child's abilities in discrete cognitive domains. Five ancillary composite scores can be derived from various combinations of primary or primary and secondary subtests.
Five complementary subtests yield three complementary composite scores to measure related cognitive abilities relevant to assessment and identification of specific learning disabilities, particularly dyslexia and dyscalculia. Variation in testing procedures and goals can reduce time of assessment to 15–20 minutes for the assessment of a single primary index, or increase testing time to three or more hours for a complete assessment, including all primary, ancillary, and complementary indices.
Contents
[hide]History[edit]
The original WISC (Wechsler, 1949) was an adaption of several of the subtests that made up the Wechsler–Bellevue Intelligence Scale (Wechsler, 1939) but also featured several subtests designed specifically for it. The subtests were organized into Verbal and Performance scales and provided scores for Verbal IQ (VIQ), Performance IQ (PIQ), and Full Scale IQ (FSIQ).
Each successive edition has re-normed the test to compensate for the Flynn effect, ensuring not only that the norms do not become outdated which is suggested to result in inflated scores on intelligence measures, but that they are representative of the current population (Flynn, 1984, 1987, 1999; Matarazzo, 1972). Additional updates and refinements include changes to the questions to make them less biased against minorities and females and updated materials to make them more useful in the administration of the test. A revised edition was published in 1974 as the WISC-R (Wechsler, 1974), featuring the same subtests. However, the age range was changed from 5-15 to 6-16.
The third edition was published in 1991 (WISC-III; Wechsler, 1991) and brought with it a new subtest as a measure of processing speed. In addition to the traditional VIQ, PIQ, and FSIQ scores, four new index scores were introduced to represent more narrow domains of cognitive function: the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), the Perceptual Organization Index (POI), the Freedom from Distractibility Index (FDI), and the Processing Speed Index (PSI).
The WISC-IV was produced in 2003. The WISC-V was published in 2014. The WISC-V has a total of 21 subtests. It yields 15 composite scores.
Test format[edit]
The WISC is one test in a suite of Wechsler intelligence scales. Subjects 16 and over are tested with the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), and children ages two years and six months to seven years and seven months are tested with the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI). There is some overlap between tests: children aged 6 years 0 months through 7 years 7 months can complete the WPPSI or the WISC; children aged 16 can complete the WISC-V or the WAIS-IV. Different floor effect and ceiling effectcan be achieved using the different tests, allowing for a greater understanding of the child's abilities or deficits. This means that a 16-year-old adolescent who has an intellectual disability may be tested using the WISC-V so that the clinician may see the floor of their knowledge (the lowest level).
There are five primary index scores, the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Visual Spatial Index (VSI), Fluid Reasoning Index (FRI), Working Memory Index (WMI), and Processing Speed Index (PSI). Two subtests must be administered to obtain each of the primary index scores; thus, a total of 10 subtests are primary subtests. The Full Scale IQ is derived from 7 of the 10 primary subtests: Both Verbal Comprehension subtests, one Visual Spatial subtest, two Fluid Reasoning subtests, one Working Memory subtest, and one Processing Speed subtest. Verbal Comprehension and Fluid Reasoning are weighted more heavily in the Full Scale IQ to reflect the importance of crystallized and fluid abilities in modern intelligence models (Wechsler, 2014).
The VCI is derived from the Similarities and Vocabulary subtests. The Verbal Comprehension scale subtests are described below:
- Similarities – (primary, FSIQ) asking how two words are alike/similar.
- Vocabulary – (primary, FSIQ) examinee is asked to define a provided word
- Information (secondary) – general knowledge questions.
- Comprehension – (secondary) questions about social situations or common concepts.
The VCI is an overall measure of verbal concept formation (the child's ability to verbally reason) and is influenced by semantic knowledge.
The VSI is derived from the Block Design and Visual Puzzles subtests. These subtests are as follows:
- Block Design (primary, FSIQ) – children put together red-and-white blocks in a pattern according to a displayed model. This is timed, and some of the more difficult puzzles award bonuses for speed.
- Visual Puzzles (primary) – children view a puzzle in a stimulus book and choose from among pieces of which three could construct the puzzle.
The VSI is a measure of visual spatial processing.
The FRI is derived from the Matrix Reasoning and Figure Weights subtests. The Fluid Reasoning scale subtests are described below:
- Matrix Reasoning (primary, FSIQ) – children are shown an array of pictures with one missing square, and select the picture that fits the array from five options.
- Figure Weights (primary, FSIQ) – children view a stimulus book that pictures shapes on a scale (or scales) with one empty side and select the choice that keeps the scale balanced.
- Picture Concepts (secondary) – children are provided with a series of pictures presented in rows (either two or three rows) and asked to determine which pictures go together, one from each row.
- Arithmetic (secondary) – orally administered arithmetic questions. Timed.
The FRI is a measure of inductive and quantitative reasoning.
The WMI is derived from the Digit Span and Picture Span subtests. The Working Memory scale's subtests are as follows:
- Digit Span (primary, FSIQ) – children are given sequences of numbers orally and asked to repeat them, as heard and in reverse order.
- Picture Span (primary) – children view pictures in a stimulus book and select from options to indicate the pictures they saw, in order if possible.
- Letter-Number Sequencing (secondary) – children are provided a series of numbers and letters and asked to provide them to the examiner in a predetermined order.
The WMI is a measure of working memory ability.
The PSI is derived from the Coding and Symbol Search subtests. The Processing Speed subtests are as follows:
- Coding (primary, FSIQ) – children under 8 mark rows of shapes with different lines according to a code, children over 8 transcribe a digit-symbol code. The task is time-limited with bonuses for speed.
- Symbol Search (primary) – children are given rows of symbols and target symbols, and asked to mark whether or not the target symbols appear in each row.
- Cancellation (secondary) – children scan random and structured arrangements of pictures and marks specific target pictures within a limited amount of time.
The PSI is a measure of processing speed.
The 2014 publication of the WISC-V contained five ancillary index scores that may be derived for special clinical purposes or situations: the Quantitative Reasoning Index (QRI), the Auditory Working Memory Index (AWMI), the Nonverbal Index (NVI), the General Ability Index (GAI), and the Cognitive Proficiency Index (CPI). Three of these ancillary index scores (NVI, GAI, and CPI) can be derived from the 10 primary subtests. The QRI and the AWMI can each be derived by administering one additional subtest from subtests that are within one of the five primary scales (Verbal Comprehension scale, Visual Spatial Index, Fluid Reasoning scale, Working Memory scale, and Processing Speed scale) but are not primary. The set of these subtests is termed secondary subtests (Wechsler, 2014).
Two ancillary index scores termed the expanded index scores were released the year after the 2014 publication, so are not included in the published manuals. These are the Verbal (Expanded Crystallized) Index (VECI) and the Expanded Fluid Index (EFI) (Raiford, Drozdick, Zhang, & Zhou, 2015).
Three complementary index scores are available to measure cognitive processes that are important to achievement and are sensitive to specific learning disabilities. The complementary index scores are the Naming Speed Index (NSI), designed to measure rapid automatized naming, and the Symbol Translation Index, designed to measure visual-verbal associative memory, which is sometimes termed visual-verbal paired associate learning in the published literature (Wechsler, 2014). The Naming Speed scale contains Naming Speed Literacy, which measures rapid automatic naming, and Naming Speed Literacy, which is the only commercially published and normed measure of rapid quantity naming, also known as subitizing. Naming Speed Quantity is uniquely sensitive to math achievement and specific learning disabilities in mathematics (Raiford et al., 2016; Wechsler, Raiford, & Holdnack, 2014).
Psychometric properties[edit]
The WISC–V normative sample consisted of 2,200 children between the ages of 6 and 16 years 11 months. In addition to the normative sample, a number of special group samples were collected, including the following: children identified as intellectually gifted, children with mild or moderate intellectual disability, children with specific learning disorders (reading, written expression, and math), children with ADHD, children with disruptive behavior, children who are English Language Learners, children with autism spectrum disorder with language impairment, children with autism spectrum disorder without language impairment, and children with traumatic brain injuries.
The WISC–V is also linked with measures of achievement, adaptive behavior, executive function, and behavior and emotion. Equivalency studies were also conducted within the Wechsler family of tests and with a Kaufman test (the KABC-II) enabling comparisons between various intellectual ability scores over the lifespan. A number of concurrent studies were conducted to examine the scale's reliability and validity. Evidence of the convergent and discriminant validity of the WISC–V is provided by correlational studies with the following instruments: WISC–IV, WPPSI–IV, WAIS–IV, WASI–II, KABC–II, KTEA–3, WIAT–III, NEPSY–II, Vineland–II, and BASC–II. Evidence of construct validity was provided through a series of factor-analytic studies and mean comparisons using matched samples of special group and nonclinical children.
Uses[edit]
The WISC is used not only as an intelligence test, but as a clinical tool. Some practitioners use the WISC as part of an assessment to diagnose attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder(ADHD) and learning disabilities, for example. This is usually done through a process called pattern analysis, in which the various subtests' scores are compared to one another (ipsative scoring) and clusters of unusually low scores in relation to the others are searched for. David Wechsler himself suggested this in 1958.[1]
However, the research does not show this to be an effective way to diagnose ADHD or learning disabilities.[2] The vast majority of ADHD children do not display certain subtests substantially below others, and many children who display such patterns do not have ADHD. Other patterns for children with learning disabilities show a similar lack of usefulness of the WISC as a diagnostic tool.[3] Although, when Cattell Horn Carrol (CHC) theory is used to interpret the WISC–V subtests, things tend to make a great deal more sense.
When diagnosing children, best practice suggests that a multi-test battery (i.e., multi-factored evaluation) should be used as learning problems, attention, and emotional difficulties can have similar symptoms, co-occur, or reciprocally influence each other. For example, children with learning difficulties can become emotionally distraught and thus have concentration difficulties, begin to exhibit behavior problems, or both. Children with ADD or ADHD may show learning difficulties because of their attentional problems or also have learning disorder or disability (or have nothing else). In short, while diagnosis of any childhood or adult difficulty should never be made based on IQ alone (or interview, physician examination, parent report, other test etc. for that matter) the cognitive ability test can help rule out, in conjunction with other tests and sources of information, other explanations for problems, uncover co-morbid problems, and be a rich source of information when properly analyzed and care is taken to avoid relying simply on the single summary IQ score (Sattler, Dumont, & Coalson, 2016).
The WISC can be used to show discrepancies between a child's intelligence and his/her performance at school (and it is this discrepancy that school psychologists look for when using this test). In a clinical setting, learning disabilities can be diagnosed through a comparison of intelligence scores and scores on an achievement test, such as the Woodcock Johnson III or Wechsler Individual Achievement Test II. If a child's achievement is below what would be expected given their level of intellectual functioning (as derived from an IQ test such as the WISC-IV), then a learning disability may be present. Other psychologists and researchers believe that the WISC can be used to understand the complexities of the human mind by examining each subtest and can, indeed, help in diagnosing learning disabilities.
Subsequently, the WISC can be used as part of an assessment battery to identify intellectual giftedness, learning difficulties, and cognitive strengths and weaknesses. When combined with other measures such as the Adaptive Behavior Assessment System–II (ABAS–II; Harrison & Oakland, 2003) and the Children's Memory Scale (CMS; Cohen, 1997) its clinical utility can be enhanced. Combinations such as these provide information on cognitive and adaptive functioning, both of which are required for the proper diagnosis of learning difficulties and learning and memory functioning resulting in a richer picture of a child's cognitive functioning.
The WISC–V is linked with the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Third Edition (KTEA–3; Kaufman & Kaufman, 2014) and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test-III (WIAT–III; Pearson, 2009), a measure of academic achievement. This linkage provides information on both cognitive ability and academic achievement in children. Tests of intellectual functioning are used extensively in school settings to evaluate specific cognitive deficits that may contribute to low academic achievement, and to predict future academic achievement. Using the WISC–V in such a manner provides information for educational intervention purposes, such as interventions that address learning difficulties and cognitive deficits.
The WISC–V can also be used to assess a child's cognitive development, with respect to the child's chronological age. Using such comparisons with other sources of data, the WISC can contribute information concerning a child's developmental and psychological well-being. Very high or very low scores may suggest contributing factors for adjustment difficulties in social contexts that present problems in accepting such developmental diversity (or that cannot accommodate more than a certain level of high cognitive functioning.)
Translations[edit]
WISC has been translated or adapted to many languages, and norms have been established for a number of countries, including Spanish, Portuguese (Brazil and Portugal), Arabic, Norwegian, Swedish, Finnish, Czech, Croatian, French (France and Canada), German (Germany, Austria and Switzerland), English (United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia), Welsh, Dutch, Japanese, Chinese (Hong Kong), Korean (South Korea), Greek, Romanian, Slovenian and Italian. Separate norms are established with each translation. (Norway uses the Swedish norms). India uses the Malin's Intelligence Scale for Children (MISIC), an adaptation of WISC.[4] The fourth edition of WISC was adapted and standardized for India in 2012. The Japanese versions of the WISC-IV was developed by Japanese psychologists Kazuhiko Ueno, Kazuhiro Fujita, Hisao Maekawa, Toshinori Ishikuma, Hitoshi Dairoku, and Osamu Matsuda.
The Wechsler Intelligence Scales consist of the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS). These are the most widely taught, used, and researched contemporary measures of human intelligence. Each Wechsler test consists of extensive interaction between a test taker and an administrator who assesses various cognitive abilities through a diverse array of standardized exercises. Because adult intelligence is of greatest direct relevance to career development, and because all three Wechsler scales possess a similar overall structure, the present discussion is limited to the WAIS. Research concerning the adult scale—currently in its third edition (WAIS-III)— supports its value as an indicator of intellectual ability and potential. However, decisions concerning the use of the WAIS in career assessment will depend on situational needs and constraints.
The WAIS-III conceptualizes intelligence as a general capacity for effective reasoning and behavior. This capacity is measured by performance on 11 to 14 subtests administered by a trained proctor, who adheres to a highly structured testing protocol. These tests vary considerably: some are timed, others not; some are strictly oral, others involve visual stimuli; and still others require physical manipulation of objects. The WAIS measures a person’s general intelligence level, along with more specific capacities, such as verbal and performance ability. Verbal intelligence involves verbal memory, general fund of factual knowledge, and capacity to reason with words, numbers, and other abstract symbols. Performance intelligence is visual-spatial-motor ability, including the capacity to process, integrate, manipulate, and discriminate among objects and visual stimuli (i.e., shapes, patterns, and pictures). Various WAIS subtests also measure other specific mental abilities, such as working memory and processing speed.
Because of the WAIS’s long history and widespread contemporary use in psychological assessment, scholars have produced a substantial body of supporting research. Evidence from these studies indicates that (a) there is such a thing as general intelligence, (b) intelligence is an effective if imperfect predictor of academic and job performance, and (c) the WAIS-III is a reliable and valid measure of this mental property. WAIS research has also supported its value in the assessment of specific cognitive problems, such as memory loss, attention disorders, and cognitive developmental disabilities. Particularly in career-development-related cases where such cognitive disorders are suspected, the WAIS-III is of great potential use.
Nevertheless, despite the WAIS’s obvious rigor and validity, some scholars question the sensibility of using it in career assessment of nonclinical populations. Past grades, standardized achievement test scores (e.g., the ACT), and related information can often be used in career guidance to make reasonable predictions about one’s capability of acquiring job-related skills. Similarly, in employment selection, grades and demonstrated job-related skills may be a fair indicator of potential. To the extent that these alternative sources of information are available, the added benefit of a formal intelligence score may not justify the cost and effort of administering the WAIS. Moreover, when a formal measure of general intelligence is desired, there are other available research-based assessments that are sufficiently valid and significantly more cost and time efficient.
Intelligence quotient
| Intelligence quotient | |
|---|---|
| Medical diagnostics | |
![[picture of an example IQ test item]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Raven_Matrix.svg)
An example of one kind of IQ test item, modeled after items in the Raven's Progressive Matrices test
| |
| ICD-10-PCS | Z01.8 |
| ICD-9-CM | 94.01 |
An intelligence quotient (IQ) is a total score derived from several standardized tests designed to assess human intelligence. The abbreviation "IQ" was coined by the psychologist William Stern for the German term Intelligenzquotient, his term for a scoring method for intelligence tests at University of Breslau he advocated in a 1912 book.[1] Historically, IQ is a score obtained by dividing a person’s mental age score, obtained by administering an intelligence test, by the person’s chronological age, both expressed in terms of years and months. The resulting fraction is multiplied by 100 to obtain the IQ score.[2] When current IQ tests were developed, the median raw score of the norming sample is defined as IQ 100 and scores each standard deviation (SD) up or down are defined as 15 IQ points greater or less,[3] although this was not always so historically. By this definition, approximately two-thirds of the population scores are between IQ 85 and IQ 115. About 2.5 percent of the population scores above 130, and 2.5 percent below 70.[4][5]
Scores from intelligence tests are estimates of intelligence because concrete measurements (e.g. distance, mass) cannot be achieved given the abstract nature of the concept of "intelligence".[6] IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality,[7][8] parental social status,[9] and, to a substantial degree, biological parental IQ. While the heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, there is still debate about the significance of heritability estimates[10][11]and the mechanisms of inheritance.[12]
IQ scores are used for educational placement, assessment of intellectual disability, and evaluating job applicants. Even when students improve their scores on standardized tests, they do not always improve their cognitive abilities, such as memory, attention and speed.[13] In research contexts they have been studied as predictors of job performance, and income. They are also used to study distributions of psychometric intelligence in populations and the correlations between it and other variables. Raw scores on IQ tests for many populations have been rising at an average rate that scales to three IQ points per decade since the early 20th century, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. Investigation of different patterns of increases in subtest scores can also inform current research on human intelligence.
Contents
[hide]- 1History
- 2Current tests
- 3Test bias or differential item functioning
- 4Reliability and validity
- 5Flynn effect
- 6Age
- 7Genetics and environment
- 8Interventions
- 9Music
- 10Brain anatomy
- 11Health
- 12Social correlations
- 13Group-IQ or the collective intelligence factor c
- 14Group differences
- 15Public policy
- 16Criticism and views
- 17Classification
- 18High IQ societies
- 19See also
- 20References
- 21Bibliography
- 22External links
History[edit]
Precursors to IQ testing[edit]
Historically, even before IQ tests were invented, there were attempts to classify people into intelligence categories by observing their behavior in daily life.[14][15] Those other forms of behavioral observation are still important for validating classifications based primarily on IQ test scores. Both intelligence classification by observation of behavior outside the testing room and classification by IQ testing depend on the definition of "intelligence" used in a particular case and on the reliability and error of estimation in the classification procedure.[citation needed]
The English statistician Francis Galton made the first attempt at creating a standardized test for rating a person's intelligence. A pioneer of psychometrics and the application of statistical methods to the study of human diversity and the study of inheritance of human traits, he believed that intelligence was largely a product of heredity (by which he did not mean genes, although he did develop several pre-Mendelian theories of particulate inheritance).[16][17][18] He hypothesized that there should exist a correlation between intelligence and other observable traits such as reflexes, muscle grip, and head size.[19] He set up the first mental testing centre in the world in 1882 and he published "Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development" in 1883, in which he set out his theories. After gathering data on a variety of physical variables, he was unable to show any such correlation, and he eventually abandoned this research.[20][21]
French psychologist Alfred Binet, together with Victor Henri and Théodore Simon had more success in 1905, when they published the Binet-Simon test, which focused on verbal abilities. It was intended to identify mental retardation in school children,[22] but in specific contradistinction to claims made by psychiatrists that these children were "sick" (not "slow") and should therefore be removed from school and cared for in asylums.[23] The score on the Binet-Simon scale would reveal the child's mental age. For example, a six-year-old child who passed all the tasks usually passed by six-year-olds—but nothing beyond—would have a mental age that matched his chronological age, 6.0. (Fancher, 1985). Binet thought that intelligence was multifaceted, but came under the control of practical judgment.
In Binet's view, there were limitations with the scale and he stressed what he saw as the remarkable diversity of intelligence and the subsequent need to study it using qualitative, as opposed to quantitative, measures (White, 2000). American psychologist Henry H. Goddard published a translation of it in 1910. American psychologist Lewis Terman at Stanford University revised the Binet-Simon scale, which resulted in the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (1916). It became the most popular test in the United States for decades.[22][24][25][26]
General factor (g)[edit]
The many different kinds of IQ tests include a wide variety of item content. Some test items are visual, while many are verbal. Test items vary from being based on abstract-reasoning problems to concentrating on arithmetic, vocabulary, or general knowledge.
The British psychologist Charles Spearman in 1904 made the first formal factor analysis of correlations between the tests. He observed that children's school grades across seemingly unrelated school subjects were positively correlated, and reasoned that these correlations reflected the influence of an underlying general mental ability that entered into performance on all kinds of mental tests. He suggested that all mental performance could be conceptualized in terms of a single general ability factor and a large number of narrow task-specific ability factors. Spearman named it g for "general factor" and labeled the specific factors or abilities for specific tasks s. In any collection of test items that make up an IQ test, the score that best measures g is the composite score that has the highest correlations with all the item scores. Typically, the "g-loaded" composite score of an IQ test battery appears to involve a common strength in abstract reasoning across the test's item content. Therefore, Spearman and others have regarded gas closely related to the essence of human intelligence.[citation needed]
Spearman's argument proposing a general factor of human intelligence is still accepted in principle by many psychometricians. Today's factor models of intelligence typically represent cognitive abilities as a three-level hierarchy, where there are a large number of narrow factors at the bottom of the hierarchy, a handful of broad, more general factors at the intermediate level, and at the apex a single factor, referred to as the g factor, which represents the variance common to all cognitive tasks. However, this view is not universally accepted; other factor analyses of the data, with different results, are possible. Some psychometricians regard g as a statistical artifact.[citation needed]
United States military selection in World War I[edit]
During World War I, a way was needed to evaluate and assign Army recruits to appropriate tasks. This led to the development of several mental tests by Robert Yerkes, who worked with major hereditarians of American psychometrics—including Terman, Goddard—to write the test.[27] The testing generated controversy and much public debate in the United States. Nonverbal or "performance" tests were developed for those who could not speak English or were suspected of malingering.[22] Based on Goddard’s translation of the Binet-Simon test, the tests had an impact in screening men for officer training:
“...the tests did have a strong impact in some areas, particularly in screening men for officer training. At the start of the war, the army and national guard maintained nine thousand officers. By the end, two hundred thousand officers presided, and two- thirds of them had started their careers in training camps where the tests were applied. In some camps, no man scoring below C could be considered for officer training.“[27]
1.75 million men were tested in total, making the results the first mass produced written tests of intelligence, though considered dubious and non-usable, for reasons including high variability of test implementation throughout different camps and questions testing for familiarity with American culture rather than intelligence.[27] After the war, positive publicity promoted by army psychologists helped to make psychology a respected field.[28] Subsequently, there was an increase in jobs and funding in psychology in the United States.[29]Group intelligence tests were developed and became widely used in schools and industry.[30]
The results of these tests, which at the time reaffirmed contemporary racism and nationalism, are considered controversial and dubious, having rested on certain contested assumptions: that intelligence was heritable, innate, and could be relegated to a single number, the tests were enacted systematically, and test questions actually tested for innate intelligence rather than subsuming environmental factors.[27] The tests also allowed for the bolstering of jingoist narratives in the context of increased immigration, which may have influenced the passing of the IImmigration Restriction Act of 1924.[27]
L.L. Thurstone argued for a model of intelligence that included seven unrelated factors (verbal comprehension, word fluency, number facility, spatial visualization, associative memory, perceptual speed, reasoning, and induction). While not widely used, Thurstone's model influenced later theories.[22]
David Wechsler produced the first version of his test in 1939. It gradually became more popular and overtook the Stanford-Binet in the 1960s. It has been revised several times, as is common for IQ tests, to incorporate new research. One explanation is that psychologists and educators wanted more information than the single score from the Binet. Wechsler's ten or more subtests provided this. Another is that the Stanford-Binet test reflected mostly verbal abilities, while the Wechsler test also reflected nonverbal abilities. The Stanford-Binet has also been revised several times and is now similar to the Wechsler in several aspects, but the Wechsler continues to be the most popular test in the United States.[22]
IQ testing and the Eugenics movement in the United States[edit]
Eugenics refers to the principles of heredity used to improve the human race. Francis Galton first used the term in the late 1800’s.[31] The eugenics movement was popular in the US in the 1920s and 1930s.
Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, “The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity”, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).[32]
Different from Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to eliminate ’undesirable’ traits.[33]Goddard coined the word “feeblemindedness” to refer to people who did not perform well in the test thus were intellectually inferior. He argued that “feeblemindedness” is caused by heredity, thus feebleminded people should be avoided to give birth, either by institutional isolation or sterilization surgeries. [32] At first, the sterilization targets the disabled and was extended to the poor people. Goddard’s intelligence test was endorsed by the eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states adopted the sterilization laws at different pace. These laws forced over 64,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.[34]
Noteworthily, California’s sterilization program was so effective that the Nazi turned to the government for advice to eliminate the birth of the “unfit”.[35] The US eugenics movement lost its momentum in 1940s and was put to haut by the horrors of the Nazi Germany.
Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory[edit]
Raymond Cattell (1941) proposed two types of cognitive abilities in a revision of Spearman's concept of general intelligence. Fluid intelligence (Gf) was hypothesized as the ability to solve novel problems by using reasoning, and crystallized intelligence (Gc) was hypothesized as a knowledge-based ability that was very dependent on education and experience. In addition, fluid intelligence was hypothesized to decline with age, while crystallized intelligence was largely resistant to the effects of aging. The theory was almost forgotten, but was revived by his student John L. Horn (1966) who later argued Gf and Gc were only two among several factors, and who eventually identified nine or ten broad abilities. The theory continued to be called Gf-Gc theory.[22]
John B. Carroll (1993), after a comprehensive reanalysis of earlier data, proposed the three stratum theory, which is a hierarchical model with three levels. The bottom stratum consists of narrow abilities that are highly specialized (e.g., induction, spelling ability). The second stratum consists of broad abilities. Carroll identified eight second-stratum abilities. Carroll accepted Spearman's concept of general intelligence, for the most part, as a representation of the uppermost, third stratum.[36][37]
In 1999, a merging of the Gf-Gc theory of Cattell and Horn with Carroll's Three-Stratum theory has led to the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory (CHC Theory). It has greatly influenced many of the current broad IQ tests.[22]
In CHC theory, a hierarchy of factors is used; g is at the top. Under it are ten broad abilities that in turn are subdivided into seventy narrow abilities. The broad abilities are:[22]
- Fluid intelligence (Gf) includes the broad ability to reason, form concepts, and solve problems using unfamiliar information or novel procedures.
- Crystallized intelligence (Gc) includes the breadth and depth of a person's acquired knowledge, the ability to communicate one's knowledge, and the ability to reason using previously learned experiences or procedures.
- Quantitative reasoning (Gq) is the ability to comprehend quantitative concepts and relationships and to manipulate numerical symbols.
- Reading and writing ability (Grw) includes basic reading and writing skills.
- Short-term memory (Gsm) is the ability to apprehend and hold information in immediate awareness, and then use it within a few seconds.
- Long-term storage and retrieval (Glr) is the ability to store information and fluently retrieve it later in the process of thinking.
- Visual processing (Gv) is the ability to perceive, analyze, synthesize, and think with visual patterns, including the ability to store and recall visual representations.
- Auditory processing (Ga) is the ability to analyze, synthesize, and discriminate auditory stimuli, including the ability to process and discriminate speech sounds that may be presented under distorted conditions.
- Processing speed (Gs) is the ability to perform automatic cognitive tasks, particularly when measured under pressure to maintain focused attention.
- Decision/reaction time/speed (Gt) reflects the immediacy with which an individual can react to stimuli or a task (typically measured in seconds or fractions of seconds; it is not to be confused with Gs, which typically is measured in intervals of 2–3 minutes). See Mental chronometry.
Modern tests do not necessarily measure all of these broad abilities. For example, Gq and Grw may be seen as measures of school achievement and not IQ.[22] Gt may be difficult to measure without special equipment. g was earlier often subdivided into only Gf and Gc, which were thought to correspond to the nonverbal or performance subtests and verbal subtests in earlier versions of the popular Wechsler IQ test. More recent research has shown the situation to be more complex.[22] Modern comprehensive IQ tests do not stop at reporting a single IQ score. Although they still give an overall score, they now also give scores for many of these more restricted abilities, identifying particular strengths and weaknesses of an individual.[22]
Other theories[edit]
J.P. Guilford's Structure of Intellect (1967) model used three dimensions which when combined yielded a total of 120 types of intelligence. It was popular in the 1970s and early 1980s, but faded owing to both practical problems and theoretical criticisms.[22]
Alexander Luria's earlier work on neuropsychological processes led to the PASS theory (1997). It argued that only looking at one general factor was inadequate for researchers and clinicians who worked with learning disabilities, attention disorders, intellectual disability, and interventions for such disabilities. The PASS model covers four kinds of processes (planning process, attention/arousal process, simultaneous processing, and successive processing). The planning processes involve decision making, problem solving, and performing activities and requires goal setting and self-monitoring.
The attention/arousal process involves selectively attending to a particular stimulus, ignoring distractions, and maintaining vigilance. Simultaneous processing involves the integration of stimuli into a group and requires the observation of relationships. Successive processing involves the integration of stimuli into serial order. The planning and attention/arousal components comes from structures located in the frontal lobe, and the simultaneous and successive processes come from structures located in the posterior region of the cortex.[38][39][40] It has influenced some recent IQ tests, and been seen as a complement to the Cattell-Horn-Carroll theory described above.[22]
Current tests[edit]
There are a variety of individually administered IQ tests in use in the English-speaking world.[41][42] The most commonly used individual IQ test series is the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale for adults and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children for school-age test-takers. Other commonly used individual IQ tests (some of which do not label their standard scores as "IQ" scores) include the current versions of the Stanford-Binet, Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities, the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children, the Cognitive Assessment System, and the Differential Ability Scales.
IQ tests that measure intelligence also include:
- Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales
- Woodcock–Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities
- Raven's Progressive Matrices
- Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
- Cattell Culture Fair III
- Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales
- Thurstone's Primary Mental Abilities [43][44]
- Differential Ability Scales
- Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test[45]
- Multidimensional Aptitude Battery II
- Das–Naglieri cognitive assessment system
IQ scales are ordinally scaled.[46][47][48][49][50] While one standard deviation is 15 points, and two SDs are 30 points, and so on, this does not imply that mental ability is linearly related to IQ, such that IQ 50 means half the cognitive ability of IQ 100. In particular, IQ points are not percentage points.
On a related note, this fixed standard deviation means that the proportion of the population who have IQs in a particular range is theoretically fixed, and current Wechsler tests only give Full Scale IQs between 40 and 160. This should be borne in mind when considering reports of people with much higher IQs.[51][52]
Test bias or differential item functioning[edit]
Differential item functioning (DIF), sometimes referred to as measurement bias, is a phenomenon when participants from different groups (ex gender, race, disability) with the same latent abilities give different answers to specific questions on the same IQ test.[53] DIF analysis measures such specific items on a test alongside measuring participants latent abilities on other similar questions. A consistent different group response to a specific question among similar type of questions can indicate an effect of DIF. It does not count as differential item functioning if both groups have equally valid chance of giving different responses to the same questions. Such bias can be a result of culture, educational level and other factors that are independent of group traits. DIF is only considered if test-takers from different groups with the same underlying latent ability level have a different chance of giving specific responses.[54] Such questions are usually removed in order to make the test equally fair for both groups. Common techniques for analyzing DIF are item response theory (IRT) based methods, Mantel-Haenszel, and logistic regression.[54]
Reliability and validity[edit]
Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability.[9][55] A high reliability implies that – although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and although they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age – the scores generally agree with one another and across time. Like all statistical quantities, any particular estimate of IQ has an associated standard error that measures uncertainty about the estimate. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about three points. Clinical psychologists generally regard IQ scores as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.[22][56][57] In a survey of 661 randomly sampled psychologists and educational researchers, published in 1988, Mark Snyderman and Stanley Rothman reported a general consensus supporting the validity of IQ testing. "On the whole, scholars with any expertise in the area of intelligence and intelligence testing (defined very broadly) share a common view of the most important components of intelligence, and are convinced that it can be measured with some degree of accuracy." Almost all respondents picked out abstract reasoning, ability to solve problems and ability to acquire knowledge as the most important elements.[58]
| Pupil | KABC-II | WISC-III | WJ-III |
|---|---|---|---|
| Asher | 90 | 95 | 111 |
| Brianna | 125 | 110 | 105 |
| Colin | 100 | 93 | 101 |
| Danica | 116 | 127 | 118 |
| Elpha | 93 | 105 | 93 |
| Fritz | 106 | 105 | 105 |
| Georgi | 95 | 100 | 90 |
| Hector | 112 | 113 | 103 |
| Imelda | 104 | 96 | 97 |
| Jose | 101 | 99 | 86 |
| Keoku | 81 | 78 | 75 |
| Leo | 116 | 124 | 102 |
Flynn effect[edit]
Since the early 20th century, raw scores on IQ tests have increased in most parts of the world.[61][62][63] When a new version of an IQ test is normed, the standard scoring is set so performance at the population median results in a score of IQ 100. The phenomenon of rising raw score performance means if test-takers are scored by a constant standard scoring rule, IQ test scores have been rising at an average rate of around three IQ points per decade. This phenomenon was named the Flynn effect in the book The Bell Curve after James R. Flynn, the author who did the most to bring this phenomenon to the attention of psychologists.[64][65]
Researchers have been exploring the issue of whether the Flynn effect is equally strong on performance of all kinds of IQ test items, whether the effect may have ended in some developed nations, whether there are social subgroup differences in the effect, and what possible causes of the effect might be.[66] A 2011 textbook, IQ and Human Intelligence, by N. J. Mackintosh, noted the Flynn effect demolishes the fears that IQ would be decreased. He also asks whether it represents a real increase in intelligence beyond IQ scores.[67] A 2011 psychology textbook, lead authored by Harvard Psychologist Professor Daniel Schacter, noted that Human's inherited intelligence could be going down while acquired intelligence goes up.[68]
Age[edit]
IQ can change to some degree over the course of childhood.[69] However, in one longitudinal study, the mean IQ scores of tests at ages 17 and 18 were correlated at r=0.86 with the mean scores of tests at ages five, six, and seven and at r=0.96 with the mean scores of tests at ages 11, 12, and 13.[9]
For decades, practitioners' handbooks and textbooks on IQ testing have reported IQ declines with age after the beginning of adulthood. However, later researchers pointed out this phenomenon is related to the Flynn effect and is in part a cohort effect rather than a true aging effect. A variety of studies of IQ and aging have been conducted since the norming of the first Wechsler Intelligence Scale drew attention to IQ differences in different age groups of adults. Current consensus is that fluid intelligence generally declines with age after early adulthood, while crystallized intelligence remains intact. Both cohort effects (the birth year of the test-takers) and practice effects (test-takers taking the same form of IQ test more than once) must be controlled to gain accurate data. It is unclear whether any lifestyle intervention can preserve fluid intelligence into older ages.[70]
The exact peak age of fluid intelligence or crystallized intelligence remains elusive. Cross-sectional studies usually show that especially fluid intelligence peaks at a relatively young age (often in the early adulthood) while longitudinal data mostly show that intelligence is stable until the mid adulthood or later. Subsequently, intelligence seems to decline slowly.[71]
Genetics and environment[edit]
Environmental and genetic factors play a role in determining IQ. Their relative importance has been the subject of much research and debate.[72]
Heritability[edit]
Heritability is defined as the proportion of variance in a trait which is attributable to genotype within a defined population in a specific environment. A number of points must be considered when interpreting heritability.[73] Heritability, as a term, applies to populations, and in populations there are variations in traits between individuals. Heritability measures how much of that variation is caused by genetics. The value of heritability can change if the impact of environment (or of genes) in the population is substantially altered. A high heritability of a trait does not mean environmental effects, such as learning, are not involved. Since heritability increases during childhood and adolescence, one should be cautious drawing conclusions regarding the role of genetics and environment from studies where the participants are not followed until they are adults.[citation needed]
The general figure for the heritability of IQ, according to an authoritative American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to around 0.75 for late adolescents and adults.[74][75] Heritability measures in infancy are as low as 0.2, around 0.4 in middle childhood, and as high as 0.9 in adulthood.[76][77] One proposed explanation is that people with different genes tend to reinforce the effects of those genes, for example by seeking out different environments.[9]
[edit]
Family members have aspects of environments in common (for example, characteristics of the home). This shared family environment accounts for 0.25–0.35 of the variation in IQ in childhood. By late adolescence, it is quite low (zero in some studies). The effect for several other psychological traits is similar. These studies have not looked at the effects of extreme environments, such as in abusive families.[9][78][79][80]
[edit]
Although parents treat their children differently, such differential treatment explains only a small amount of nonshared environmental influence. One suggestion is that children react differently to the same environment because of different genes. More likely influences may be the impact of peers and other experiences outside the family.[9][79]
Individual genes[edit]
A very large proportion of the over 17,000 human genes are thought to have an effect on the development and functionality of the brain.[81] While a number of individual genes have been reported to be associated with IQ, none have a strong effect. Deary and colleagues (2009) reported that no finding of a strong single gene effect on IQ has been replicated.[82]Recent findings of gene associations with normally varying intelligence differences in adults continue to show weak effects for any one gene;[83] likewise in children.[84]
Gene-environment interaction[edit]
David Rowe reported an interaction of genetic effects with socioeconomic status, such that the heritability was high in high-SES families, but much lower in low-SES families.[85] In the US, this has been replicated in infants,[86] children,[87] adolescents,[88] and adults.[89] Outside the US, studies show no link between heritability and SES.[90] Some effects may even reverse sign outside the US.[90][91]
Dickens and Flynn (2001) have argued that genes for high IQ initiate an environment-shaping feedback cycle, with genetic effects causing bright children to seek out more stimulating environments that then further increase their IQ. In Dickens' model, environment effects are modeled as decaying over time. In this model, the Flynn effect can be explained by an increase in environmental stimulation independent of it being sought out by individuals. The authors suggest that programs aiming to increase IQ would be most likely to produce long-term IQ gains if they enduringly raised children's drive to seek out cognitively demanding experiences.[92][93]
Interventions[edit]
In general, educational interventions, as those described below, have shown short-term effects on IQ, but long-term follow-up is often missing. For example, in the US very large intervention programs such as the Head Start Program have not produced lasting gains in IQ scores. More intensive, but much smaller projects such as the Abecedarian Projecthave reported lasting effects, often on socioeconomic status variables, rather than IQ.[9]
Recent studies have shown that training in using one's working memory may increase IQ. A study on young adults published in April 2008 by a team from the Universities of Michigan and Bern supports the possibility of the transfer of fluid intelligence from specifically designed working memory training.[94] Further research will be needed to determine nature, extent and duration of the proposed transfer. Among other questions, it remains to be seen whether the results extend to other kinds of fluid intelligence tests than the matrix test used in the study, and if so, whether, after training, fluid intelligence measures retain their correlation with educational and occupational achievement or if the value of fluid intelligence for predicting performance on other tasks changes. It is also unclear whether the training is durable of extended periods of time.[95]
Music[edit]
Musical training in childhood has been found to correlate with higher than average IQ.[96][97] It is popularly thought that listening to classical music raises IQ. However, multiple attempted replications (e.g.[98]) have shown that this is at best a short-term effect (lasting no longer than 10 to 15 minutes), and is not related to IQ-increase.[99]
Brain anatomy[edit]
Several neurophysiological factors have been correlated with intelligence in humans, including the ratio of brain weight to body weight and the size, shape, and activity level of different parts of the brain. Specific features that may affect IQ include the size and shape of the frontal lobes, the amount of blood and chemical activity in the frontal lobes, the total amount of gray matter in the brain, the overall thickness of the cortex, and the glucose metabolic rate.[100]
Health[edit]
Health is important in understanding differences in IQ test scores and other measures of cognitive ability. Several factors can lead to significant cognitive impairment, particularly if they occur during pregnancy and childhood when the brain is growing and the blood–brain barrier is less effective. Such impairment may sometimes be permanent, sometimes be partially or wholly compensated for by later growth.[citation needed]
Since about 2010, researchers such as Eppig, Hassel, and MacKenzie have found a very close and consistent link between IQ scores and infectious diseases, especially in the infant and preschool populations and the mothers of these children.[101] They have postulated that fighting infectious diseases strains the child's metabolism and prevents full brain development. Hassel postulated that it is by far the most important factor in determining population IQ. However, they also found that subsequent factors such as good nutrition and regular quality schooling can offset early negative effects to some extent.
Developed nations have implemented several health policies regarding nutrients and toxins known to influence cognitive function. These include laws requiring fortification of certain food products and laws establishing safe levels of pollutants (e.g. lead, mercury, and organochlorides). Improvements in nutrition, and in public policy in general, have been implicated in worldwide IQ increases.[citation needed]
Cognitive epidemiology is a field of research that examines the associations between intelligence test scores and health. Researchers in the field argue that intelligence measured at an early age is an important predictor of later health and mortality differences.
Social correlations[edit]
School performance[edit]
The American Psychological Association's report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%. Achieving good grades depends on many factors other than IQ, such as "persistence, interest in school, and willingness to study" (p. 81).[9]
It has been found that the correlation of IQ scores with school performance depends on the IQ measurement used. For undergraduate students, the Verbal IQ as measured by WAIS-R has been found to correlate significantly (0.53) with the grade point average (GPA) of the last 60 hours. In contrast, Performance IQ correlation with the same GPA was only 0.22 in the same study.[102]
Some measures of educational aptitude correlate highly with IQ tests – for instance, Frey and Detterman (2004) reported a correlation of 0.82 between g (general intelligence factor) and SAT scores;[103] another research found a correlation of 0.81 between g and GCSE scores, with the explained variance ranging "from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design".[104]
Job performance[edit]
According to Schmidt and Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."[105] The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.[106] The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods was controlled for.[9] While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function,[107]IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations.[105] That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management) low IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance, whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) are more likely to influence performance.[105]The prevailing view among academics is that it is largely through the quicker acquisition of job-relevant knowledge that higher IQ mediates job performance. This view has been challenged by Byington & Felps (2010), who argued that "the current applications of IQ-reflective tests allow individuals with high IQ scores to receive greater access to developmental resources, enabling them to acquire additional capabilities over time, and ultimately perform their jobs better."[108]
In establishing a causal direction to the link between IQ and work performance, longitudinal studies by Watkins and others suggest that IQ exerts a causal influence on future academic achievement, whereas academic achievement does not substantially influence future IQ scores.[109] Treena Eileen Rohde and Lee Anne Thompson write that general cognitive ability, but not specific ability scores, predict academic achievement, with the exception that processing speed and spatial ability predict performance on the SAT math beyond the effect of general cognitive ability.[110]
The US military has minimum enlistment standards at about the IQ 85 level. There have been two experiments with lowering this to 80 but in both cases these men could not master soldiering well enough to justify their costs.[111]
Income[edit]
While it has been suggested that "in economic terms it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much",[112][113] large-scale longitudinal studies indicate an increase in IQ translates into an increase in performance at all levels of IQ: i.e. ability and job performance are monotonically linked at all IQ levels.[114][115] Charles Murray, coauthor of The Bell Curve, found that IQ has a substantial effect on income independent of family background.[116]
The link from IQ to wealth is much less strong than that from IQ to job performance. Some studies indicate that IQ is unrelated to net worth.[117][118]
The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about a quarter of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes.[9]
In a meta-analysis, Strenze (2006) reviewed much of the literature and estimated the correlation between IQ and income to be about 0.23.[119]
Some studies claim that IQ only accounts for (explains) a sixth of the variation in income because many studies are based on young adults, many of whom have not yet reached their peak earning capacity, or even their education. On pg 568 of The g Factor, Arthur Jensen claims that although the correlation between IQ and income averages a moderate 0.4 (one sixth or 16% of the variance), the relationship increases with age, and peaks at middle age when people have reached their maximum career potential. In the book, A Question of Intelligence, Daniel Seligman cites an IQ income correlation of 0.5 (25% of the variance).
A 2002 study[120] further examined the impact of non-IQ factors on income and concluded that an individual's location, inherited wealth, race, and schooling are more important as factors in determining income than IQ.
Crime[edit]
The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlation between IQ and crime was −0.2. It was −0.19 between IQ scores and number of juvenile offenses in a large Danish sample; with social class controlled, the correlation dropped to −0.17. A correlation of 0.20 means that the explained variance is 4%. The causal links between psychometric ability and social outcomes may be indirect. Children with poor scholastic performance may feel alienated. Consequently, they may be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior, compared to other children who do well.[9]
In his book The g Factor (1998), Arthur Jensen cited data which showed that, regardless of race, people with IQs between 70 and 90 have higher crime rates than people with IQs below or above this range, with the peak range being between 80 and 90.
The 2009 Handbook of Crime Correlates stated that reviews have found that around eight IQ points, or 0.5 SD, separate criminals from the general population, especially for persistent serious offenders. It has been suggested that this simply reflects that "only dumb ones get caught" but there is similarly a negative relation between IQ and self-reported offending. That children with conduct disorder have lower IQ than their peers "strongly argues" for the theory.[121]
A study of the relationship between US county-level IQ and US county-level crime rates found that higher average IQs were associated with lower levels of property crime, burglary, larceny rate, motor vehicle theft, violent crime, robbery, and aggravated assault. These results were not "confounded by a measure of concentrated disadvantage that captures the effects of race, poverty, and other social disadvantages of the county."[122][123]
The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlations for most "negative outcome" variables are typically smaller than 0.20, which means that the explained variance is less than 4%.[9]
Tambs et al.[124][better source needed] found that occupational status, educational attainment, and IQ are individually heritable; and further found that "genetic variance influencing educational attainment ... contributed approximately one-fourth of the genetic variance for occupational status and nearly half the genetic variance for IQ." In a sample of U.S. siblings, Rowe et al.[125] report that the inequality in education and income was predominantly due to genes, with shared environmental factors playing a subordinate role.
Health and mortality[edit]
Multiple studies conducted in Scotland have found that higher IQs in early life are associated with lower mortality and morbidity rates later in life.[126][127]
Other accomplishments[edit]
| Accomplishment | IQ | Test/study | Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| MDs, JDs, and PhDs | 125 | WAIS-R | 1987 |
| College graduates | 112 | KAIT | 2000 |
| K-BIT | 1992 | ||
| 115 | WAIS-R | ||
| 1–3 years of college | 104 | KAIT | |
| K-BIT | |||
| 105–110 | WAIS-R | ||
| Clerical and sales workers | 100–105 | ||
| High school graduates, skilled workers (e.g., electricians, cabinetmakers) | 100 | KAIT | |
| WAIS-R | |||
| 97 | K-BIT | ||
| 1–3 years of high school (completed 9–11 years of school) | 94 | KAIT | |
| 90 | K-BIT | ||
| 95 | WAIS-R | ||
| Semi-skilled workers (e.g. truck drivers, factory workers) | 90–95 | ||
| Elementary school graduates (completed eighth grade) | 90 | ||
| Elementary school dropouts (completed 0–7 years of school) | 80–85 | ||
| Have 50/50 chance of reaching high school | 75 |
| Accomplishment | IQ | Test/study | Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Professional and technical | 112 | ||
| Managers and administrators | 104 | ||
| Clerical workers, sales workers, skilled workers, craftsmen, and foremen | 101 | ||
| Semi-skilled workers (operatives, service workers, including private household) | 92 | ||
| Unskilled workers | 87 |
| Accomplishment | IQ | Test/study | Year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adults can harvest vegetables, repair furniture | 60 | ||
| Adults can do domestic work | 50 |
There is considerable variation within and overlap among these categories. People with high IQs are found at all levels of education and occupational categories. The biggest difference occurs for low IQs with only an occasional college graduate or professional scoring below 90.[22]
Group-IQ or the collective intelligence factor c[edit]
With operationalization and methodology derived from the general intelligence factor g, a new scientific understanding of collective intelligence, defined as a group’s general ability to perform a wide range of tasks,[131] aims to explain intelligent behavior of groups. Goal is to detect and explain a general intelligence factor c for groups, parallel to the g factor for individuals. As g is highly interrelated with the concept of IQ,[132][133] this measurement of collective intelligence can be interpreted as intelligence quotient for groups (Group-IQ) even though the score is not a quotient per se. Current evidence suggests that this Group-IQ is only moderately correlated with group members' IQs but with other correlates such as group members' Theory of Mind.[131]
Group differences[edit]
Among the most controversial issues related to the study of intelligence is the observation that intelligence measures such as IQ scores vary between ethnic and racial groups and sexes. While there is little scholarly debate about the existence of some of these differences, their causes remain highly controversial both within academia and in the public sphere.[134]
Sex[edit]
Most IQ tests are constructed so that there are no overall score differences between females and males.[9][135] Popular IQ batteries such as the WAIS and the WISC-R are also constructed in order to eliminate sex differences.[136] In a paper presented at the International Society for Intelligence Research in 2002, it was pointed out that because test constructors and the United States' Educational Testing Service (which developed the US SAT test) often eliminate items showing marked sex differences in order to reduce the perception of bias, the "true sex" difference is masked. Items like the MRT[Jargon] and RT tests,[Jargon] which show a male advantage in IQ, are often removed.[137] Meta-analysis focusing on gender differences in math performance found nearly identical performance for boys and girls,[138] and the subject of mathematical intelligence and gender has been controversial.[139]
Race and intelligence[edit]
Race and Intelligence in United States of America[edit]
The 1996 Task Force investigation on Intelligence sponsored by the American Psychological Association concluded that there are significant variations in IQ across races.[9] The problem of determining the causes underlying this variation relates to the question of the contributions of "nature and nurture" to IQ. Psychologists such as Alan S. Kaufman[140] and Nathan Brody[141] and statisticians such as Bernie Devlin[142] argue that there are insufficient data to conclude that this is because of genetic influences. A review article published in 2012 by leading scholars on human intelligence concluded, after reviewing the prior research literature, that group differences in IQ are best understood as environmental in origin.[143]
In considering disparities between test results of different ethnic groups, it is crucial to investigate the effects of stereotype threat (a situational predicament in which a person feels at risk of confirming negative stereotypes about the group(s) he identifies with),[144] as well as culture and acculturation.[145]
Race and Intelligence in Europe[edit]
Some countries in Europe as well as America passed mandatory sterilization laws due to eugenics concerns about IQ.[146]
Public policy[edit]
In the United States, certain public policies and laws regarding military service,[147][148] education, public benefits,[149] capital punishment,[150] and employment incorporate an individual's IQ into their decisions. However, in the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. in 1971, for the purpose of minimizing employment practices that disparately impacted racial minorities, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the use of IQ tests in employment, except when linked to job performance via a job analysis. Internationally, certain public policies, such as improving nutrition and prohibiting neurotoxins, have as one of their goals raising, or preventing a decline in, intelligence.
A diagnosis of intellectual disability is in part based on the results of IQ testing. Borderline intellectual functioning is a categorization where a person has below average cognitive ability (an IQ of 71–85), but the deficit is not as severe as intellectual disability (70 or below).
In the United Kingdom, the eleven plus exam which incorporated an intelligence test has been used from 1945 to decide, at eleven years of age, which type of school a child should go to. They have been much less used since the widespread introduction of comprehensive schools.
Criticism and views[edit]
Relationship to Intelligence[edit]
IQ is the most thoroughly researched means of measuring intelligence, and by far the most widely used in practical settings. However, while IQ strives to measure some concepts of intelligence, it may fail to serve as an accurate measure of broader definitions of intelligence. IQ tests examine some areas of intelligence, while neglecting to account for other areas, such as creativity and social intelligence.
Critics such as Keith Stanovich do not dispute the reliability of IQ test scores or their capacity to predict some kinds of achievement, but argue that basing a concept of intelligence on IQ test scores alone neglects other important aspects of mental ability.[9][151]
Criticism of IQ[edit]
Some scientists dispute IQ entirely. In The Mismeasure of Man (1996), paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould criticized IQ tests and argued that they were used for scientific racism. He argued that g was a mathematical artifact and criticized:
Arthur Jensen responded:
Jensen also argued that even if g were replaced by a model with several intelligences this would change the situation less than expected. He argues that all tests of cognitive ability would continue to be highly correlated with one another and there would still be a black-white gap on cognitive tests.[154] Hans Eysenck responded to Gould by stating that no psychologist had said that intelligence was an area located in the brain.[155] Eysenck also argued IQ tests were not racist, pointing out that Northeast Asians and Jews both scored higher than non-Jewish Europeans on IQ tests, and this would not please European racists.[156]
Psychologist Peter Schönemann persistently criticized IQ, calling it "the IQ myth". He argued that g is a flawed theory and that the high heritability estimates of IQ are based on false assumptions.[157][158] Robert Sternberg, another significant critic of g as the main measure of human cognitive abilities, argued that reducing the concept of intelligence to the measure of g does not fully account for the different skills and knowledge types that produce success in human society.[159]
Test bias[edit]
The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that in the United States IQ tests as predictors of social achievement are not biased against African Americans since they predict future performance, such as school achievement, similarly to the way they predict future performance for Caucasians.[9] While agreeing that IQ tests predict performance equally well for all racial groups, Nicholas Mackintosh also points out that there may still be a bias inherent in IQ testing if the education system is also systematically biased against African Americans, in which case educational performance may in fact also be an underestimation of African American children's cognitive abilities.[160] Earl Hunt points out that while this may be the case that would not be a bias of the test, but of society.[161]
However, IQ tests may well be biased when used in other situations. A 2005 study stated that "differential validity in prediction suggests that the WAIS-R test may contain cultural influences that reduce the validity of the WAIS-R as a measure of cognitive ability for Mexican American students,"[162] indicating a weaker positive correlation relative to sampled white students. Other recent studies have questioned the culture-fairness of IQ tests when used in South Africa.[163][164] Standard intelligence tests, such as the Stanford-Binet, are often inappropriate for autistic children; the alternative of using developmental or adaptive skills measures are relatively poor measures of intelligence in autistic children, and may have resulted in incorrect claims that a majority of autistic children are mentally retarded.[165]
Outdated methodology[edit]
According to a 2006 article by the National Center for Biotechnology Information, contemporary psychological research often did not reflect substantial recent developments in psychometrics and "bears an uncanny resemblance to the psychometric state of the art as it existed in the 1950s."[166]
"Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns"[edit]
In response to the controversy surrounding The Bell Curve, the American Psychological Association's Board of Scientific Affairs established a task force in 1995 to write a report on the state of intelligence research which could be used by all sides as a basis for discussion, "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns". The full text of the report is available through several websites.[9]
In this paper, the representatives of the association regret that IQ-related works are frequently written with a view to their political consequences: "research findings were often assessed not so much on their merits or their scientific standing as on their supposed political implications".
The task force concluded that IQ scores do have high predictive validity for individual differences in school achievement. They confirm the predictive validity of IQ for adult occupational status, even when variables such as education and family background have been statistically controlled. They stated that individual differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by both genetics and environment.
The report stated that a number of biological factors, including malnutrition, exposure to toxic substances, and various prenatal and perinatal stressors, result in lowered psychometric intelligence under at least some conditions. The task force agrees that large differences do exist between the average IQ scores of blacks and whites, saying:
The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997, several of them arguing that the report failed to examine adequately the evidence for partly genetic explanations.
Dynamic assessment[edit]
An alternative to standard IQ tests originated in the writings of psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) from his last two years of work.[167][168] The notion of the zone of proximal development that he introduced in 1933, roughly a year before his death, served as the banner for his proposal to diagnose development as the level of actual development that can be measured by the child's independent problem solving and, at the same time, the level of proximal, or potential development that is measured in the situation of moderately assisted problem solving by the child.[169] The maximum level of complexity and difficulty of the problem that the child is capable to solve under some guidance indicates the level of potential development. Then, the difference between the higher level of potential and the lower level of actual development indicates the zone of proximal development. Combination of the two indexes—the level of actual and the zone of the proximal development—according to Vygotsky, provides a significantly more informative indicator of psychological development than the assessment of the level of actual development alone.[170][171]
The ideas on the zone of development were later developed in a number of psychological and educational theories and practices. Most notably, they were developed under the banner of dynamic assessment that focuses on the testing of learning and developmental potential[172][173][174] (for instance, in the work of Reuven Feuerstein and his associates,[175] who has criticized standard IQ testing for its putative assumption or acceptance of "fixed and immutable" characteristics of intelligence or cognitive functioning). Grounded in developmental theories of Vygotsky and Feuerstein, who maintained that human beings are not static entities but are always in states of transition and transactional relationships with the world, dynamic assessment received also considerable support in the recent revisions of cognitive developmental theory by Joseph Campione, Ann Brown, and John D. Bransford and in theories of multiple intelligences by Howard Gardner and Robert Sternberg.[176] Still, dynamic assessment has not been implemented in education on a large scale as is up to now, by admission of one of its notable proponents, "in search of its identity".[177]
Classification[edit]
IQ classification is the practice by IQ test publishers of designating IQ score ranges as various categories with labels such as "superior" or "average."[178] IQ classification was preceded historically by attempts to classify human beings by general ability based on other forms of behavioral observation. Those other forms of behavioral observation are still important for validating classifications based on IQ tests.
High IQ societies[edit]
There are social organizations, some international, which limit membership to people who have scores as high as or higher than the 98th percentile (2 standard deviations above the mean) on some IQ test or equivalent. Mensa International is perhaps the best known of these. The largest 99.9th percentile (3 standard deviations above the mean) society is the Triple Nine Society.
No comments:
Post a Comment