The World's IQ = 86

scudsucker said:
IQ tests do have meaning to researchers who are qualified to understand and rate IQ.

They are worse than meaningless to the general public, who do not understandtha concept and are seduced into thinking IQ tests are the be-all and end-all of intelligence.

That said, the OP obviously did not study statistics. Average IQ (the mean) was arbitrarily at 100. The "fact" that the "average is 89" is clearly an error with the original sample.

Because... The average IQ is 100. This is a standard. This is how it works. 100 IQ points is "standard average".

I do understand some of you will not get the irony of the OP: if the alleged average IQ of the survey is 83 purported IQ points, and it is a reliable study, then the "value" of an IQ point needs to be reduced so that the new mean is still 100. These IQ points are an imaginary scale. There's no absolute value of the "standard human intelligence" of '100'.

Oh well. It is up to those of us with a high IQ - but more importantly an understanding of statistics - to help the rest of you out.
Click to expand...
I hope your IQ can handle the Greenwich scale.
 
I haven't seen seen all that many IQ test, but its generally simple pattern recognition and some basic maths. Jordan Peterson makes a good point(I think in the video just quoted by someone) that you can't educate people past their potential, so there will always be someone that's really stupid. But people can be uneducated or under educated or even dumb down by a number of factors.
Now I work with quite a few "average" people on a regular basis and I don't consider them stupid, but if they were to take IQ test I bet they would really suck. Just because they aren't used to answering that type of questions. I think the average person, especially here, is completely under-educated and mentally lazy so you can probably spend some time with then and practice problem solving puzzles, maths and even the IQ test then they should score above or close to 100
 
its time for Monday night rehabilitation with beef supreme!!!

and Secretary not sure who wanted to put water on crops not branwdo, the thirst mutilator.
 
IQ was a system meant for Nazi children.Adams ruins it properly.
 
IQ means ****. My last IQ test returned 133 but I still consider myself a dumb lazy ****.

You can't judge a persons holistic worth by an IQ test.
 
Shaun108 said:
IQ means ****. My last IQ test returned 133 but I still consider myself a dumb lazy ****.

You can't judge a persons holistic worth by an IQ test.
Click to expand...

Quite correct. You have to take personality into account.

The interesting thing is that if you have a high IQ with low conscientiousness and openness, you are almost guaranteed misery. This is because your personality would make it difficult for you to be productive in a high paying job. Which means that you would be relegated to a menial job, which to a high IQ person would be demeaning.


Just as a side note: has anyone checked South Africa's IQ? It is 68.85...

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
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient

This means that the US military would reject the average South African as they are considered too stupid to be of any value.
:crylaugh: :crylaugh: :crylaugh: :crylaugh:
 
The Trutherizer said:
It means something on the low end. Sure from a certain point onward (90) a person is more or less intellectually capable. As in capable of functioning in the world. Reading fairly easily, adequate communication, useful mathematical skills, making a living (and even on the low end often enough making a living very well indeed). You know... Functional.

Below 90 you start skirting the borders of what can be called intellectually feeble. For example most Down Syndrome scores range from 50-70 with a fair number lower, and a relative few going as high as 80.

It's not a nice fuzzy thing, but it does have an effect, and one should not disrespect the hardships people who suffer from such have to endure by just brushing it aside as inconsequential. It's extremely important to note that so many things can push massive numbers of people into problem areas. Poor nutrition, poor hygiene, pollution, substance abuse by themselves and/or their parents. Even just widespread financial or other stress can have a pronounced negative impact - Although the effects of stress are often temporary.
Click to expand...

Nice explanation , makes perfect sense!
 
not surprised actually with according to Google 80% of the world's population being impoverished it's going to impact the global IQ
 
By implication, this data suggests that rule by democratic majority is not optimal for humanity.
 
dear...sweet...baby...jesus.

If you go to the collection page on the spreadsheet, then go to South Africa, they have all the tests that they used to get the international statistics. The stats are broken down by race...
For the one study done on children(15 yo)
White: 93.56
Coloured: 80.77
Indian: 88.27
Black: 69.59

I followed up on the article where they got the tests from:
This article examines the suitability of the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices Test (SPM) for groups of white, coloured, Indian and black pupils in Standard 7 in South Africa. The four groups show very little difference in test reliabilities, the rank order of item difficulties, item discrimination values, and the loadings of items on the first principal component. Consequently, from a psychometric point of view, the SPM is not culturally biased. However, the test is not culture or ethnic ‘blind’ either. This is revealed by discriminant analysis which shows that the largest proportion of the black and white testees follow the general pattern of their own group. (This tendency is far less evident in the coloured and Indian groups.) The groups also show large mean test score differences, especially between black and white pupils where the differences is nearly 3 SD units. Regarding the nature of these differences, it was found that items which discriminate best within the groups were also the items that showed the largest differences between the groups.
Click to expand...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019188699290037P

The test if anyone is interested:
https://iqpro.org/
This isn't exactly biased to English or Afrikaans either... The test is designed to be linguistically and culturally bias free.
220px-Raven_Matrix.svg.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices
 
konfab said:
dear...sweet...baby...jesus.

If you go to the collection page on the spreadsheet, then go to South Africa, they have all the tests that they used to get the international statistics. The stats are broken down by race...
For the one study done on children(15 yo)
White: 93.56
Coloured: 80.77
Indian: 88.27
Black: 69.59

I followed up on the article where they got the tests from:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019188699290037P

The test if anyone is interested:
https://iqpro.org/
This isn't exactly biased to English or Afrikaans either... The test is designed to be linguistically and culturally bias free.
View attachment 473646
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices
Click to expand...

is this a weighted test or a standard IQ test? Seeing that the kids were just 15 their scores can increase by up to 20 points.
 
garp said:
By implication, this data suggests that rule by democratic majority is not optimal for humanity.
Click to expand...

Well I did say last week democracy in its current form is not sustainable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X