I hear people say that high IQ doesn’t mean you are automatically good at something, but what does it mean then, in terms of physical properties of the brain? And how do they translate to one’s abilities?
In: 682
Speaking as someone who used to test at the high end of school IQ tests, it means you are good at demonstrating the things IQ tests measure *under exam conditions*. Usually that’s shape and spatial reasoning, pattern recognition, memory, sometimes things like reading comprehension, vocabulary and logic – and it significantly overvalues quick thinking over accurate thinking, because tests are usually timed. The tests taken in childhood produce a score for where you are expected to be for your age and ideally also your background (if you never saw a book you won’t be able to read, for an extreme example), and compare your test scores to that to give an index that might measure how smart you are. I read better aged 7 than many adults do, for example, and can still get through an entire novel on a two hour plane flight aged 40.
‘High IQ’ like I have (had?) is pretty well associated with being good at the kinds of tests you do in maths and science at school. I got great grades and hardly worked for them. I am still very convinced that I do not think any better than people closer to the mean on IQ tests, but I did think noticeably much *faster* than my peers at Cambridge (many of whom were, not being funny, very very much better than me at all the things I’m supposed to be good at) and I come across in conversation as a lot smarter than I actually am.
It’s also a danger to a kid’s education to let them skate based on their test taking skills. My teachers didn’t get on my case about homework because I literally couldn’t have better test grades. I nearly crashed and burned at Cambridge University – I had to re-learn how to study *aged 19*, on my own, when I could no longer get by on photographic memory, reading comprehension and basic logic.
Latest Answers