IQ

Post Reply New Topic

Are points added on IQ for inattention and Asperger related issues related to Nonverbal deficiencies? IOW, how can the IQ meaured accurately?

If an IQ is on the high end, I read somewhere that up to 20 or 30 points are added on. So if it's 130 the true IQ would be considered 160ish.

Does this make sense?

IQ tests are not a accurate measure of intelligence anyways, the guy who made the first IQ test acknowledged that himself.

Intelligence has many different aspects to consider, it cannot be measured by a number.

How could you ACCURATELY test IQ? You would have to cover EVERYTHING, weight it properly, etc.... NOBODY is smart enough to do that, infallible enough to phrase it, weight it, etc...., properly, etc....

So IQ can just be an APPROXIMATION on a select group of areas. As for adding points, I never heard about that. I doubt it.

And WHY would they add points for problems?

its really more a general indicator than anything else. that said when i did my first proper iq test when it was little i was really rather chuffed to to get 150+ it made me smile

No. Nothing is added to your IQ score. However, if you have such problems, then you can request accommodations while being tested. For example, if you have problems interpreting speech, you might be given the questions in written form.

IQ is an accurate measurement of a number of cognitive abilities that constitute part of the 'intelligence' spectrum. Intelligence on its own has no defined meaning, it has to be broken down into a number of different intelligences, including verbal intelligence, mathematical intelligence, emotional intelligence, etc. While the more abstract aspects such as emotional intelligence cannot be so easily quantified, 'traditional' intelligence, which was defined primarily around academic achievement, can indeed be measured by a number, although even within those aspects there's room for variation, for example two people with identical IQs may differ, with one excelling more in the verbal component while another does better in the mathematical component. In the end, while it says little about someone's individual abilities and talents, IQ is indeed an accurate approximation of one's general level of 'academic' intelligence (as compared to the average level, which is what the level of 100 IQ is anchored to and defined as); it's what IQ testing and, in fact, the concept of IQ itself, was designed to measure and quantify. The fact that it doesn't grasp the whole picture doesn't invalidate the part of the picture that it does grasp.

Tests start to get inaccurate if you hit the ceiling or floor on several subtests, which can happen with a high IQ, a low IQ, or a big subscore gap (you know, like the kind they often find in autistic people). I recently found out my own IQ test had this effect, so there's no way of knowing whether the IQ it shows is actually correct. There are ways of testing IQs with subscores outside the average range; but I haven't been tested with any of them, and frankly, it doesn't matter if I ever am because it's my practical skills that have a great deal more impact on how independent I am and how much I can do.

In daily life, I function in some areas as well as someone with mild MR, in other areas as well as someone with moderate MR. In my areas of strength, I perform as though in the "profoundly gifted" range, but only if I can concentrate and organize myself. What does that make me? Well, it doesn't make me either mentally ret*d or gifted, overall. You can't define me by an overall score, because my overall score simply doesn't define me at all. If you assumed I functioned in all areas at or near my average, like an NT might, you wouldn't have a clear picture of me at all. You'd need to ask what I'm good at, what I'm bad at, and what I simply haven't had enough practice doing.

I'll echo what BobTheMartian and Callista said. But there are also different scales - most have a mean of 100, but the SD can vary, so direct comparisons of different scales have to be translated to a common scale (preferentially into SD form, from a mathematical perspective). Not really additive, though. Also, IQ as tested is understood as a performance measure, so there would be no additions/subtractions based on any conditions other than unusual testing method, and perhaps not even then.

I've been told and have read that the current Wechsler IQ test for adults doesn't accurately measure IQs over 130. So they sometimes use the old Stanford-Binet test to evaluate those who are higher than that - aka the "profoundly gifted."

Z