Well I’m sure there may be some skilled members here that have special training to do IQ tests and can pick up on low IQ people. And from what I read IQ was invented to see how well people do in school.
From what I read on the internet there seems to be some traits of what low IQ people likely do.
Well traits of low IQ normally have.So I’m not sure how low on the IQ test you have to score to normally have these traits.
—They are likely to be overweight
—They don’t get certain jokes and phrases
—They fall prey to false advertising
—They do not planning ahead
—They tend to live in the moment
—They usually are bad with money
—Work at low paying jobs.
—The relative absence of wit and sophisticated creativity
—They usually are bad with money
—limited working vocabulary
—They may like to argue and get into fights than learn
—They are bad with planning for the future
—They don’t seek information from people smarter than them
—They get confused easy
— It is hard for them to learn and understand things
— They normally think in simple things.
Not sure I understand what you saying Wesley_clark
The liberals normally through money at the problem and blame it on the school or home the lack of education growing up.
Well the conservatives blame it on home and IQ than say the school. And people have to understand that we not equal how shocking that may be for liberals to try to understand. Well that what they are saying.
As someone smarter and wiser that I once told me. We are all created equal, it’s what you do after your creation that separates and elevates some to higher positions in life.
Is English your first language? I ask because it’s very hard to understand some of your posts due to the grammatical errors.
Ironically, that’s the type of error that might cause some people to conclude that you had a low IQ. It’s one of the issues with standardized IQ tests; they are often culturally biased. A test in English might make a ESL learner score lower when it has nothing to do with their innate intelligence.
Where did you get your list of attributes that correlate to low IQ? It would be interesting to read that from the original source.
I think you can damage IQ early in life with malnutrition and an unstimulating early environment. I expect these are things that correlate with poverty. Conversely, if you want to maximize IQ, you need to ensure proper nutrition even before conception, and provide plenty of intellectual stimulation and encouragement.
I think once you’re partway through your childhood, bumping up IQ is not likely to happen.
OTOH, scholastic/life success can be maximized by developing good habits/self-discipline. There are students with real learning disabilities, but there are also a lot of students who don’t get good grades (and later, don’t get good jobs) because they just couldn’t bring themselves to do the work. Parenting likely has some impact on this.
The Flynn effect, a generation-over-generation upward creep of IQ test raw scores, was mentioned upthread. The Wikipedia page is of interest, but you can hear about it straight from the horse’s mouth here, as James Flynn himself delivers a TED talk:
some people are uncomfortable that skills you did nothing to earn can make a difference in life outcomes. people don’t earn their iq, they’re born with it.
certain interventions can help. improved prenatal and childhood nutrition. more stimulating environment as a kid, etc. but even those will probably only make a difference of a few points. they won’t take someone who is an iq of 90 and lift them to 115.
Jillwood77, where do get this list of 16 things that people with a lower I.Q. are supposed to have? Does it all come from one website, or did you put it together from reading a lot of websites? In either case, what websites did you take these claims from? These 16 things may at present vaguely correlate with a low I.Q., but in general it’s not clear that they are caused by a low I.Q. Some of them only correlate with a low I.Q. at present, but they didn’t correlate in the past. Some of them are mostly caused by poverty. Some of them are mostly caused by mental health issues. Some of them are mostly caused by the environment you live in. If you want to convince us of anything, you’re going to have to present the evidence for what you say better.
In fact, the Flynn effect says (sort of) that someone who scored about 115 on an I.Q. test in 1940 would score about 90 on a present-day I.Q. test, since I.Q. scores as measured by tests have been rising by .3 points per year during the 81 years from 1940 to 2021. It’s now usually accepted that the increase in intelligence as measured by I.Q. tests is caused by a more stimulating intellectual environment in general. (Yes, I realize that I’m greatly simplifying what the Flynn effect says, since the rise has been different in different countries, different socioeconomic classes, and different decades.)
True but I more meant within one person’s life, they can’t add 25 points. You can add points over the generations with better nutrition, reduced levels of environmental toxins and stressors and (if you want) selective breeding procedures. But for a single person, especially an adult, IQ doesn’t seem very changeable.
Also the Flynn effect has stopped in the last few decades, but I don’t know if anyone knows for sure why yet.
I think there seems to be some confusion of what IQ is and why we do IQ tests and I get different answers if you ask liberals vs conservatives. And also what the IQ tests all covers.
I have looked at that YouTube video and some of the replies in this thread and it is saying IQ was invented to see how well you do in school.
So in other words if some one scores really low say below 80 you cannot be a doctor or engineer the person will not be able to learn or be able to do the work.
I’m not sure what skilled people use to conduct an IQ tests and what all it is covers and there seem to be some debate or confusion of IQ vs intelligence. That IQ does not cover or tests intelligence and intelligence has nothing to do with IQ
But you don’t need IQ tests or master degree or PHD in IQ testing to spend time with some one to see if the person is average, below average or really good at doing different things. Not everyone is gifted or can get PHD
That list I posted could be low IQ or low intelligence or even just hillbilly like or ghetto like.
Now again I don’t know that may be you need 5 or 6 points on that list to be low IQ and three points or less is just more hillbilly like or ghetto like than IQ I don’t know.
I know some people that have never gone to school to learn how to built things and can built things with no book or papers telling them how to built things and yet some other people with books and papers still get confused when comes to spatial IQ part of it and get really confused.
Those individuals with relatively high academic intelligence, which is what IQ is purported to measure, can be expected to have a relatively easier time of it in school.
However, one’s intellectual ability certainly does not determine their destiny academically or occupationally. There are too many other variables at play.
I had a professor once who polled us all about our thoughts of the typical IQ of physicians by raising our hands. What percentage in the gifted range, superior, above average, and so on. There were few of us willing to agree that any M.D. had an IQ in only the average range, and none below that.
The prof said he “guaranteed” there was a physician somewhere out there who had an IQ in the 80’s. Whether that is true or not, it is food for thought. Don’t give too much weight to a test score.
I disagree. There have been people I’ve met who I would never have thought could have gotten a Ph.D. from my interactions with them, but they did get one. Calling someone hillbilly-like or ghetto-like is exactly the wrong way to determine their I.Q. A person’s I.Q. can’t be determined from their accent or the people they grew up with. In fact, it’s this stereotyping of people according to their socioeconomic background that makes it hard to succeed for people from areas where few people get Ph.D.s or even graduate from college or, for that matter, even graduate from high school. People from such backgrounds get discouraged (both consciously and unconsciously) from going further in their education than the people they grew up with. They are prevented from going further both by the people they meet in the higher-level educational institutions (and jobs) and often by their own friends and relatives. The people in those higher-level schools and jobs don’t want someone who they consider below them to succeed. Their friends and families often don’t want to see someone who grew up with them do well in those higher-level schools and jobs, since often they don’t want to be confronted by the fact that someone from a lower-level environment can make it out of there.
Like I said before how do you define intelligent people. People seem to have different meanings what that word means.
Do you define people ability to do well at school? Or the ability to get a master degree or PHD.Or the ability to learn fast? Or the ability to do well at work?
I think intelligence, as measured by an IQ test, is about pattern recognition. The better you are at harnessing what you’ve learned in the past (whether it’s the distant past or immediate past) to help you understand the present and predict the future, the more intelligent you are.
Intelligence is a critical attribute in the pursuit of academic and professional achievement, but by itself it’s not enough; as Calvin Coolidge said, “unrewarded genius is almost a proverb.” If you want to get through grad school and/or rise to the top of the corporate world, you also need things like self-discipline, interest in your work, motivation, sociability, and a measure of assertiveness in advancing/protecting your own interests along the way. A modest deficit in any of these categories can be offset by strength in one or more of the other categories, but a severe deficit in any of these categories is probably fatal to achievement.
People seem to confuse raw cognitive ability vs the application of that ability vs actual achievement. Sort of like the difference between being really tall, learning to play basketball, and actually having access to facilities and coaching to get to NBA level.
I’m sure there are doctors with IQs in the 80s, but they are the exception rather than the rule. College and medical school will weed out most people who have cognitive abilities in that range who try to become physicians.
Also IQ isn’t the only factor in success. No matter how smart you are, you still have to work 80 hours a week in residency. Some people can’t handle that despite having extremely high IQs, in fact that is considered one of the negative effects of an extremely high IQ. You get lazy because everything comes easy, and then when you are asked to put in long hours you can’t do it. If you have had an extremely high IQ since childhood and academics were a breeze, you may not develop any work ethic.
But suffice it to say, its a safe bet physicians have an IQ above average. I’m not sure what range, but I’d guess 115-130 is around the average IQ for physicians. There are physicians with low IQs, but they are going to be the exception.
EDIT: According to this, average physician IQ is 125
Previous reports of the intellectual functioning of “non-impaired” physicians have suggested that the mean I.Q. of individuals with medical degrees is 125 (Matarazzo & Goldstein, 1972; Wecshler, 1972), which is considerably higher than the average performance of this cohort. Matarazzo and Goldstein (1972) also examined the I.Q. of the average medical student to determine whether, then, present claims that there was a “decline in the intellectual caliber of the entering medical student” (p. 102) was correct. Those authors found, contrary to the alleged contention, that their sample of medical students performed similar to that of 10 other samples of medical student I.Q.’s from 1946 to 1967. The average Full Scale I.Q. of the medical students across the number of studies was 125, similar to the I.Q.’s of physicians at that time.
