IQ score distribution

Post Reply New Topic

Well, the scores indicate that it's advanced math I'll likely have trouble with, which bodes poorly for my math major.

My block design score was right about at the population mean, and my processing speed (lowest score) was 105, which in relation to the general populationl is not really horrible, but taken in the context of the discrepancy between that and other subscores, and the fact that I'm hoping to study at a high level where "average" has no chance in hell, I could see it becoming a problem.

Still, I plan on going on with my studies in the fields that interest me regardless of what the IQ test says. When/if I run into trouble, I'll just work harder.

My official WAIS-III scores were much like yours. My highest scores (block design and picture arrangement) were 99% while my lowest (math reasoning and letter-number sequencing) were 50%. That's slightly more than three standard deviations. I had more than a full standard deviation between performance IQ (my highest) and verbal IQ (the lower of the two). Working memory and processing speed were average.

This site, University of Iowa's Belin-Blank Center, has a report on a study of gifted students with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Look for the PDF called The Paradox of Giftedness and Autism, Packet of Information for Professionals (PIP) – Revised. You might find it helpful in interpreting your scores.

In my case it seems that a working memory and processing speed deficiency caused me to have problems learning to speak, read, and write and to take timed tests. I've worked hard to do those things well and superficially you'd never know that I had problems with them. But the WAIS test scores reveal a pattern of deficit and high ability - coexisting in my brain. I test like I have HFA, but there is probably no way I'd receive a diagnosis for that because I'm too effective with interpersonal communication.

All the best to you Orwell,

Z

Here's an interesting thing I learned about IQ tests in general from 2 different psychology professors and one PhD student whose research specialty was IQ tests. His attitude towards them in general was quite enthusiastic, but he mentioned the same weakness as the professors:

IQ tests are designed to determine whether a person is intelligent enough to be expected to have the roughly the same intellectual abilities as the majority of the population. And if their intellectual abilities are lower, by how much, and in what areas?

This is directly related to their most common practical applications - deciding which classes to place children in, deciding if they require extra assistance due to intellectual limitations, determining if adults qualify for various types of assistance due to intellectual disabilities, etc.

IQ tests are not really designed to determine how far above the normal range a person's intellectual abilities are. In fact, the farther your scores go above what is considered average, the less reliable the tests become. The higher your IQ, the wider your range of scores will be each time you take the test. This applies to the subtests as well as the overall score.

Another interesting factor is that people who are especially intellectually gifted can have scores that far under-estimate their abilities. This is because some of these people tend to "over-think" the questions. The questions and answers are designed for fast-paced, "common sense" style reasoning. People who spend a lot of time thinking often think differently - going over various ways in which a question could be interpreted and arriving at a different conclusion than one derived from a more superficial analysis of the question.

Despite these weaknesses, one interesting thing remains true: When you study random samples of people and group them by IQ score, the farther the group's scores are from "average", the more neurological abnormalities (of all kinds) will be found within that group. So, in other words, both high and low IQ scores and equally correlated with neurological abnormalities that are not generally thought to be related to intelligence.

I wonder if there are any controlled studies of this phenomenon? I agree, but think that most people try to hide their neurological differences, and it might be difficult to find high IQ participants.

Z

I have not seen the controlled studies themselves. My neuroscience professor summarized these research findings in class one day.

So yes, according to one bio-psych researcher, there have been enough controlled studies (published in scientific academic journals after going through the research grant process, peer review, etc) to document the phenomenon. But no, I have not taken the time to look up the studies themselves because I'm busy with grad school in another subject.

According to the professor, these controlled studies looked statistically at rates of diagnosis of neurological disorders in people with different IQ scores, and the findings were that IQ scores farther from normal were correlated with a higher rate of diagnosis of neurological disorders that were not (at the time, at least) thought to be related to intelligence. The professor / researcher found it interesting that the rate of diagnosis of neurological abnormalities increased about equally in either direction away from the average range of IQ scores.

In his own research, he studied the effects of drugs on circadian rhythms in rodents. (Just in case you were curious.)

Thanks for the info, release_the_bats. I'll go and check out the neuroscience journals and the local college library . . . .

Z

I read that PDF document and the section that goes into more detail on the results of the IQ test was almost identical to my test scores. Generally the percentiles were in very close proximity to the percentile rankings they indicated in the paper. The only exception being in the areas of word reading, reading comprehension and reading speed. My IQ profile was more like the scores typical of ASD rather than the outstanding scores this study reports. It was a little bit unsettling to realize just how much I fit the description of someone with an ASD. I do not think it is really possible to "fake" and IQ test.

Because of slower processing speed, it is possible to to worse on IQ tests than you normally would, particularly if you feel stressed. Timed tests are bad (at least for me) because I become anxious that I won't be able to finish in the allotted time and the anxiety makes my verbal comprehension tank. Having difficulty shifting mental focus can also affect IQ scores. If you have difficultly (for instance) shifting from thinking about visual problems to thinking about verbal problems, not being able to transfer your focus can lower your scores.

Those with giftedness and learning / developmental disabilities are often referred to as "twice exceptional." A good overview of recognizing learning disabilities is here.

Z

Yes... this is one of the more interesting aspects of "our" IQ profiles. My IQ test was administered as part of a psychoeducational assessment. I was refered for the assessment by a mental health professional who thought that they may be able to determine if I have a learning disability (I will be attending graduate school in the fall). To make a long story short, the woman who conducted the assessment told me that my profile was "different" from most she had encountered. She said that I had several irregularities in my profile, but none of them were indicative of any particular learning disability. She said that the areas of weakness were in sufficient contrast to the areas of strenght and that this was her basis for assigning me the label of "learning disability not otherwise specified". I had never heard this term before. I was also given a few assessments for HFA/AS (four different ones, actually) and I came out well into the range for people with HFA/AS. Interpretation of the results of those tests was pretty obvious, but the results of the Wechsler Adult IQ assessment and the Woodcock-Johnson III test of cognative abilites were much less "obvious". They apparently meant something to her, but not to me! I was just happy that I didn't have the IQ of Forrest Gump! Long story longer.... between the assessment report that I was given and this PDF file that I was linked to by this forum post I was able to look back on my education (k - 12 and beyond) and determine that my performance in school would have been VERY different if someone had known these things about me when I was small. It sort of makes me angry because I spent all of my K-12 years in the "slow" class, but no one ever bothered to figure out "why" I couldn't attend to my assignments. I was labeled as being "lazy and underachieving". In many ways this label was much more hurtful than a label of "autistic" would have been. All I can do now is make sure that I am an advocate for my little girl. She seems to be on the spectrum and is also in the process of being assessed for HFA/AS.

Have any of you taken the Woodcock-Johnson test? If so, does anyone know anything about the "cognitive fluency" score. I have read about this and it almost seems that if one is "on the spectrum" that this score may actually be more accurate than the full scale or general ability IQ scores. Any comments on this?

The BIG problems is, at least in the US, you can only legally be given a diagnosis of learning disabled if your scores are quite low - if they are average, then "you don't have a problem." However, that doesn't take into account that some with learning disabilities are not being helped because their intellectual capacity brings their disability into the average range, but yet they have difficulty functioning because they really do have some severe deficits.

In school I was told that I was lazy, that I could do better if I really wanted to, and some teachers took my difficulties as purposefully trying to get out of doing work. My second grade teacher really didn't like me and I knew it. My parents were both teachers as well, but they thought I was average because I struggled in language and in math. When things started going bad for me in the public school I started attending private (sometimes bizarre) schools. For two years I was in a program where I essentially taught myself - so I was way ahead in social studies and way behind in math. But that was a good thing because I could focus on what I did well which gave me confidence that I could do well. It also allowed me to learn at a faster rate in some areas and not be held back with everyone else like usually happens in public schools.

I haven't taken the Woodcock-Johnson test, but congrats whipstitches on going to grad school and on finding ways to better help your daughter.

Z

I was very similar when I took that test. My digit span was horrendous, and a couple of the 'common sense' facts I got wrong... like where does the sun set. I think I got all of the Block Design. Many of the more visual mental processing tests I got nearly all of them right. A couple I got frustrated because the explainations weren't exactly clear. Once I got what was being presented, it was very smooth and easy.

I don't know the extent the gap was, but I think it was greater than 3 standard deviations. I got below average or the poor things, and on the ones I was good at the test wasn't adequete to test my abilities. Even with the bad parts I averaged a 130ish IQ... if he threw out the bad parts it would be considerably higher.

I probably have a learning disability, but I'm also in the gifted range. I think a lot of my AS problems can be attributed to this, living this double life of extreme ability and disability. The biggest problem is that these mask each other... and my approaches to life are completely different to curcumvent my problems with my abilities that others don't have.

Dude-man! You seem A LOT like me!! !

Out of the four index scores on the WAIS-IV I got a high average score on the verbal comp. section, a superior score on the perceptual reasoning section, an average score on the working memory portion and a superior score on the processing speed (I incorrectly stated that I had taken the WAIS-III previously - whoops ). That is all fine and well, but the parts of the educational assessment that were mind boggling for me were the 50th percentile score that I received on the similarities section and the 25th percentile score that I got on the arithmetic section. I didn't do so great on the digit span thing either. I was in the 63rd percentile on that one. I, like many of you, feel that I would have done well on that test if the material had been presented visually. I "see" stuff in my head when I remember.




Z!! Thanks for the kudos on grad school and my little girl!! I was going to share some of the "oddities" from that Woodcock-Johnson test with you. There were basically two tests. One test for cognative abilities which resulted in five scores to measure cognative functions. The other test was for academic acheivment and it consisted of four sections (with lots of little sub-tests) that measure ones ability in reading, math, and both written and oral language. On the first test for cognative ability my short term memory, working memory, broad attention and executive processing scores were all "average" and ranged from 44th percentile to 69th percentile. The fifth score was for cognative fluency. I was in the 99th percentile for that one. I won't bore you with all of the different subtests that they used to arrive at those scores, but I will share the funny parts.... my "auditory attention score" was in the 10th percentile!! Pugly... I feel your pain when you said that you had a hard time with the verbal instructions on the IQ test!! On one test, by the time I realized that I had TOTALLY not understood the directions.... I was well on my way to failing the whole section!! ! I was also in the 12th percentile for math knowledge!! ! The majority of my scores on both of the Woodcock-Johnson tests were in the "average" range, so there isn't anything exciting about my brain other than it apparently looks like an EKG of someone trying to "flat line" on paper!!

The world of assessment is VERY strange.... How does anyone know if they area genius, a "dull normal" or just plain "average"???

sorry... I just discovered all of these "other" emoticons....

And this is how I got screwed over by my university's disability office.

Sucks!

Whipstitches, interesting what you say about the arithmatic parts, I'm good at math understanding but I make simple mistakes... so I didn't do exceptional on that part either. I did okay, but probably worse than someone who professes to be good at math 'should' get.

I also did one session of the test without any sleep, which might of hindered it... but I actually think it help in a strange way.

Orwell, you seem in a similar situation to me... in terms of cognative ability and math. I graduated with a math degree, but some of the later courses caused me difficulty... due to this 'disability' that I wasn't aware of. When I had courses that meshed with my brain, it was the easiest thing in the world... but geometry was a pain... along with number theory. I have difficulty remembering the theorems for proofs. I can follow a proof, and understand general concepts. But remembering all the thereoms to use in solving my own proofs is tricky, especially on a test. You have to keep a sort of mental rolodex of all these proofs, and It's difficult to juggle that knowledge in my head... especially that specific of knowledge.

But I did graduate eventually, and I'm looking into grad school.

It's funny... I was really sick the day I took my IQ test. Also, I used to have to use math all the time in my previous graduate program (I am going back for round 2 of grad school). Nothing remarkable or anything, just log functions and standard algebra II/trig stuff. I CANNOT DO CALCULUS... mostly because I am like Pugly describes. I can follow what is going on in class and it all makes perfect sense, but I can't seem to do it on my own. Obviously you guys are able to "do" while I can just reason through the process and then forget it right away. I am reliant on calculators and Excel to help me do math. I think that between the LD stuff, not having a need to use math much for about 5 years and being sick that I managed to get such a ridiculously low score on the math sections of the test. However, even when I was in "shape" with my math skills I still would have done poorly on those sections. I just would have been closer to the mean!! Instead I am hanging around more than 1.5 sigma away from the mean (in the wrong direction!!). Crazy!! !