Americans' IQ Declining for First Time in Almost a Century, Study Finds

What is happening in a picture format

 

That's a distinction without a difference. IQ tests measure IQ. Therefore, education has an effect on IQ.

 

delete

 

RIIIIIGHT

 

That's how crank thinks.

Yes and no. Humanity is also important, as well.

I'll take my political correct hat off though, and say it's a problem when stupid can have tons of children expect them all to be taking care of (and they are) and the intelligent are so focused on their careers and putting that intelligence to good use that they don't have time for children.

I'm not saying that's exactly what's happening, but it's not completely incorrect either.

 

Yes but regarding your opening paragraph, education is part of the environment. And environment is certainly a component in intellectual development. And more importantly, in capability. You don't need to be a genius to do very well in our society. Support, focus and good judgement are just as valuable assets.

 

I hate to contradict, but environment is probably a huge factor. Especially when it comes to trauma and impoverished upbringings. (My personal opinion as a psychologist is it's quite false, but I'll leave that aside...).

https://www.newsweek.com/identical-...nt-countries-huge-iq-difference-1704836?amp=1

Your example might hold true in certain methodologies, but at that moment that you're talking about teaching algebra the developmental trajectory is largely set, as a consequence of the environment that the infant experienced. It's what happens from birth until when the algebra teaching begin that is most important.

 

While there would be validity in what you say, the very validity that got the tests banned in most states, the bottom line is their is no such thing as an IQ test. Their are tests for disabilities. There are achievement tests. But there is no such thing as an IQ test. They do not exist for the very reasons that you point out and others.

 

What is the contributing factor to the above?? Has general education become less challenging?? Are expectations to low??
What are the dumming down factors??

How do societal norms factor in ??

This is an interesting phenomena. Does it apply to everyone??....and in all fields??

If so.......prognosis is concerning.

 

IQ tests measure IQ but, like any academic test, they can't do it perfectly. If Max and Tom are students about to take a maths exam that they already have a reasonable ability in. Max spends his time learning and reviewing the actual maths knowledge in the exam, and so does better in the exam - he knows more maths. Tom spends his time on general exam-skills, mastering exam techniques, taking mock exams etc., and so also does better in the exam - he doesn't know any more maths but is better at taking exams. If they were tested using a different method, say coursework or teacher-assessment, Max is likely to do better.

Intellectual development yes, but that isn't increasing raw IQ. IQ is like the volume of the fuel tank. You can put more fuel in, use more efficient fuel, patch leaks etc. to get better results, but none of that is actually increasing the size of the tank.

 

we see a lot more cult like behavior and narcissism nowadays, "Q" anyone

not sure if it's our high carb diets or what, something though is effect the brains of people

it could just be social media, many sites do not have multiple view points like this one

 

When you realise how the brain works, that is not completely correct. There may be limits to improvement at certain trajectories of the lifetime, but most of the limitations are not related to human potential but rather the environment that the individual is embedded in. Also IQ is broken up into many sub-components, related to specific cognitive skills. These skills can certainly be improved and you'll get a higher IQ score. Now there may be limits to improvement, again, depending on what age you catch the kid, locate the deficit and provide appropriate training. Genetics will play a factor, but I won't go there.

It is also difficult to distinguish "measured IQ" from IQ. We can (technically) only ascribe IQ with a score.

May I ask what your background is? My knowledge about IQ comes from having run longitudinal studies over late childhood & adolescence that measured changes in brain structure and among other things how these changes relate to intelligence. I also later worked as a school psychologist - again measuring IQ over and over again. I've seen it all. Lol

Also, we haven't even touched on trauma. And cultural differences. Look at Africa, for instance... The various tribes are perfectly adapted for the environment. Well what their environment was before the West touched it.

 

There's an aggressive financial incentive to pigeonhole people and feed them the same intellectual muck.

 

Spot on.

 

IQ tests are certainly taken very seriously down under. An absolute must to gain funding and assistance for schools with students who have various learning disabilities & language deficits.

Unfortunately the whole system is designed by government bureaucrats so we are always in conflict with them.

 

The internet and social media.

 

Specific testing for specific issues is useful. An IQ test is not.
Let's say your 3 year old trashes the guest bathroom!. You invite two inspectors.
The first one, we'll call him IQ, when asked do you need a paint job will say yes.
The second one, Detailer, says only the guest bathroom needs painting.
Both are right, you do need painting, but only one specifies what painting needs.done.
Lets go back to the example of dyslexia. An IQ test would say a dyslexic is low intelligence but a reading skills test for dyslexia would spot the problem. A while back. I pointed out that half the people.working at NASA are dyslexic yet that is one of the most intellectually demanding places on earth, or space, to work. A dyslexic who failed in high school was the third man to walk on the moon.

 

From a certain perspective you're correct.

As a psychologist I would pull out the subtests for IQ when talking to parents of a child. E.g. Visual Spatial, Fluid Reasoning, Working Memory, and Processing Speed There's almost always aspects that are normal or even above average (a far more pleasant conversation!). And of course I would discuss many other interesting strengths and details in the report. This is an ethical obligation.

However the government only really cares about the Full-scale IQ score. Must be 70 or below for intellectual disability. Must be 85 or higher (combined with a (low scoring) diagnosis from a speech pathologist) for a child to have severe language disorder diagnosis. They only care about the numbers, and I'm sure if too many applied for funding, those numbers would change. Sometimes we (pychs) will call a disorder if the number is one point out, based on other information.

It's an odd profession. We are gunning inside for the child to score low enough to get help, but must also obey the rules. It's the in between kids that I feel sorry for. They have learning issues, but not enough to get targeted support. They are often left out in the cold and I'll often never even know that they exist.

Yes, I take the point about dyslexia. Not my specialist area - but following the method above a normal IQ score might rule out IQ as the cause of the reading issue. (there are ways to test IQ without reading). So normal IQ plus reading difficulty = dyslexia.

Of course I've simplified it. Ideally a developmental psychologist is a good detective and will work from every angle, including emotional to try and locate the issue. But in an underfunded public system the kid might just get an IQ test.

 

I'm not really raising a biological question but a grammatical one. It's about what IQ actually means and the limits of IQ tests to accurately measure that without undue influence from other factors.

I totally accept that IQ scores can increase with formal education, and indeed increase within populations that have an increase in formal education. Where I question the approach of the OP is the assumption that lower IQ scores, and the types of education being attributed to that lowering (assuming that is true), is automatically a bad thing in general, with the wider question of whether a singular focus on IQ scores and formal academic education is the best way to measure general success (be that of individuals, a system or a region).

Yes, that is exactly my point.

Nothing directly related really, just general education (ironically) and life experience, though including some practical experience in both early-years education and statistical data analysis.

 

Biden has been largely operating outside the constitution for his entire presidency

You can't find a thing you aren't interested in looking for.

 

Ok, I understand where you're coming from now.

 

OK, you do the opposite. Who, in authority, showed any evidence whatsoever of actual fraud.

This counts as an IQ question.

 

When I went to my 25th Reunion at West Point, my old roommate introduced me to his son... a Plebe. I was so happy for him... and I admit... a bit jealous. My 50th comes up next year.

 

A few things to consider: are more people taking IQ tests these days and have people with higher IQs been more willing to engage in such tests in the past in the first place? Regardless, I'm not impressed with IQ testing to begin with.

 

The building was not open to the public at that time. They broke in and were breaching the final barricade. And the Taliban surrender was negotiated by Trump. I agree that Biden should have fought against it instead of going along with the Trump plan.