A debate on the intelligence of SDMB posters

Great Debates
1

I was on the fence vis-a-vis putting this into GD or IMHO. It ended up here. Mods, move it if need be.

Now, this may be a sensitive issue for some people so I’m throwing out a disclaimer now; this argument isn’t directed at anyone in particular. It’s a general-observation sort of thing, although I use one specific example. If you hate me, well, join the club.

In this thread, a discussion continues on how to motivate bright kids to do schoolwork. To some extent it has morphed into a debate on the value of schoolwork for smart kids.

The observations found in this thread are by no means new to the SDMB. Many, many posts have detailed the tedium of school for the gifted. But what I find interesting is the truly amazing number of people on the SDMB who were positively Doogieesque in their level of giftedness. In the thread linked, one poster claims to have been reading at a college level when he was two years old, something I find absolutely astounding, something that probably has not happened a dozen times since the invention of written language. I am sure such a phenomenon must have been in the national press.

Indeed, I would say that scores of SDMB posters have claimed to be incredibly gifted, scoring IQ’s above 140, SAT scores above whatever a great SAT score is (I’m Canadian, we don’t have SATs here) scoring in the 97th percentile and above on standarized tests, reading Proust in grade two, solving Fermat’s last theorem in finger paint, being four years ahead of every other kid in the class, etc. etc. Indeed, even I claimed in the thread linked that I was a “smart kid.”

Although I have no hard numbers, I would guess that the number of SDMB posters who have claimed genius-level intelligence defies statistical likelihood, at least with respect to the percentage of Wile E. Coyote-level supergeniuses in the general population. (As a side note, it is also worth noting that the CHILDREN of SDMB members seem to be almost uniformly the most intelligent batch of children that have ever walked the face of the Earth, but I don’t think we can begrudge parents a little bragging.) Of course, it is entirely possible that the population of the SDMB selects for Nobel Prize candidates, and that these people are likely to have children with large brains or precocious reading skills.

In case it isn’t already obvious, I am really skeptical that SDMB posters are as bright, as a group, as they claim to be. I base that opinion on three factors:

  1. People are inclined to overestimate their own intelligence anyway. Many, many people claim to be smarter than normal, but very few people admit to being stupid. So there’s a natural inflation there.

  2. A great many people who claim to have been geniuses as kids do so in the context of claiming that their intelligence led to scholastic failure (the “I was too bored to succeed” method) or social rejection. While those things can and do happen, it was my direct experience that really smart kids in high school were MORE likely to be academically successful and socially accepted, not less. This was true of my high school, which wasn’t any special sort of school, and it’s true of people I know personally and their high schools. (Note that I do not count a “Failing at school” smart kids who slack but get A’s anyway.) I find it again defies statistical probability that so many geniuses here were scholastic and social failures, when in real life most geniuses are scholastic and social successes.

  3. While the level of discussion on the SDMB is a lot higher than can be found on most message boards, I don’t get the sense that everyone here rivals Stephen Hawking in brainpower. I think most of us are reasonably bright, with a heavy bias towards skill in written English, but the number of people who give me a strong impression of being actual geniuses is pretty small. I don’t count myself among them, either.

So the way I see it there are three possibilities:

  1. My observations are wrong. Maybe I am overestimating the number of people who have asserted Olympian brainpower. I don’t think so, though, because certified geniuses are pretty rare and I’ve seen dozens of 'em here. But maybe I’m wrong. It may also be, with respect to my second observation above, that the reason so many SDMB geniuses failed in school is because they are the geniuses who feel a need to say theyre geniuses, while really smart people who did well in school are less likely to mention it.

  2. SDMB posters really are geniuses. Perhaps this message board HAS become a gathering place for the smartest people in the world.

  3. People ain’t as smart as they think they are.

I throw some questions open to the board:

  1. Do we really have that many geniuses on the board?

  2. Why does it seem that large-brained people on here profess that having large brains was a disadvantage? Am I wrong in asserting that in real life most people with high IQs actually do very well?

  3. If people on here do tend to overestimate their own cranial power, is this just a normal phenomenon or is it doubly inflated here? If so, why?

2

Me smart.

3

We have many posters here who really are experts in their fields, and usually one cannot become an expert in something without at least having a good capacity and predilection for logic and analysis. These two characteristics then lend themselves to the pursuit of other knowledge, through the absorption of information through news services or through the acquisition of information through search engines online. In short, intelligence is increased because these people have the capability to know what to look for, how to look for it, and what to do with it once they’ve found it.

Having said that, there are also plenty of people on here - and I can refer only to those who do post, of course - who are not experts in their fields. They’re regular folk, like me. They are here because they like to learn new things and interact with people with whom they may share a comon experience. Although these people may not be experts in the strictest sense of the word, they are usually quite articulate, which is not something that’s easily measured (least of all by SAT scores).

I think that the average intelligence of this board is high, as long as by “intelligence” we mean not only the capacity for thought and logic but also the innate ability to self-articulate. There are plenty of people in the world who are book smart, and there are legions who are world smart (i.e., experience). On the SDMB, we have many in both categories.

4

[Garrison Keiller]
SDMB. Where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average…
::heavy nose breathing::
[/Garrison Keiller]
Anyway, your questions:

  1. Geniuses on board This is not directly measurable through the medium of these fora. One can make subjective evaluations of individual Dopers, but the only way to remotely test this (random sampling of registered users, via standardized testing) is necessarily voluntary, unverifiable, and of dubious accuracy in any case.

  2. Big brains = small success? Yeah, this is not only counterintuitive, it doesn’t fit observed phenomena. I think it’s obvious that success by itself is not a reliable indicator of intelligence, but certainly intelligence would have to be counted as an asset toward success rather than an impediment.

  3. Do we have big heads over our supposedly big brains? Well, the Straight Dope is supposed to be about fighting ignorance. I think any message board based on pointing out ignorance or other intellectual failings will encourage some sort of sense of superiority in its membership. (See the forums associated with the Darwin Awards, JREF, etc.)

5

I think that many of the posters here have well-exercised analytical skills (probably at least partly because of being here) and are willing to think more deeply about issues than the average fellow; whether that constitiutes smart or not is open to debate.

I think we have a number of genuises here too, but I have no idea if we have more than we statistically should and even if we did, it might only be the result of ‘stickiness’ - smarter people enjoy the content here and stay, erm ‘less smart’ people can’t be bothered and leave, idiots and trolls get thrown out.

6

Outside of high school, I would tend to agree with you that intelligence is more likely to lead to social success, I think that at the high school level it varies widely from place to place. Anecdotally speaking, in my own school intelligence was an enormous barrier to social acceptance – athletic achievement counted for far more than intelligence did.

The stereotype of the brainy high-schooler with no friends, like many stereotypes, has some basis in truth.

7

RickJay,

Might I suggest that the topic of the thread to which you link (or any similar thread) is calculated to bring out those who claim to be geniuses, and particularly those who felt that this had harmed them in scholastic achievement?
This is not to say that I disagree with what seems to be your general premise - that most people think they are smarter (and better looking, and nicer etc. etc.) than they actually are. But I think the extent to which this is true is skewed by looking at threads which focus on this type of topic.

8

“1. Do we really have that many geniuses on the board?”

I suspect a statistical leaning towards higher-than-average writing skills, and hazard the theory that high-level communication skills are one form of “intelligence” that match up well with standardized IQ tests.

That leaning undoubtedly gets exaggerated for the usual reasons.

"2. Why does it seem that large-brained people on here profess that having large brains was a disadvantage? Am I wrong in asserting that in real life most people with high IQs actually do very well? "

There’s all sorts of reasons for lack of success. I think a certain significant percentage of people heavily involved in online fora may have some difficulties in non-textual society in general–and no matter where one’s native intelligence is at, that kind of thing will handicap success. Aside from that, there’s motivation issues, plain bad luck, and umpty others.

I don’t think your assertion is wrong in general, at all.

“3. If people on here do tend to overestimate their own cranial power, is this just a normal phenomenon or is it doubly inflated here? If so, why?”

Well, there’s the whole We Fight Ignorance thing here, which is more of a rather touching (and less addled than the usual) corporate vision statement than a truth. So there’s a few ingredients–the idea that geniuses are better able to fight ignorance, the natural human urge to get better standing in whatever social group they’re in, and the equally natural urge to play “I can top that!” with personal anecdotes and whatnot.

9

Well we did in the 60’s/70’s. All Ontario students wrote the SATO (Scholatic Aptitude Test Ontario) tests in Grade12 or 13, (I can’t remember which) as a requirement for admission into Ontario Universities. Marks (I only remeber percentiles) were issued in both math and english.

I’m quite confident that dopers ares smarter than the average citizen, but I can’t think of anyone here that I’d qualify as genius. Except Cecil perhaps.

10

People who’re really intelligent are unlikely to brag about their SAT scores. They just plod along, making insightful, informed posts, while failing to contribute to a statisctically valid sample by posting their GRE scores. I’ll certainly accept that some fraction of the people who shoot their mouths off about their misunderstood brilliance are probably talking through their hats. But I also think that for every “genius” describing how they independently discoverd calculus at age eight but were failed English Lit in high school, there’s a garden variety smart-as-a-tack Doper thinking, “uh, whatever,” and wandering off to GQ to Fight the Good Fight.

Also, consider that the SDMB has a very strong self-selection effect, and a large populace to draw on. The people on the interenet are going to come predominantly from the higher percentiles of the general population. (Well, leaving off the people who use AOL. :wink: ) Those who are interested in the SDMB are going to be in the higher percentiles of the interenet-using population. According to the main page, the SDMB has 23,821 members. Let us make the demonstrably wrong assumption that they are all Americans. According to the U.S. Census Beureau, the population of the US is approximately 287,565,028, so Dopers would constitute 0.0083% of the population. That means you could fit every last one of us in the 99th percentile without even trying. Now, I’m not saying that Dopers are the top 0.0083% of the population, or even that most of us are in the 99th percentile, just that the majority of us are probably to be ‘above average,’ and a significant number of us are probably significantly above average.

Podkayne resists the urge to post her SAT scores to bolster her point. :wink:

11

  1. Genius is usually defined as an IQ over 140. I would guess that the average IQ of SMDB posters is quite a bit over 100, and that there is also a larger percentage over 140 than would be found in the general population.

  2. Looking at the thread in question, I don’t really see many claims of high intelligence being a disadvantage. I only see the claim that this was not always reflected in their grades, etc… I think you may be confusing “in spite of” with “because of”. Conversely, your expectation that high IQ leads to greater chance of success was precisely the premise of The Bell Curve. Try starting a thread on that book and see how well the science behind it is thought of in these parts.

A quick search of google found two websites with an interesting overview of the link between IQ and success :IQ and real world success and IQ best predicts if you will succeed or fail in life. As for social success, it is generally accepted to be true that people prefer the company of people who are similar to themselves. Since IQ’s are more numerous near 100, people with IQ in the extreme ranges (below 70, above 130 or so) may have more difficulty socializing for that reason.

  1. Personally I find perusing the Straight Dope to be rather humbling to my just slightly under 140 IQ. YMMV (I’m sure I also often fall into the trap of overestimating my intellectual capabilities, though I think that is just a normal part of believing there’s nothing I can do that can’t be done.)
12

Re, the ‘we’re fighting ignorance - so we must be smart’ argument; you could just as well state that since the board is still here and that ignorance is rampant, we must have a higher coefficient of ignoramuses than what is average, or? In any sense the opposite argument seems somewhat dangerously close to self-flattery.

I’m pretty certain that the IQ level of the board is slightly above average, but in no way so that we have a dramatic overrepresentation of geniuses.

I am also fairly certain that the board is has a slightly higher level than normal of people below par on social skills or EQ as someone so daftly coined it a few years back.

And yes I think that people blatantly overestimate their smarts around here, but that’s not so significant, it’s not a competition anyway.

What I know is that this place has a capacity to attract people that have a love for knowledge and information, who are opinionated and analytical and know how to express that. As a group the SDMB members harbor a vast amount of general and detailed knowledge (sometimes trivial, sometimes less), which through the nature and rules of the board is put to an entertaining and educational use. I’d call that above average intelligent behavior in one way, but then again that’s pretty biased – I value that kind of thing, why else stick around?

Out of the members whose posts I have encountered I have no clue as to who might be or might not be a genius. I do know one thing however; there are a few members who have an enormous amount of general and/or specific knowledge, which is awe inspiring, impresses me deeply and makes debate around here worthwhile. The contribution by these members on any given topic is what makes SDMB stand out as being in a different league to other forums with a less ambitious founding vision or a more narrow scope.

In case anyone should wonder, I was pretty much a scholastic disaster and it sure as hell had nothing to do with me being too smart – It just seemed at the time that I had better things to do – like right now when I should be working and I’m posting this. Think about it.

Sparc

13

I’ll concur with some of the previous replies. Given the environment here, the more-intelligent individuals will stick around which continually raises the average. In my short time here (also read alot before posting) I have seen that the average intellenge level does seem higher here than on other messageboards. That’s one of the attractions I find, there’s much more compelling and thought-intriguing threads here and less of the pointless flaming I see elsewhere.

Just to throw out some numbers to help you with your stastical survey:
GPA: 3.0 (I was a slacker)
IQ: checked years ago at 135. Recent sample tests would indicate a similar reading today.
SAT: hard to remember, but a 1300-something sounds close.

14

Though a relative newcomer on the internet, I have concluded through rigorous unscientific testing that the Straight Dope Message Boards are populated by large brained aliens. Do not anger them.

FYI: IQ over 130, SAT (taken once in 11th grade) over 1300, lazy, prone to grumpiness.

15

I got a 34 on the ACT, out of 36. Nyah.

16

Well, as you might guess from the other thread, I could have written your OP, RickJay. My tangent is to complain that there are a bunch of books out there that glorify the non-existent kids who solve Fermat’s theroem in finger paint. In fact, I just wrote that complaint again in another spin-off thread. Linky.

17

And you should hear these guys talk about penis size!
-DSeid, who says it aint the size of your brain but how you use it!:wink:
(And BTW, not a genius and didn’t get a perfect SAT… but curious and always been grateful that I could at least hang out with the smart kids.)

18

It should be pointed out that the SAT grade curve has been shifted several times over the years. (IIRC, it always gets easier to get a higher grade.)

I know this because I took it right before a change. I graduated HS in 1994, and they told me to emphasise to colleges that my grade on the test was before the changes of that year.

I got an 1150, BTW which at that time was 95 percentile. That sounds impresssive until you pause to consider how many slack jawed yokels were in my high school.

19

I happened upon the SDMB by accident, really. I was doing some research on a topic for work so I posted a question within minutes of my arrival. I was amazed by the quality of answers I received. Since that time I frequently think, “Who are these guys?”. I check profiles and locations. I imagine that these dopers are cabinet members, Rhodes Scholars, etc.

I am convinced that this is a community of highly intellectual people with unimaginable analytical capacity and literary skills. I still ask - who are these guys???

20

I participate in a number of messageboards, and my SWAG is that the general level of intelligence here at the SDMB is well above average. If for no other reason than the dolts here get bored with reading posts that they can’t understand, and move on to greener pastures.

Of course, the average IQ here drops everytime I sign on, but that is another issue.

I see a number of posters who are flat out wrong, but significantly few who are stupid. I bet a messageboard advertising itself as giving “the straight dope” on every subject under the sun is going to attract people who are at least making an effort to think analytically. And analytical thought improves with practice, as does practically everything else.

Plus a lot of the people here are laugh-out-loud funny in their quips and parodies. It is very difficult to be intentionally funny and stupid at the same time.

I did OK in school, although I’m no genius. I think blasting trolls is an activity that leads to over-estimating one’s own intelligence as well. It can lead one to assume that, just because you are clearly smarter than that clown, you must be equally superior to the average person on the street who has no interest in posting to messageboards.

And people ignore Gaudere’s law. It is easy to feel superior to someone who is a bad speller, in a way that you couldn’t IRL, since IRL you couldn’t see the spelling mistakes. Then the really-smart-but-lousy-at-spelling people join the group that us maybe-not-as-smart-but-better-at-spelling types look down on.

FWIW. YMMV.

Regards,
Shodan