Nathan Tsai's List: Stats 10/14 - Nathan Tsai

• • Over 140 - Genius or near genius 

  •  

    120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence 

  •  

    110 - 119 - Superior intelligence 

  •  

    90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence 

  •  

    80 - 89 - Dullness 

  •  

    70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency 

  •  

    Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness 

• 
•  In 1905, a French psychologist by the  name of Alfred Binet, working with a physician-associate, Theodore  Simon, developed the Binet Simon Test designed to measure the  intelligence of retarded children, based upon their observations  that.
    (1) Just as children grow taller as they grow older, they grow  more mentally capable as they grow older; and
    (2)  Some children can perform at age and equivalent-grade  levels above their chronological ages, while other children perform  at age and equivalent-grade levels below their chronological  ages. For example, a few 6-year-olds could perform as well on  the Binet Simon mental tests as the average 8-year-old, while  a few 6-year-olds could only perform as well as the average 4-year-old.

•  

  In 1911, the concept of "mental  age" (as distinguished from "chronological age")

    

  was introduced. The 6-year-old who performed as well as the average 8-year-old was assigned a mental age of 8, while the 6-year-old who performed only as well as a 4-year-old was assigned a mental age of 4.
• IQ Range   

  Frequency   

  Cumulative
    Frequency   

  Typical Educability   

  Employment
    Options     

  Below 30   

  >1%    >1% below 30     Illiterate     Unemployable. Institutionalized.      

  30 to 50   

  >1%?    >1% below 50     1st-Grade to 3rd-Grade     Simple, non-critical household chores.      

  50 to 60   

  ~1%?    1.5% below 60     3rd-Grade to 6th-grade     Very simple tasks, close supervision.      

  60 to 74   

  3.5%?    5% below 74     6th-Grade to 8th-Grade     "Slow, simple, supervised."      

  74 to 89   

  20%    25% below 89     8th-Grade to 12th-Grade     Assembler, food service, nurse's aide      

  89 to 100   

  25%    50% below 100     8th-Grade to 1-2 years of College.     Clerk, teller, Walmart       100 to 111    

  50%    1 in 2 above 100     12th-Grade to College Degree     Police officer, machinist, sales       111 to 120    

  15%    1 in 4 above 111     College to Master's Level     Manager, teacher, accountant       120 to 125    

  5%    11 in 10above 120     College to Non-Technical Ph. D.'s.     Manager, professor, accountant       125 to 132    

  3%    1 in 20 above 125     Any Ph. D. at 3rd-Tier Schools     Attorney, editor, executive.       132 to 137    

  1%    1 in 50 above 132     No limitations.     Eminent professor, editor       137 to 150    

  0.9%    1 in 100 above 137     No limitations.     Leading math, physics professor       150 to 160    

  0.1%    1 in 1,100 above 150     No limitations     Lincoln, Copernicus, Jefferson       160 to 174    

  0.01%    1 in 11,000 above 160     No limitations     Descartes, Einstein, Spinoza       174 to 200    

  0.0099%    1 in 1,000,000
    above 174     No limitations     Shakespeare, Goethe, Newton
• 

3 more annotations...

• An intelligence quotient, or IQ, is a score derived from one of several different standardized tests designed to assess intelligence. The term "IQ", from the German Intelligenz-Quotient, was coined by the German psychologist William Stern in 1912^[1] as a proposed method of scoring early modern children's intelligence tests such as those developed by Alfred Binet and Théodore Simon in the early 20th Century.^[2] Although the term "IQ" is still in common use, the scoring of modern IQ tests such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale is now based on a projection of the subject's measured rank on the Gaussian bell curve with a center value (average IQ) of 100, and a standard deviation of 15, although different tests may have different standard deviations.
• Q scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality,^[3] parental social status,^[4] and to a substantial degree, parental IQ.
• Q scores are used in many contexts: as predictors of educational achievement or special needs, by social scientists who study the distribution of IQ scores in populations and the relationships between IQ score and other variables, and as predictors of job performance and income.

1 more annotation...

• person is to be religious.

    To place these studies in  perspective, it is helpful to know the general religious attitudes of Americans  today. According to a February 1995 Gallup poll, 96 percent of all Americans  believe in God, and 88 percent affirm the importance of religion. However, the  degree of religiosity within this group varies considerably. Only 35 percent can  be classified as "religious," using a definition that requires them to consider  religion important and attend religious services at least once a week. And a  March 1994 Gallup poll found that only 20 percent of all Americans belong to  that politically active group known as "Christian conservatives."
• 
   STUDIES OF  STUDENTS
• 
   STUDIES OF  VERY-HIGH IQ GROUPS
  
                      

  % among IQ>140	10%	18%	62%	57%	28%	23%
  belief	♂	♀	♂	♀	♂	♀
  	strong		little		none

  1. Terman, 1959
  Studied group with IQ's over  140. Of men, 10 percent held strong religious belief, of women 18 percent.  Sixty-two percent of men and 57 percent of women claimed "little religious  inclination" while 28 percent of the men and 23 percent of the women claimed it  was "not at all important."
  
  2. Warren and Heist, 1960
  Found no  differences among National Merit Scholars. Results may have been effected by the  fact that NM scholars are not selected on the basis of intelligence or grades  alone, but also on "leadership" and such like.
  
  3. Southern and Plant,  1968
  Studied 42 male and 30 female members of Mensa. Mensa members were  much less religious in belief than the typical American college alumnus or  adult.
• 
   STUDIES Of SCIENTISTS
  
  1. William S. Ament,  1927
  C. C. Little, president of the University of Michigan, checked  persons listed in Who's Who in America: "Unitarians, Episcopalians,  Congregationalists, Universalists, and Presbyterians [who are less religious]  are… far more numerous in Who's Who than would be expected on the basis  of the population which they form. Baptists, Methodists, and Catholics are  distinctly less numerous."
  
  Ament confirmed Little's conclusion. He noted  that Unitarians, the least religious, were more than 40 times as numerous in  Who's Who as in the U.S. population.
  
  2. Lehman and Witty,  1931
  Identified 1189 scientists found in both Who's Who (1927) and  American Men of Science (1927). Only 25 percent of those listed in the  latter and 50 percent of those in the former reported their religious  denomination, despite the specific request to do so, under the heading of  "religious denomination (if any)." Well over 90 percent of the general  population claims religious affiliation. The figure of 25 percent suggests far  less religiosity among scientists.
  
  Unitarians were 81.4 times as numerous  among eminent scientists as non-Unitarians.
  
  3. Kelley and Fisk,  1951
  Found a negative (-.39) correlation between the strength of  religious values and research competence. [How these were measured is  unknown.]
  
  4. Ann Roe, 1953
  Interviewed 64 "eminent scientists,  nearly all members of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences or the  American Philosophical Society. She reported that, while nearly all of them had  religious parents and had attended Sunday school, 'now only three of these men  are seriously active in church. A few others attend upon occasion, or even give  some financial support to a church which they do not attend… All the others have  long since dismissed religion as any guide to them, and the church plays no part  in their lives… A few are militantly atheistic, but most are just not  interested.'"
  
  5. Francis Bello, 1954
  Interviewed or  questionnaired 107 nonindustrial scientists under the age of 40 judged by senior  colleagues to be outstanding. Of the 87 responses, 45 percent claimed to be  "agnostic or atheistic" and an additional 22 percent claimed no religious  affiliation. For 20 most eminent, "the proportion who are now a-religious is  considerably higher than in the entire survey group."
  
  6. Jack  Chambers, 1964
  Questionnaired 740 US psychologists and chemists. He  reported, "The highly creative men… significantly more often show either no  preference for a particular religion or little or no interest in religion."  Found that the most eminent psychologists showed 40 percent no preference, 16  percent for the most eminent chemists.
  
  7. Vaughan, Smith, and Sjoberg,  1965
  Polled 850 US physicists, zoologists, chemical engineers, and  geologists listed in American Men of Science (1955) on church membership,  and attendance patterns, and belief in afterlife. Of the 642 replies, 38.5  percent did not believe in an afterlife, whereas 31.8 percent did. Belief in  immortality was less common among major university staff than among those  employed by business, government, or minor universities. The Gallup poll taken  about this time showed that two-thirds of the U.S. population believed in an  afterlife, so scientists were far less religious than the typical  adult.
  
• Conclusion
  
  The consensus here is clear: more  intelligent people tend not to believe in religion. And this observation is  given added force when you consider that the above studies span a broad range of  time, subjects and methodologies, and yet arrive at the same conclusion.  
  
  This is the result even when the researchers are Christian conservatives  themselves. One such researcher is George Gallup. Here are the results of a Fall  1995 Gallup poll:

  Percentage of respondents who agreed with the following statements: 

3 more annotations...

• To address this question, Duckworth and Seligman conducted a two-year study of eighth graders, combining several measures of self-discipline for a more reliable measure, and also assessing IQ, achievement test scores, grades, and several other measures of academic performance. Using this better measure of self-discipline, they found

   

   

  that self-discipline was a significantly better predictor of academic performance 7 months later than IQ.
• Most impressive was the whopping .67 correlation between self-discipline and final GPA, compared to a .32 correlation for IQ. This graph dramatically shows the difference between the two measures:
• 

1 more annotation...

•        

  Posted on May. 11^th, 2008  

   

   

  sphoenixee

   

   4.2 average rating for 1 answer in Work & Career

     

  109 IKU in this category

    

   

   

   

    <script type="text/javascript"><!--  google_ad_client = "pub-5362207239493207";  google_ad_slot = "7648075161";  google_ad_width = 125;  google_ad_height = 125;  //-->  </script> <script src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js" type="text/javascript"> </script> 

     

  I think parental income definitely has a lot to do with it. Social expectation is immensely, immensely powerful. I am particularly reminded of the Pygmalion/Rosenthal effect (albeit, that isn't generally related to future income, but still in the same vein of thought), where certain students do better in the classroom because of teacher's differing expectations.
  
  I don't think GPA is a good indicator because 1) so much of that depends on which school one is at (3.5 at Exeter is rather different from 3.5 at an Indianapolis Public School), 2) scholastic success and career success (measured in terms of income in this case) are not really related, and 3) lots of people cheat (though one could argue cheating can increase income too).
  
  Wikipedia has a nice section with sources on how IQ affects job performance:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iq#Job_performance
  
  According to Schmidt and Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."[68] The validity depends on the type of job and varies across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.[69] However IQ mostly correlates with cognitive ability only if IQ scores are below average and this rule has many (about 30 %) exceptions for people with average and higher IQ scores.[70] Also, IQ is related to the "academic tasks" (auditory and linguistic measures, memory tasks, academic achievement levels) and much less related to tasks where even precise hand work ("motor functions") are required.[71]
  
  A meta-analysis[69] which pooled validity results across many studies encompassing thousands of workers (32,124 for cognitive ability), reports that the validity of cognitive ability for entry-level jobs is 0.54, larger than any other measure including job try-out (0.44), experience (0.18), interview (0.14), age (&#8722;0.01), education (0.10), and biographical inventory (0.37). This implies that, across a wide range of occupations, intelligence test performance accounts for some 29% of the variance in job performance.

• According to Schmidt and Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."^[68] The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.^[69] While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function ^[70] IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations^[68]. That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management) IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance, whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) are more likely to influence performance.

• Philosophers (22) average IQ 160; Scientists (39) 159; Fiction writers (53)  152; Statesmen (43) 150; Musicians (11) 149; Artists (13) 153; Soldiers  (27) 136.

• Intelligence Interval

  Cognitive Designation

  Common Possessors^*

  85 - 114AveragePupils at junior high school115 - 124Above averagePupils at senior high school125 - 134GiftedUniversity graduates135 - 144Highly giftedIntellectuals145 - 154GeniusProfessors155 - 164GeniusNobel Prize Winners165 - 179High genius 180 - 200Highest genius >200"Unmeasurable" genius 

• Name

  Nationality

  Active as & Comments

  Ratio IQs

  Deviation IQs^*

  Johann Wolfgang von GoetheGermanyPoet/Writer. Universal genius.^**210179Emanuel SwedenborgSwedenReligious writer. Universal genius.205176Gottfried Wilhelm von LeibnizGermanyPhilosopher/Mathematician, etc. The greatest universal genius together with Leonardo da Vinci.^**205176John Stuart MillEnglandPhilosopher/Economist/Political theorist200174Blaise PascalFranceMathematician/Physicist/Religious thinker195171Ludwig WittgensteinAustriaPhilosopher-190Bobby FischerU.S.A.Chess player187167Galileo GalileiItalyPhysicist/Astronomer/Philosopher185165René DescartesFrancePhilosopher/Mathematician180162Madame De StaelFranceWoman of letters/Novelist/Political Philosopher180162Immanuel KantGermanyPhilosopher175159Linus Carl PaulingU.S.A.Chemist - Double Nobel Prize Winner170156Sofia KovalevskayaRussia/SwedenMathematician/Writer170156Thomas ChattertonEnglandPoet/Writer170156Charles DarwinEnglandNaturalist165153Wolfgang Amadeus MozartAustriaComposer165153George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans)EnglandWriter - Close friend to J.S. Mill.160150Nicolaus CopernicusPolandCleric/Astronomer160150Olof PalmeSwedenPrime Minister (Murdered)-156Rembrandt van RijnHollandPainter/Etcher155146Anna LindhSwedenForeign Minister (Murdered)152145George Sand (Aurore Dupin)FranceWriter150143

1 more annotation...