An intelligence quotient or IQ is a number derived from a set of standardized tests. These tests measure a person's ability to conduct a number of tasks to which most people raised in that society will be exposed, and so measure a person's ability to absorb and repeat mechanical intellectual tasks. Component tests are generally designed and chosen because they are found to be predictable of later intellectual development, particularly with respect to literacy.
IQ tests take their name because many IQ tests have been scaled based on the testers' assessment of the subject's relative cognitive abilities ("intelligence") as compared to different age groups. IQ tests do not purport to measure intelligence the way a ruler measures height (absolutely), but rather the way a race measures speed (relatively); IQ is described as a "quotient" because, originally, it represented the ratio between a person's "mental age" and actual chronological age. Likewise, IQ tests are generally designed to meaningfully assess learning discrepancies and deficiencies in comparison to relatively homogenous cultural groups.
The principal practical purpose of IQ tests remains the diagnosis and treatment of learning disabilities, and the assessment of individual strengths in educational and employment contexts. Variances between different component tests often indicate a persons performance on some component tests is limited by a neurological or other learning disability, who may be assisted by intensive educational intervention. Substantial test design and research focuses on the ability of a test component to predict later difficulties with reading and learning.
For people living in the prevailing conditions of the developed world, IQ is highly heritable, and by adulthood the influence of family environment on IQ is undetectable. That is, significant variation in IQ between adults can be attributed to genetic variation, with the remaining variation attributable to environmental sources that are not shared within families. In the United States, marked variation in IQ occurs within families, with siblings differing on average by 12 points.
IQ scores are designed to correlate with academic success, and have been found, in differing degrees, to correlate to job performance, socioeconomic advancement, and "social pathologies". IQ scores have been taken by many psychologists to be a proxy for intelligence, and a measurable definition of certain types of intellectual ability, but generally not taken to measure all meanings of "intelligence" (e.g., creativity). Recent work has demonstrated links between IQ and health, longevity, and functional literacy.
The average IQ scores for many populations were rising during the 20th century: a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. It is not known whether these changes in scores reflect real changes in intellectual abilities. On average, IQ scores are stable over a person's lifetime, but some individuals undergo large changes. For example, scores can be affected by the presence of learning disabilities (Shaywitz, 1995).
A further refinement of the Binet-Simon scale was published in 1916 by Lewis M. Terman, from Stanford University, who incorporated Stern's proposal that an individual's intelligence level be measured as an intelligence quotient (I.Q.). Terman's test, which he named the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale formed the basis for one of the modern intelligence tests still commonly used today. They are all colloquially known as IQ tests.
Modern IQ tests produce scores for different areas (e.g., language fluency, three-dimensional thinking, etc.), with the summary score calculated from subtest scores. Individual subtest scores tend to correlate with one another, even when seemingly disparate in content.
Analyses of individuals' scores on the subtests of a single IQ test or the scores from a variety of different IQ tests (e.g., Stanford-Binet, WISC-R, Raven's Progressive Matrices Universal Nonverbal Intellience Test, and others) reveal that they all measure a single common factor and various factors that are specific to each test. This kind of factor analysis has led to the theory that underlying these disparate cognitive tasks is a single factor, termed the general intelligence factor (or g), that corresponds with the common-sense concept of intelligence. In the normal population, g and IQ are roughly 90% correlated and are often used interchangeably.
Where an individual has scores that do not correlate with each other, there is a good reason to look for a learning disability or other cause for the lack of correlation. Tests have been chosen for inclusion because they display the ability to use this method to predict later difficulties in learning.
The role of genes and environment (nature vs. nurture) in determining IQ is reviewed in Plomin et al. (2001, 2003). The degree to which genetic variation contributes to observed variation in a trait is measured by a statistic called heritability. Heritability scores range from 0 to 1, and can be interpreted as the percentage of variation (e.g. in IQ) that is due to variation in genes. Twins studies and adoption studies are commonly used to determine the heritability of a trait. Until recently heritability was mostly studied in children. These studies find the heritability of IQ is approximately 0.5; that is, half of the variation in IQ among the children studied was due to variation in their genes. The remaining half was thus due to environmental variation and measurement error. A heritability of 0.5 implies that IQ is "substantially" heritable. Studies with adults show that they have a higher heritability of IQ than children do and that heritability could be as high as 0.8. The American Psychological Association's 1995 task force on "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" concluded that within the White population the heritability of IQ is "around .75" (p. 85).*
Nearly all personality traits show that, contrary to expectations, environmental effects actually cause adoptive siblings raised in the same family to be as different as children raised in different families (Harris, 1998; Plomin & Daniels, 1987). Put another way, shared environmental variation for personality is zero, and all environmental effects would be nonshared. Conversely, IQ is actually an exception to this, at least among children. The IQs of adoptive siblings, who share no genetic relation but do share a common family environment, are correlated at .32. Despite attempts to isolate them, the factors that cause adoptive siblings to be similar have not been identified. However, as explained below, shared family effects on IQ disappear after adolescence.
Active genotype-environment correlation, also called the "nature of nurture", is observed for IQ. This phenomenon is measured similarly to heritability; but instead of measuring variation in IQ due to genes, variation in environment due to genes is determined. One study found that 40% of variation in measures of home environment are accounted for by genetic variation. This suggests that the way human beings craft their environment is due in part to genetic influences.
Shared family effects also seem to disappear by adulthood. Adoption studies show that, after adolescence, adopted siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers (IQ correlation near zero), while full siblings show an IQ correlation of 0.6. Twin studies reinforce this pattern: monozygotic (identical) twins raised separately are highly similar in IQ (0.86), more so than dizygotic (fraternal) twins raised together (0.6) and much more than adopted siblings (~0.0).Plomin et al. (2001, 2003)
Most of the IQ studies described above were conducted in developed countries, such as the United States, Japan, and Western Europe. Also, a few studies have been conducted in Moscow, East Germany, and India, and those studies produce similar results. Any such investigation is limited to describing the genetic and environmental variation found within the populations studied. This is a caveat of any heritability study.
IQ score ranges (from DSM-IV):
The rate of mental retardation is higher among males than females, and higher among blacks than whites, according to a 1991 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study.*
By race, the overall rate was 16.6 per 1000 for blacks and 6.8 per 1000 for whites. Rates of mental retardation for black males, the group with the highest rates, were 1.7 times higher than black females, 2.4 times higher than white males, and 3.1 times higher than white females.
Individuals with IQs below 70 have been essentially exempted from the death penalty in the U.S. since 2002.*
Thus, if the heritability of IQ is 50%, a couple with an average IQ of 120 may have children that average around an IQ of 110, assuming that both parents come from a population with a median IQ of 100.
Worldwide, IQ scores appear to be slowly rising, a trend known as the Flynn effect. Flynn, 1999. The Flynn effect has been observed to be so severe that it is difficult to explain. However, tests are only renormalized occasionally to obtain mean scores of 100, for example WISC-R (1974), WISC-III (1991) and WISC-IV (2003). Hence it is difficult to compare IQ scores measured years apart.
While IQ scores of individual members of different racial or ethnic groups are distributed across the IQ scale, groups vary in where their members cluster along the IQ scale. Ashkenazi Jews and East Asians cluster higher than Europeans, while "Hispanics" and Sub-Saharan Africans cluster lower.Gottfredson et al. 1994 (ctrl+f "groups") Much research has been devoted to the extent and potential causes of racial-ethnic group differences in IQ, and the underlying purposes and validity of the tests has been examined. Most experts conclude that examination of many types of test bias and simple differences in socioeconomic status have failed to explain the IQ clustering differences.Neisser et al. 1995 For a summary of expert opinions, see Race and Intelligence.
The findings in this field are often thought to conflict with fundamental social philosophies, and have engendered a large controversy.The controversy itself has caused some scientists to debate whether such areas of science are inappropriate, or whether group differences in traits are just another area of the science of human nature, as Steven Pinker and others argue. (See Race and intelligence#Utility of research and racism.)
Several studies have investigated the relationship between intelligence and the degree of religious belief (excluding humanism), with most showing that intelligence averages decrease significantly with the "importance of religion" an IQ testee rates as apt. Many studies chiefly show the same results (despite time of study, location, etc.). Charles Murray, author of The Bell Curve, chronicled the attitudes and beliefs of the Elites (elite in regards to I.Q.) in regards to religion spanning from Ancient times to the Modern Day and across the globe in his book, Human Accomplishment. He wrote that Elites in the First World, post-1950, are mostly hostile towards religion.
Research in Scotland has shown that a 15-point lower IQ meant people had a fifth less chance of seeing their 76th birthday, while those with a 30-point disadvantage were 37% less likely than those with a higher IQ to live that long *.
Evidence for the practical validity of IQ comes from examining the correlation between IQ scores and life outcomes.
| Factors | Correlation |
|---|---|
| School grades and IQ | 0.5 |
| Total years of education and IQ | 0.55 |
| IQ and parental socioeconomic status | 0.33 |
| Job performance and IQ | 0.54 |
| Negative social outcomes and IQ | −0.2 |
| IQs of identical twins | 0.86 |
| IQs of husband and wife | 0.4 |
| Heights of parent and child | 0.47 |
| IQ | <75 | 75–90 | 90–110 | 110–125 | >125 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US population distribution | 5 | 20 | 50 | 20 | 5 |
| Married by age 30 | 72 | 81 | 81 | 72 | 67 |
| Out of labor force more than 1 month out of year (men) | 22 | 19 | 15 | 14 | 10 |
| Unemployed more than 1 month out of year (men) | 12 | 10 | 7 | 7 | 2 |
| Divorced in 5 years | 21 | 22 | 23 | 15 | 9 |
| % of children w/ IQ in bottom decile (mothers) | 39 | 17 | 6 | 7 | < 1 |
| Had an illegitimate baby (mothers) | 32 | 17 | 8 | 4 | 2 |
| Lives in poverty | 30 | 16 | 6 | 3 | 2 |
| Ever incarcerated (men) | 7 | 7 | 3 | 1 | < 1 |
| Chronic welfare recipient (mothers) | 31 | 17 | 8 | 2 | < 1 |
| High school dropout | 55 | 35 | 6 | 0.4 | < 0.4 |
| Values are the percentage of each IQ sub-population, among non-Hispanic whites only, fitting each descriptor. Compiled by Gottfredson (1997) from a US study by Herrnstein & Murray (1994) pp. 171, 158, 163, 174, 230, 180, 132, 194, 247–248, 194, 146 respectively. | |||||
Research shows that general intelligence plays an important role in many valued life outcomes. In addition to academic success, IQ correlates with job performance (see below), socioeconomic advancement (e.g., level of education, occupation, and income), and "social pathology" (e.g., adult criminality, poverty, unemployment, dependence on welfare, children outside of marriage). Recent work has demonstrated links between general intelligence and health, longevity, and functional literacy. Correlations between g and life outcomes are pervasive, though IQ and happiness do not correlate. IQ and g correlate highly with school performance and job performance, less so with occupational prestige, moderately with income, and to a small degree with law-abidingness.
General intelligence (in the literature typically called "cognitive ability") is the best predictor of job performance by the standard measure, validity. Validity is the correlation between score (in this case cognitive ability, as measured, typically, by a paper-and-pencil test) and outcome (in this case job performance, as measured by a range of factors including supervisor ratings, promotions, training success, and tenure), and ranges between −1.0 (the score is perfectly wrong in predicting outcome) and 1.0 (the score perfectly predicts the outcome). See validity (psychometric). The validity of cognitive ability for job performance tends to increase with job complexity and varies across different studies, ranging from 0.2 for unskilled jobs to 0.8 for the most complex jobs.
A meta-analysis (Hunter and Hunter, 1984) which pooled validity results across many studies encompassing thousands of workers (32,124 for cognitive ability), reports that the validity of cognitive ability for entry-level jobs is 0.54, larger than any other measure including job tryout (0.44), experience (0.18), interview (0.14), age (−0.01), education (0.10), and biographical inventory (0.37).
Because higher test validity allows more accurate prediction of job performance, companies have a strong incentive to use cognitive ability tests to select and promote employees. IQ thus has high practical validity in economic terms. The utility of using one measure over another is proportional to the difference in their validities, all else equal. This is one economic reason why companies use job interviews (validity 0.14) rather than randomly selecting employees (validity 0.0).
However, legal barriers, most prominently the US Civil Rights Act, as interpreted in the 1971 United States Supreme Court decision Griggs v. Duke Power Co., have prevented American employers from using cognitive ability tests as a controlling factor in selecting employees where (1) the use of the test would have a disparate impact on hiring by race and (2) where the test is not shown to be directly relevant to the job or class of jobs at issue. Instead, where there is not direct relevance to the job or class of jobs at issue, tests have only been legally permitted to be used in conjunction with a subjective appraisal process. The U.S. military uses the Armed Forces Qualifying Test (AFQT), as higher scores correlate with significant increases in effectiveness of both individual soldiers and units,Microsoft is known for using non-illegal tests that correlate with IQ tests as part of the interview process, weighing the results even more than experience in many cases.*" target="_blank" >[https://www.keepmedia.com/Auth.do?extId=10022&uri=/archive/forbes/2005/1031/045.html
Some researchers have echoed the popular claim 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." (Detterman and Daniel, 1989)*
However, some studies suggest IQ continues to confer large benefits even at very high levels. Ability and performance for jobs are linearly related, such that at all IQ levels, an increase in IQ translates into a concomitant increase in performance (Coward and Sackett, 1990). In an analysis of hundreds of siblings, it was found that IQ has a substantial effect on income independently of family background (Murray, 1998).
Other studies question the real-world importance of whatever is measured with IQ tests, especially for differences in accumulated wealth and general economic inequality in a nation. IQ correlates highly with school performance but the correlations decrease the closer one gets to real-world outcomes, like with job performance, and still lower with income. It explains less than one sixth of the income variance Even for school grades, other factors explain most the variance. One study found that, controlling for IQ across the entire population, 90 to 95 percent of economic inequality would continue to exist. *." target="_blank" >Some argue that IQ scores are used as an excuse for not trying to reduce poverty or otherwise improve living standards for all. Claimed low intelligence has historically been used to justify the feudal system and unequal treatment of women (but note that many studies find identical average IQs among men and women; see sex and intelligence). In contrast, others claim that the refusal of high-IQ elites to take IQ seriously as a cause of inequality is itself immoral.[http://www.isteve.com/How_to_Help_the_Left_Half_of_the_Bell_Curve.htm
Because public policy is often intended to influence the same outcomes (for example to improve education, fight poverty and crime, promote fairness in employment, and counter racial discrimination), policy decisions frequently interact with intelligence measures. In some cases, modern public policy references intelligence measures or even aims to alter cognitive development directly.
While broad consensus exists that intelligence measures neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy, controversy surrounds many other aspects of this interaction. Central issues concern whether intelligence measures should be considered in policy decisions, the role of policy in influencing or accounting for group differences in measured intelligence, and the success of policies in light of individual and group intelligence differences. The importance and sensitivity of the policies at issue have produced an often-emotional ongoing debate spanning scholarly inquiry and the popular media from the national to the local level.
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act generally prohibits employment practices that are unfair or discriminatory. One provision of Title VI, 42 USC 2000(e)(2)(h), specifically provides that it is not an "unlawful employment practice for an employer to give and to act upon the results of any professionally developed ability test provided that such test, its administration or action upon the results is not designed, intended or used to discriminate because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin." This statute was interpreted by the Supreme Court in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 US 424 (1971). In Griggs, the Court ruled that the reliance solely on a general IQ test that was not found to be specifically relevant to the job at issue was a discriminatory practice where it had a "disparate impact" on hiring. The Court gave considerable weight in its ruling to an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulation interpreting Section 2002(e)(2)(h)'s reference to a "professionally developed ability test" to mean "a test which fairly measures the knowledge or skills required by the particular job or class of jobs which the applicant seeks, or which fairly affords the employer a chance to measure the applicant's ability to perform a particular job or class of jobs." In other words, the use of any particular test would need to be shown to be relevant to the particular job or class of jobs at issue.
In the educational context, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals interpreted similar state and federal statutes to require that IQ Tests not be used in a manner that was determinative of tracking students into classes designed for the mentally retarded. Larry P. v. Riles, 793 F.2d 969 (9th Cir. 1984). The court specifically found that the tests involved were designed and standardized based on an all-white population, and had not undergone a legislatively mandated validation process. In addition, the court ruled that predictive validity for a general population is not sufficient, since the rights of an individual student were at issue, and emphasized that had the tests not been treated as controlling but instead used as part of a thorough and individualized assessment by a school psychologist a different result would have obtained.
The Supreme Court of the United States has utilized IQ test results during the sentencing phase of some criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court case of Atkins v. Virginia, decided June 20 2002, * held that executions of mentally retarded criminals are "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. In Atkins the court stated that
In overturning the Virginia Supreme Court's holding, the Atkins opinion stated that petitioner's IQ result of 59 was a factor making the imposition of capital punishment a violation of his eighth amendment rights. In the opinion's notes the court provided some of the facts relied upon when reaching their decision
Tests also differ in their g-loading, which is the degree to which the test score reflects general mental ability rather than a specific skill or "group factor" such as verbal ability, spatial visualization, or mathematical reasoning). g-loading and validity have been observed to be related in the sense that most IQ tests derive their validity mostly or entirely from the degree to which they measure g (Jensen 1998).
The social-construct and real-ability interpretations for IQ differences can be distinguished because they make opposite predictions about what would happen if people were given equal opportunities. The social explanation predicts that equal treatment will eliminate differences, while the real-ability explanation predicts that equal treatment will accentuate differences. Evidence for both outcomes exists. Achievement gaps persist in socioeconomically advantaged, integrated, liberal, suburban school districts in the United States (see Noguera, 2001). Test-score gaps tend to be larger at higher socioeconomic levels (Gottfredson, 2003). Some studies have reported a narrowing of score gaps over time.
The reduction of intelligence to a single score seems extreme and unrealistic to many people. Opponents argue that it is much more useful to know a person's strengths and weaknesses than to know their IQ score. Such opponents often cite the example of two people with the same overall IQ score but very different ability profiles. As measured by IQ tests, most people have highly balanced ability profiles, with differences in subscores being greater among the more intelligent. However, this assumes the ability of IQ tests to comprehensively gauge the wide variety of human intellectual abilities.
The creators of IQ testing did not intend for the tests to gauge a person's worth, and in many (or, as some people suggest, all) situations, IQ may have little relevance.
He spends much of the book debunking the concept of IQ, including a historical discussion of how the IQ tests were created and a technical discussion of why g is simply a mathematical artifact. Later editions of the book include criticism of The Bell Curve.
Arthur Jensen, Professor of Educational Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, responds to Gould's criticisms in a paper titled The Debunking of Scientific Fossils and Straw Persons.*
The findings of the task force state that IQ scores do have high predictive validity for individual (but not necessarily population) 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 agree that individual (again, not necessarily population) differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by genetics.
They state there is little evidence to show that childhood diet influences intelligence except in cases of severe malnutrition. They agree that there are no significant differences between the average IQ scores of males and females. The task force agrees that large differences do exist between the average IQ scores of blacks and whites, and that these differences cannot be attributed to biases in test construction. While they admit there is no empirical evidence supporting it, the APA task force suggests that explanations based on social status and cultural differences may be possible. Regarding genetic causes, they noted that there is not much direct evidence on this point, but what little there is fails to support the genetic hypothesis.
The APA journal that published the statement, American Psychologist, subsequently published eleven critical responses in January 1997, most arguing that the report failed to examine adequately the evidence for partly-genetic explanations.
The report was published in 1995 and thus does not include a decade of recent research.
Cognitive tests | Psychometrics
Quocient intel·lectual | Intelligenskvotient | Intelligenzquotient | Intelligentsuskvoot | Cociente intelectual | Quotient intellectuel | Cociente intelectual | Quoziente_d'intelligenza | Greindarvísitala | מנת משכל | Intelekto koeficientas | IQ | Intelligentiequotiënt | 知能指数 | Intelligenskvotient | Iloraz inteligencji | Quociente de inteligência | Коэффициент интеллекта | Intelligence quotient | Inteligenčný kvocient | Inteligenčni količnik | Älykkyysosamäärä | IQ | IQ | IQ | 智商
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the
"Intelligence quotient".
Home Page • arts • business • computers • games • health • hospitals • home • kids & teens • news • physicians • recreation• reference • regional • science • shopping • society • sports • world