5 ms·
the average IQ in the US is just below 100 This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of IQ as a measurement. IQ is defined as a normal distribution with a
by uiri 10y ago
the average IQ in the US is just below 100
This represents a fundamental misunderstanding of IQ as a measurement. IQ is defined as a normal distribution with a median of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. The average IQ in the US is 100 for any IQ test calibrated to measure the US population. No absolute statements regarding intelligence can be made on the basis of IQs; only relative statements about how an individual fits into the normal distribution measured by the test.
This ignores the flaws in Flynn and Vanhanen's study when it came to calculating IQ scores for different countries. They used incomplete data sets collected at different times using different tests. For 104 out of 185 countries, they had no data available at all. Instead, they averaged neighboring or comparable countries - for instance El Salvador is an average of Guatemala and Colombia while Kyrgyzstan is an average of Iran and Turkey.
I think it is fair to say that the average IQ for $COUNTRY is 100. This is a meaningless statement when it comes to discussing macroeconomics or comparing countries on the basis of IQ.
- DashRattlesnake 10y agoThat's true, but it also seems kinda irrelevant to the OP (the link happens to be the 1st result for a google search of "us average iq"[1], so I think it was just a quickie cite to back up a statistic). Average IQ people (e.g. the welders and bank tellers) don't seem like they're in demand for high-demand knowledge-work jobs, so retraining is probably not the answer to any economic woes they're experiencing. [1] https://www.google.com/#q=%22us+average+iq%22 https://www.google.com/#q=%22us+average+iq%22
- Ensorceled 10y agoExactly. I have read over and over that US IQ rates tend lower than international. The point is it's even worse to try to train up US citizens to jobs requiring higher cognitive capacity.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- hamandcheese 10y agoIt's meaningful in this context, since, chances are, those commenting here have a much higher IQ than 100.
- Hydraulix989 10y agoWhich was a point implied by the OP that still stands.
- uiri 10y agoBy definition, 50% of the population has an IQ between 90 and 110. While it is plausible that there is a disproportionately low number of HN commenters in the bottom quartile for IQ, I believe that the majority, if not the plurality, of HN commenters will fall in the range of (90, 110). 35% of the US population over 25 has a Bachelor's degree. Assuming that, say, the top 40% in IQ of the total population is capable of completing such a degree and that HN commenters are a randomly distributed subset of that population, that would leave a lower bound for IQ of 104 and a median IQ of 113. The reality is that IQ is unlikely to be the limiting factor when it comes to whether or not it is possible to retrain large portions of the working population.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- Ensorceled 10y agoThis completely misses my point as I'm only using IQ as a stand in for cognitive abilities, cognitive abilities that are required to retrain and function in non-repetitive occupations.
- TheCoelacanth 10y agoBy that argument my IQ is 100 because I have the median score of the population consisting of myself. Of course, when using an IQ test calibrated for a larger population, my IQ is something different. Similarly, it makes perfect sense for the average IQ of a country to be different from 100 when using a test calibrated for a population that is a superset of the country's population.