basically high IQ but low IQ performance

Post Reply New Topic

I am truly horrible at "find the next number in the series" questions. That is literally the worst kind of question for me. I can only do it if the series is very rudimentary. Something like 2,4,6,8... or 1,2,4,8,16.... And with that last one, if the "16" isn't included in the series, I won't be able to figure it out. I do alright with "rotate the figure" questions or any of the verbal questions. But those number series questions...I.Just.Can't. Luckily that sort of question only comes up as a puzzle or on an IQ test. Not being able to do that doesn't harm my ability to figure out which financial investment plan is the best for me or which can of soup is actually the better value.

No, I never did figure out what real-life value those sequence puzzles were supposed to have. It could be it's that which makes me balk at them - possibly unusual for a suspected Aspie, I developed an aversion to pointlessness in my special interests. My hobbies still tend to end up begging the question "isn't it all rather a ridiculously long way to achieve something not terribly important?" but I do sometimes spot it and change tack.

I actually love the number sequencing questions. I missed one on one of those online tests and I couldn't sleep thinking about it... finally figured out it was a sequence of cubed numbers. duh! I felt so silly, but then I could go to sleep.

How about pattern recognition? That's actually a pretty important skill.

It is an important skill, but I think I'm ok with pattern recognition yet horrid at these puzzles. These puzzles ask you to see a pattern in the sequence of numbers, but what they are really asking you to do is reverse engineer an algorithm that would predict the next number. Some people are really good at reverse engineering- and really good at figuring out algorithms on their own. I'm not. But that doesn't seem to have hampered my ability to recognize either visual patterns or patterns in data. So I think that in one sense this is pattern recognition, but in another sense it's tapping the completely different skill of figuring out what algorithm created a sequence.

I believe IQ tests can underestimate true intelligence. People like me with easily disrupted working memory get screwed on timed tests in general. If I'm nervous I'll often have to read a question up to five times before I comprehend what it's asking.

I run across people all the time who are great at timed tests and can do all kinds of mental operations extremely quickly in their head. Yet these same people often lack my conceptual intuition for abstract academic subjects. Then there are others who can express themselves with exquisite language yet all their thoughts seem redundant/unoriginal/trivial to me. My average verbal IQ is my weakest area.

In terms of having the ability to develop strong intuitions I think I'm probably above 99.9% of the population, yet most IQ tests don't test well for that type of ability. I've never done Wexler IQ but I suspect my profile is very unusual, unusual for NTs and people on the spectrum alike.

I agree it's a form of pattern recognition, which does seem an important aptitude, but it seems rather a specialised form, and yet it features a lot on IQ tests, which are supposed to be tests of general intelligence. How many people are ever going to need to reverse-engineer a mathematical algorithm?

I guess that's the problem with IQ tests - if they're going to mean anything, they need to faitfully represent the most commonly-used and needed mental abilities in the culture as a whole.....somehow they try to transcend specific cultures so they'll be applicable anywhere across time and space, but people, including test designers, are notoriously bad at transcending their own narrow cultural heritage, which they're so close to that they barely realse it's there. And since human ability is largely social, testing an individual in isolation from that culture seems kind of futile.

I think we are getting into uncharted territory. Look at a savaunt .

They can do amazing things but be unable to tie their own shoes.

Where is the trade off?

What if you could write amazing songs but you were too afraid to go out or you had to wash your hands 20 times an hour?

Would that make you a genius or a freak?

Both.

I completely 100% agree with this statement.

I assess children in the school setting (no flames as I am an advocate and have a child on the spectrum).
A child or adult who is classified as being in the "MR" range, , we usually see scores that are relatively the same in all areas. There could be some areas of strengths and weaknesses but they are not that pronounced. The adaptive skills of an "NT' person and a person in the "MR' range usually consistently show adaptive skills on the easier items as showing up "always" but as they get more advanced they show less of those skills "sometimes then turning to never"- it is consistent (the person with the MR label topping out earlier).

Most individuals on the spectrum usually have significant splintered skills. Also, AS individuals may not have difficulties on some higher level adaptive skills but may not demonstrate skills on a lower one - all being in the same area such as Daily Living skills or Functional Communication. For example, on the daily living skills domain for AS individuals, I may have "often" on the first few adaptive questions and then "never" on the next one, "Always" on the next one, and then "never" again. --- very splintered. Although many people on the spectrum have adaptive scores in the limited to very limited, it is usually doesn't provide a complete picture. I absolutely dislike giving an adaptive score if I have splintered skills within one area which is very common. So, if you are on the spectrum and got a borderline or very low score (i.e. 75) find out if you show extremely splintered skills within a particular adaptive area - my guess is that you do.

That is also true of IQ tests. I have tested many individuals on the spectrum who are obviously high intelligence but they don't show it on the IQ tests just because of the difference in the way of thinking - which doesn't necessarily indicate a persons "true" intelligence. There are many people on here who are very smart but have scored lower on their IQ tests. When that happens to me on a child I assess, I write a HUGE disclaimer stating that the IQ score most likely is not a valid measure of the person's true intelligence. There are also various IQ tests out there such as the Standford Binet, WAIS or WISC-IV (depending on age) KABC, RIAS, UNIT (nonverbal) etc. I am not saying that the score is always invalid - there are some people with AS in which the score is extremely valid.

Regardless, like adaptive measures, the assessment does provide some information to help us. Even if a child refuses to comply - we have some information. Giving a score is sometimes pointless and leads people to feel like they are not smart when they just see the world in a different way. It drives me crazy. I do need to mention that memory tasks and processing speed tasks are usually pretty accurate. I have noticed that the nonverbal composite seems to be more valid than the verbal IQ with AS individuals. Again, I really like a back up tests to confirm that score if the score is fairly low with AS individuals (true of some ADHD as well).

It is interesting to see the difference between tests on individuals on the spectrum. I have noticed huge differences between some of them with individuals on the spectrum (and a little with ADHD - not as much). If you took one test that suggested you were in the borderline range, don't think that is the "end all be all". There is a high chance you would score differently on another IQ assessment. Again, I have found this more with individuals on the spectrum than "NT".

The great thing about the vineland and other tests like that is that they show us areas of weakness and what we need to improve upon. Lord knows I have many areas of needed improvement

Sorry - dang I write a lot.

I read the whole thing.

I'm all over the place on an IQ test. When I was tested at age 13, I varied from 136-94 depending on the section. I really think it's true that IQ tests are meaningless for people on the spectrum. I really wanted nothing more than to be with other intelligent people when I was young. I guess I didn't test high enough to switch to the gifted school when tested in second grade.

I took the military pre-test AFQT last year. Scored in the 97th percentile finishing in less than ten minutes. They asked if I was a genius before my score popped up. The recruiter said he'd never seen someone finish as fast or score as high!

It's not cool being like this, though. I'm emotionally ret*d. Haven't had a job last longer than 6 weeks. I'm basically scared of taking a personality test for an interview ever again. I've taken several years ago, and I guess I would show up red flagged! I don't understand what I did wrong. The tests expect if you answer one question one way, you'll answer a similar question the exact same. What they don't take into consideration, is that new stimulus, experiences between the two questions are possibly changing ones mood, perception, and ways to solve a problem. Each problem becomes increasingly novel, depending on the level of detail & context one can consider.

Sorry, off topic rant..

School was easy, until I found out it was mostly meant to socially program people. After that I refused all programming, choosing to learn on my own. One of the best decisions I ever made, next to throwing away the tube.

^
I've always been perplexed at my own general abilities and "intelligence" - I seem to be both incredibly bright and thick as a plank, and I often envy people who are comfortably and consistently somewhere in the middle of the range, though ultimately I don't know that I'd swap places with them if I had the chance. I tend to raise and dash the hopes of supervisors and managers - I'm sure the poor devils don't know what to do with me. The problem is, most people seem to have a very simplistic, binary view of intelligence, they seem to think they can judge others as dumb or smart on the basis of very brief observation. The truth is much more complicated, especially in my case.

When I had my IQ tested it turned out about 1/3 of me was ret*d, 1/3 of me was average and 1/3 of me is extremely intelligent! Weird huh? Because of that, my average IQ was measured at... well... average... See I have quite severe learning disability (dyspraxia/dyscalculia) so I totally sucked on any of the tests to do with math, remembering numbers and anything measuring my coordination!

Heh Yeah, that's pretty normal in autistic people. I had scores all over the place on my IQ test, too, though nothing actually indicating a learning disability... technically. I mean, if your vocabulary is at the 99.9th percentile, and your ability to understand what you hear is at the 43rd percentile, you sure don't have an average brain. (In my case, that led to a conclusion that I have "some auditory processing issues". Well, duh. If I didn't know so much about language, I'd be unable to make any sort of rational guess at the halves of every sentence that sound like jibberish!)