iq<\/h3>\r\n
IQ stands for intelligence quotient<\/strong> and describes a score earned on a test designed to measure intelligence.<\/p>\r\n<\/section>\r\n Modern intelligence researchers emphasize that there are many kinds of intelligence<\/strong>, not all of which are captured by traditional IQ tests. Still, IQ testing remains widely used in education, clinical psychology, and legal settings. Because of the potential impact of these scores, only licensed psychologists are permitted to administer most standardized IQ tests\u2014social workers, teachers, and psychiatrists generally cannot.<\/p>\r\n IQ testing has a complicated history. Although many people benefit from accurate cognitive assessments, IQ tests have also been misused, most famously in support of the early 20th-century eugenics movement<\/strong>. In Buck v. Bell<\/em> (1927), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld laws permitting forced sterilization of people labeled \u201cfeeble-minded,\u201d often on the basis of biased intelligence testing\u2014ultimately resulting in approximately 65,000 sterilizations<\/strong> (Ko, 2016). Understanding both the value and<\/em> the limits of IQ tests is essential.<\/p>\r\n Despite historical misuse, IQ tests can serve important purposes when used ethically:<\/p>\r\n Educational settings\u2014<\/strong>IQ tests can help identify:<\/p>\r\n Without assessments, many children who struggle or excel might go unnoticed.<\/p>\r\n Clinical and legal settings\u2014<\/strong>IQ scores may help determine:<\/p>\r\n Candace, a 14-year-old in Connecticut, was failing all her classes, frequently fighting with peers, and cursing at teachers. She felt singled out and embarrassed in class and believed teachers only called on her when she didn\u2019t know the answer. A psychological evaluation\u2014including an IQ test\u2014revealed her score was 68, far below the average range.<\/p>\r\n Candace\u2019s difficulties were not due to lack of effort or motivation; she had likely needed academic support for years. IQ testing helped educators and clinicians finally understand the root of her struggles and identify appropriate interventions.<\/p>\r\n What does Candace\u2019s score say about her ability to excel or even succeed in regular education classes without assistance? Why were her difficulties never noticed or addressed?<\/p>\r\n<\/section>\r\n It seems that the human understanding of intelligence is somewhat limited when we focus on traditional or academic-type intelligence. How then, can intelligence be measured? And when we measure intelligence, how do we ensure that we capture what we\u2019re really trying to measure (in other words, that IQ tests function as valid measures of intelligence)?<\/p>\r\n In the late 1800s, Sir Francis Galton developed the first broad test of intelligence (Flanagan & Kaufman, 2004). Although he was not a psychologist, his contributions to the concepts of intelligence testing are still felt today (Gordon, 1995).<\/p>\r\n Reliable intelligence testing (you may recall from earlier modules\u00a0that reliability refers to a test\u2019s ability to produce consistent results) began in earnest during the early 1900s with a researcher named Alfred Binet.<\/p>\r\n Binet was asked by the French government to develop an intelligence test to use on children to determine which ones might have difficulty in school; it included many verbally based tasks. American researchers soon realized the value of such testing.<\/p>\r\n Louis Terman, a Stanford professor, modified Binet\u2019s work by standardizing<\/strong> the administration of the test and tested thousands of different-aged children to establish an average score for each age. As a result, the test was normed and standardized, which means that the test was administered consistently to a large enough representative sample of the population that the range of scores resulted in a bell curve (bell curves will be discussed later).<\/p>\r\n Norming and standardizing the test ensures that new scores are reliable. This new version of the test was called the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (Terman, 1916). Remarkably, an updated version of this test is still widely used today.<\/p>\r\n Psychologist David Wechsler created a new IQ test in the US in 1939 by combining subtests from previous intelligence tests. These subtests tapped into a variety of verbal and nonverbal skills because Wechsler believed that intelligence encompassed \u201cthe global capacity of a person to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment\u201d (Wechsler, 1958, p. 7) He named it the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale, which later was renamed and revised into the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS).<\/p>\r\n Today, three main Wechsler IQ tests are widely used in clinical and school settings:<\/p>\r\n All three tests are individually administered by trained professionals and are regularly updated (\u201crevised editions\u201d) to keep norms current and items fair and accurate.<\/p>\r\n These tests are used widely in schools and communities throughout the United States, and they are periodically normed and standardized as a means of recalibration. For example, as a part of the recalibration process, the WISC-V was given to thousands of children across the country, and children taking the test today are compared with their same-age peers.<\/p>\r\n The WISC-V is composed of 14 subtests, which comprise five indices, which then render an IQ score. The five indices are:<\/p>\r\n When the test is complete, individuals receive a score for each of the five indices and a full scale IQ score. The method of scoring reflects the understanding that intelligence is comprised of multiple abilities in several cognitive realms and focuses on the mental processes that the child used to arrive at their answers to each test item.<\/p>\r\n Though many intelligence tests have been made that produce valid and reliable results, a good question to ask is simply, how should we go about measuring intelligence in the first place? Do you think asking a vocabulary question, for example, is a good measure of intelligence? If we are really attempting to measure the ability to learn from experience, for example, then the best types of tests would have people develop novel solutions to problems, but you can imagine how difficult it would be to design a test like that.<\/p>\r\n A major problem with IQ tests is that the questions are typically rooted in Western, middle-to-upper-class values, language, and experiences, which results in questions that are more easily understandable and relatable for individuals from these backgrounds, inadvertently favoring them and creating a bias against those from other cultural contexts.<\/p>\r\n The wording and language used in many IQ tests may not be accessible to individuals for whom English is not a first language or who speak different dialects. Additionally, intelligence is multifaceted and does not fit neatly into the box that many standardized tests attempt to place it in. By not considering the diverse ways intelligence manifests across different cultures, traditional IQ testing can be limited in its scope and potentially discriminatory.<\/p>\r\n In some studies with Indigenous Australian participants, researchers gathered feedback about the types of culturally relevant test questions they could ask that would be clear. Some participants gave feedback that they would prefer to take the test outdoors, and that some of the terminology doesn't translate well, like right-hand side or left-hand side.[footnote]Dingwall, K. M., Gray, A. O., McCarthy, A. R., Delima, J. F., & Bowden, S. C. (2017). Exploring the reliability and acceptability of cognitive tests for Indigenous Australians: a pilot study. BMC psychology<\/em>, 5(1), 26. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s40359-017-0195-y[\/footnote]<\/p>\r\n In one study, researchers asked community members about the tests beforehand, and some of the tests were vetoed for being culturally irrelevant. Others were changed to be more culturally sensitive. For example, a question using abstract images replaced them with animals or grocery items, playing cards were replaced with stones or seashells.[footnote]Rock, D., Price, I.R. Identifying culturally acceptable cognitive tests for use in remote northern Australia. BMC Psychol 7, 62 (2019). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s40359-019-0335-7[\/footnote]<\/p>\r\n<\/section>\r\n<\/section>\r\n Periodic updates to test norms revealed a surprising pattern: average IQ scores have increased with each generation<\/strong>, a trend known as the Flynn effect<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n Although scores rise, James Flynn argued this does not<\/em> mean people are innately \u201cmore intelligent\u201d today. Instead, changes in education, technology, nutrition, and daily problem-solving demands may make each generation more practiced at the kinds of thinking IQ tests measure (Flynn, Shaughnessy, & Fulgham, 2012).<\/p>\r\n Modern IQ tests are:<\/p>\r\n However, debates remain about:<\/p>\r\n In short, IQ tests provide valuable information<\/strong>, but they are not a complete picture of intelligence<\/strong>.<\/p>\r\n While you\u2019re likely familiar with the term \u201cIQ\u201d and associate it with the idea of intelligence, what does IQ really mean?<\/p>\n IQ stands for intelligence quotient<\/strong> and describes a score earned on a test designed to measure intelligence.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n Modern intelligence researchers emphasize that there are many kinds of intelligence<\/strong>, not all of which are captured by traditional IQ tests. Still, IQ testing remains widely used in education, clinical psychology, and legal settings. Because of the potential impact of these scores, only licensed psychologists are permitted to administer most standardized IQ tests\u2014social workers, teachers, and psychiatrists generally cannot.<\/p>\n IQ testing has a complicated history. Although many people benefit from accurate cognitive assessments, IQ tests have also been misused, most famously in support of the early 20th-century eugenics movement<\/strong>. In Buck v. Bell<\/em> (1927), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld laws permitting forced sterilization of people labeled \u201cfeeble-minded,\u201d often on the basis of biased intelligence testing\u2014ultimately resulting in approximately 65,000 sterilizations<\/strong> (Ko, 2016). Understanding both the value and<\/em> the limits of IQ tests is essential.<\/p>\n Despite historical misuse, IQ tests can serve important purposes when used ethically:<\/p>\n Educational settings\u2014<\/strong>IQ tests can help identify:<\/p>\n Without assessments, many children who struggle or excel might go unnoticed.<\/p>\n Clinical and legal settings\u2014<\/strong>IQ scores may help determine:<\/p>\n Candace, a 14-year-old in Connecticut, was failing all her classes, frequently fighting with peers, and cursing at teachers. She felt singled out and embarrassed in class and believed teachers only called on her when she didn\u2019t know the answer. A psychological evaluation\u2014including an IQ test\u2014revealed her score was 68, far below the average range.<\/p>\n Candace\u2019s difficulties were not due to lack of effort or motivation; she had likely needed academic support for years. IQ testing helped educators and clinicians finally understand the root of her struggles and identify appropriate interventions.<\/p>\n What does Candace\u2019s score say about her ability to excel or even succeed in regular education classes without assistance? Why were her difficulties never noticed or addressed?<\/p>\n<\/section>\n It seems that the human understanding of intelligence is somewhat limited when we focus on traditional or academic-type intelligence. How then, can intelligence be measured? And when we measure intelligence, how do we ensure that we capture what we\u2019re really trying to measure (in other words, that IQ tests function as valid measures of intelligence)?<\/p>\n In the late 1800s, Sir Francis Galton developed the first broad test of intelligence (Flanagan & Kaufman, 2004). Although he was not a psychologist, his contributions to the concepts of intelligence testing are still felt today (Gordon, 1995).<\/p>\n Reliable intelligence testing (you may recall from earlier modules\u00a0that reliability refers to a test\u2019s ability to produce consistent results) began in earnest during the early 1900s with a researcher named Alfred Binet.<\/p>\n Binet was asked by the French government to develop an intelligence test to use on children to determine which ones might have difficulty in school; it included many verbally based tasks. American researchers soon realized the value of such testing.<\/p>\n Louis Terman, a Stanford professor, modified Binet\u2019s work by standardizing<\/strong> the administration of the test and tested thousands of different-aged children to establish an average score for each age. As a result, the test was normed and standardized, which means that the test was administered consistently to a large enough representative sample of the population that the range of scores resulted in a bell curve (bell curves will be discussed later).<\/p>\n \nThese steps produce norms<\/strong>, which allow examiners to interpret individual scores in comparison to others of the same age. Terman\u2019s version became the Stanford\u2013Binet Intelligence Scale<\/strong>, still used today in updated form.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n Norming and standardizing the test ensures that new scores are reliable. This new version of the test was called the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (Terman, 1916). Remarkably, an updated version of this test is still widely used today.<\/p>\n Psychologist David Wechsler created a new IQ test in the US in 1939 by combining subtests from previous intelligence tests. These subtests tapped into a variety of verbal and nonverbal skills because Wechsler believed that intelligence encompassed \u201cthe global capacity of a person to act purposefully, to think rationally, and to deal effectively with his environment\u201d (Wechsler, 1958, p. 7) He named it the Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale, which later was renamed and revised into the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS).<\/p>\n Today, three main Wechsler IQ tests are widely used in clinical and school settings:<\/p>\n All three tests are individually administered by trained professionals and are regularly updated (\u201crevised editions\u201d) to keep norms current and items fair and accurate.<\/p>\n These tests are used widely in schools and communities throughout the United States, and they are periodically normed and standardized as a means of recalibration. For example, as a part of the recalibration process, the WISC-V was given to thousands of children across the country, and children taking the test today are compared with their same-age peers.<\/p>\n The WISC-V is composed of 14 subtests, which comprise five indices, which then render an IQ score. The five indices are:<\/p>\n When the test is complete, individuals receive a score for each of the five indices and a full scale IQ score. The method of scoring reflects the understanding that intelligence is comprised of multiple abilities in several cognitive realms and focuses on the mental processes that the child used to arrive at their answers to each test item.<\/p>\n Though many intelligence tests have been made that produce valid and reliable results, a good question to ask is simply, how should we go about measuring intelligence in the first place? Do you think asking a vocabulary question, for example, is a good measure of intelligence? If we are really attempting to measure the ability to learn from experience, for example, then the best types of tests would have people develop novel solutions to problems, but you can imagine how difficult it would be to design a test like that.<\/p>\n A major problem with IQ tests is that the questions are typically rooted in Western, middle-to-upper-class values, language, and experiences, which results in questions that are more easily understandable and relatable for individuals from these backgrounds, inadvertently favoring them and creating a bias against those from other cultural contexts.<\/p>\n The wording and language used in many IQ tests may not be accessible to individuals for whom English is not a first language or who speak different dialects. Additionally, intelligence is multifaceted and does not fit neatly into the box that many standardized tests attempt to place it in. By not considering the diverse ways intelligence manifests across different cultures, traditional IQ testing can be limited in its scope and potentially discriminatory.<\/p>\n In some studies with Indigenous Australian participants, researchers gathered feedback about the types of culturally relevant test questions they could ask that would be clear. Some participants gave feedback that they would prefer to take the test outdoors, and that some of the terminology doesn’t translate well, like right-hand side or left-hand side.[1]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n In one study, researchers asked community members about the tests beforehand, and some of the tests were vetoed for being culturally irrelevant. Others were changed to be more culturally sensitive. For example, a question using abstract images replaced them with animals or grocery items, playing cards were replaced with stones or seashells.[2]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/section>\n Periodic updates to test norms revealed a surprising pattern: average IQ scores have increased with each generation<\/strong>, a trend known as the Flynn effect<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Although scores rise, James Flynn argued this does not<\/em> mean people are innately \u201cmore intelligent\u201d today. Instead, changes in education, technology, nutrition, and daily problem-solving demands may make each generation more practiced at the kinds of thinking IQ tests measure (Flynn, Shaughnessy, & Fulgham, 2012).<\/p>\n Modern IQ tests are:<\/p>\n However, debates remain about:<\/p>\n In short, IQ tests provide valuable information<\/strong>, but they are not a complete picture of intelligence<\/strong>.<\/p>\nWhy Measure Intelligence?<\/strong><\/h1>\r\n
\r\n\t
Why Measure Intelligence?<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t
Real World Example<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
Measuring Intelligence<\/h2>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"486\"]
![\"Photograph](\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images-archive-read-only\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/902\/2015\/02\/23224836\/CNX_Psych_07_05_ChildIQ.jpg\")
Figure 1<\/strong>. French psychologist Alfred Binet helped to develop intelligence testing. (b) This page is from a 1908 version of the Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale. Children being tested were asked which face, of each pair, was prettier.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nEarly History<\/h3>\r\n
standardization and norms<\/h3>\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\nThese steps produce norms<\/strong>, which allow examiners to interpret individual scores in comparison to others of the same age. Terman\u2019s version became the Stanford\u2013Binet Intelligence Scale<\/strong>, still used today in updated form.<\/p>\r\n<\/section>\r\n\r\n\t
\r\n\t
How do you really measure intelligence?<\/h2>\r\n
Cultural Biases in Testing<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
The Flynn Effect<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
Are IQ Tests Valid?<\/strong><\/h3>\r\n
\r\n\t
\r\n\t
Understanding IQ<\/h2>\n
iq<\/h3>\n
Why Measure Intelligence?<\/strong><\/h1>\n
\n
Why Measure Intelligence?<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
Real World Example<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Measuring Intelligence<\/h2>\n
Early History<\/h3>\n
standardization and norms<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
How do you really measure intelligence?<\/h2>\n
Cultural Biases in Testing<\/strong><\/h3>\n
The Flynn Effect<\/strong><\/h3>\n
Are IQ Tests Valid?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
\n