What is the Average IQ?

I'm so excited to answer this one because I'm asked it so much! On all modern IQ tests, the average is 100. This is calculated such that for every age, the average is always 100, even though the expectations of the test go up. The large majority of people will score between 85 and 115, so anything within these is pretty typical and all that you need.

By the way, this also means that the rumors swirling around the internet of who has an IQ "Over 200!" and whatnot, are probably false. Up past 137 or 138 we're all ready splitting the top 1% into tiny little bits, so it just becomes statistically improbable that this many celebrities and children have actually scored that high.   

What's it Like to Take an IQ Test?

I remember taking my IQ test pretty well. I can't remember the name of the School Psychologist, but I recall that it was a middle-aged man with a beard and a sweater (for some reason, every male school psychologist I've ever met eventually developed a fondness for sweaters and beards) and I remember some parts of the test. I also remember thinking that I did very poorly.

Don't misunderstand that last part. The gentleman who administered the test was a warm, friendly kind of guy and definitely encouraged me, but there is a funny thing about taking an IQ test; they don't stop until you get a lot of questions wrong. I put together some puzzles and then suddenly, there was one that was way too hard. The next one was even harder. I became aware that I was getting a lot of them wrong and, being a smart kid and not at all used to messing things up, I was starting to get upset. In giving a test, however, it's important to get a picture of how much a student can do. This means that testing does not stop until a student hits a "Ceiling," usually three to five questions in a row wrong. A lot of psychologists I know will warn kids about this by pointing out that tests are often given to kids over a wide age range, so they shouldn't worry if they get to the end and they get the last few wrong ("those are for high school or college kids").

Aside from hitting a Ceiling though, I can say that taking an IQ test is usually fun. The student will go with the School Psychologist administering the test somewhere quiet and after some time chatting and making sure today is a good day for some hard work, they will get started. Most tests for kids start out with their most colorful and interesting subtest (a lot of them use toys and pictures) and there will be a totally different thing to do every few minutes, so I've never had a student complain they were bored (although I'm sure at least a few teenagers will insist that they totally were). The variety also means that even when a subtest is hard for a student, it's usually over pretty fast and they can feel good about their performance on the next one. For some students, I might use stickers or Gummi Bears to help motivate them to work hard, but for most, I can rely on my knowledge of cartoons and ponies to keep them engaged and make sure they do their best.   

As for the tests themselves, they don't look much like other tests. Each full IQ test will be divided into about six to ten subtests. Each subtest is distinct and meant to measure a specific ability. For some, the examiner will just ask questions or (as on some tests of Short-Term Memory) say information the person taking the test has to remember. Other tests will have pictures in a book or on cards. Finally, some tests will have blocks or puzzle pieces that the student has to physically assemble. Before each of the subtests, the examiner reads some standardized instructions to the test taker. It's a skill to get good at saying these (so you don't sound like you're reading) but everyone has to hear the same thing before they take the test so that the quality of the instructions you give doesn't influence someone's performance.    

What Abilities are Tested on an IQ Test?

What Abilities are Tested on an IQ Test?

Different tests will emphasize different kinds of tasks but there has by now been enough research to identify distinct abilities. Most of this comes in the form of a kind of statistical research called "Factor Analysis." Psychologist look at the performance of large groups of people and see which kinds of tasks are related, that is, when people do well on one task, what else do they do well on, and when they do poorly, what else do they do poorly on? When they see which ones are closely related and what the tasks have in common, then it allows for a picture of what the distinct abilities are. Further research can show what each ability is related to in terms of academic achievement.

Primary Abilities

It is mostly my own distinction between what is a "Primary" ability as opposed to a "Secondary." I'm not aware of another person in psychology who has decided to distinguish categories this way, but I'm also not just making them up. For one thing, every ability has a certain amount of what we call "g Loading." The letter "g" in this case means "general intelligence" and different abilities appear to account for different amounts of g. The ones I consider Primary Abilities predict a lot of someone's IQ (they have high g loading). They also account for a lot of achievement. Finally, they tend to be closely related to each other. In fact a lot of cognitive psychology suggests they build on each other. The more of one you have, the more of the others you tend to develop. I'll explain a little more about that as we go.

Primary Ability 1, Fluid Reasoning: This is probably what most people mean when they say "Intelligence." This is the ability to solve puzzles, find patterns and figure out how things work and connect. Classic tests include matrix tasks where the student views a series of pictures and has to figure out the pattern or rule that determines what should happen next. Other tasks may have a student look at a set of figures and determine the relationships between them. Usually, these tests do not have explicitly verbal components.

In real life, we use fluid reasoning all the time. Any puzzle or problem that may make you say "OK, if when we do this, then this happens.. then I'll bet if I do THAT, then THAT will happen," is an example of fluid reasoning. Sometimes, this is related to critical thinking skills as well.

Primary Ability 2, Long-Term Memory: This is your ability to learn new things and remember what you've learned. This is a little harder to test since the kind of learning we do in real life is harder to simulate in a test and takes place over days and many repetitions. In testing, the student may learn a code, learn the names of people or things or else readily recall things that the test maker can be pretty sure the student knows.

Again, this is an ability that is used often. Especially in early schooling, we learn new words all the time and although a lot of them are sounded out, a lot of them are just learned by sight. "Island" and "right" are words that can't be sounded out, so they are learned and repeated in the same way as on Cognitive Tests.   

Primary Ability 3, Fund of Knowledge: This is how much you already know. There is reasonable disagreement on whether this should be tested on IQ tests at all. Several psychologists have pointed out that relying too much on measuring Knowledge will result in low scores for students who have been through poor schooling or a home with few resources since these students will not have had the opportunity to build their knowledge. Considering that most people's idea of IQ is that it's fully or mostly intrinsic, this can make a student from a difficult background look like he or she is just not bright. Some major tests actually avoid this all together (like the CAS) while others have ways to factor it out if needed (like the KABC-II, or the WISC-V).

The problem with excluding knowledge from testing, is that it's really important. When you encounter a problem, you are more likely to be able to solve it if you have seen problems like it before. If you want to remember something, you can do so better if you can connect it to something you already know. Think for example how much easier it will be to learn the history of the revolutionary war if you already know what a "general" is, you already know about military strategy and you know the major events that led up to it. If you're reading a story, you'll understand it better if you know all of the vocabulary it uses and maybe something about the period when it was written (imagine reading Shakespeare without knowing why he keeps writing about kings). That's why Fund of Knowledge predicts a lot of achievement and why if a student has a weakness in it, I want to know it to plan on how to help. On the other hand, if a student shows a low fund of Knowledge, but is strong in the other primary abilities, then I tend to conclude that they have not had the opportunity to develop their Knowledge.  

How do the primary abilities fit together?

The better your memory and learning, the bigger your fund of knowledge gets. The more you know, the easier it is to build on that knowledge to solve problems. If you remember what you figure out, then you it helps build your knowledge.

So far, there's nothing all that surprising here. While I'll get later on to whether you can specifically improve your IQ, I would say that if all you take away from this blog is that it's good to make sure you (or your child) learns a lot and gets lots of practice in solving problems, then that's great. The Secondary Abilities are maybe a bit more interesting, but they are generally not as important. They are less related to achievement, and less related to your overall score, so when a student is weak in one of them, it is more likely point to a learning disability, ADHD or other factor as opposed to a really weak IQ.

Secondary Abilities

Secondary Ability 1, Visual Spatial Reasoning: This refers to the ability make an accurate visual representation in your mind or to make sense of a visual field. People with good visual processing may be able to picture a map or a shape in their minds with great accuracy. It's that focus on whether your imagined picture is correct that makes this ability distinct from just imagining something. A child can have a good imagination and picture that he or she is flying in space, but to show that they have good visual processing, they need to be able to visualize a consistent space ship and plot its path through a map of stars we draw of them. On tests, Visual Spatial reasoning tasks might require you to assemble puzzles, plan a path through a maze, or accurately picture what an object looks like from a different angle.

There is some evidence that being particularly weak in this area can lead to poor math performance, but for the most part, it looks like as long you are at least average at this, it doesn't affect your achievement that much.

Secondary Ability 2, Auditory Processing: This is the ability to accurately analyze and understand auditory information (including speech). It's related to reading and sometimes listening comprehension. Those with poor Auditory Processing may have difficulty combining letter sounds to sound out words as they are read. It's tested with tasks that ask the student to listen to recordings of words that are hard to understand due to distortion or background noise. Other tests may require the student to distinguish among similar sounds. 

Secondary Ability 3, Processing Speed: This is the ability to complete simple tasks quickly and accurately.  In my experience, this is the Ability with the least helpful name. In popular use, "processing" has come to mean something like "thinking." Parents often say "he takes a while to process what I say," and then I have to explain that when they see a section of my report marked "Processing Speed" it has nothing to do with this. Rather, tests in this area require quick matching of symbols or numbers, or quickly solving simple puzzles. This is closely related to tasks like reading fluency or solving simple arithmetic where most adults and older children can work automatically. Performance on these tasks can also be affected by attention since if the student is at all distracted, they will solve fewer puzzles.    

Secondary Ability 4, Short-Term Memory: Short-Term Memory is distinct from long term memory in that information is only in short term memory briefly. When you have to remember that you are in the store to buy bread, you're using your Short-Term Memory. When you first learned that bread is made from wheat, that went into your Long-Term Memory. Low scores can drag down other areas since most complex tasks are helped by being able to keep things in awareness. Short-Term Memory is also important in early reading and for mental math.

Short-Term Memory is another ability that can be impacted by difficulty in attention. Attention difficulties can mean that you miss some information before it enters Short-Term Memory, or you might become distracted while you have to keep it in awareness. Tests might be relatively simple such as having a student remember a string of letters or numbers. More complex tasks may start the same way, with a string of letters or numbers read to the student, but then the student will have to do something else. After answering other questions or otherwise being distracted, then the examiner will check whether the student still remembers the list.  

Secondary Ability 5, Quantitative Reasoning: This refers to reasoning with numbers. Some tests consider this a sub ability of Fluid Reasoning, while others (such as the Stanford-Binet V) treat it as its own ability. Tests require a student to solve puzzles that require some form of counting or comparing quantities.

Quantitative Reasoning is obviously related to math ability, but becomes very hard to test in older students since it's difficult to separate from math achievement. To see whether a young child has developed the concepts of quantity, bigger or smaller, or number patterns, is easy to test with puzzles or pictures. On the other hand, if a test must challenge an older student, then the harder Quantitative Reasoning task it employs will need to be either a word problem or pictorially presented math problem. No matter how far the test moves from a straightforward math computation problem, there will be a kind of math (algebra, geometry, etc) that can be used to solve the test. This gives a very large advantage to students who have taken these classes and moves it farther away from an IQ test and into being an achievement test.

What about online "IQ Tests?"

There are two things to get out of the way: the first is that there are entirely too many online "IQ Tests" to possibly discuss them all and the second is that even if a website claims that their test is different and just as valid as one that would be administered by a Psychologist, it's very, and I mean VERY difficult to believe that it could be.

Most of what makes an IQ test valid is the normative sample. During development of a test, the publisher administers the test to a large sample of people to get an idea of how we would expect anyone to do (what’s a good score? what’s a bad score?). Your score on a real IQ test reflects a comparison to hundreds or thousands of your peers. They are also selected carefully so that they come from different places, have different levels of educational attainment and otherwise represent the country as a whole. No online IQ test I emailed (and I emailed five) responded with information about how the normative sample for their test was developed. I suppose it is possible that one of these companies went far and wide and invested millions of dollars in developing a sample, but it would make more sense for them to just assign scores based on whatever standard they make up rather than to spend a lot of money on something most people won’t even know they need.

It is also possible that a site could be using people who seek out the tests as a comparison group, but this is also not going to create an adequate sample. If a real test's sample can be accurately described as "a representative sample of the entire country," then the sample for an online "IQ test" will be more like "people who felt like taking an IQ test and have an internet connection and happened to click on that test." Not everyone has an internet connection, and we don't know who would decide to take the test. I would be reasonably sure that it's not students who may be eligible for special education, or the majority of people who are average and have no particular need or desire to know their IQ. Even if an online test had enough people to make a normative sample, then they wouldn’t have the right people to do so. Then again, as I looked at these, I started to realize that there’s no reason for them to do so.

Every online test I took gave me an initial score and then offered me the option of a detailed report for a price. I am inclined to think that the average person would be more willing to spend money at a site that tells them what they want to hear, and who doesn't want to hear that they are a genius? A few dollars for the details of my own genius sounds like a good deal. In other cases there might be motivation for a site to give an artificially low score. Several sites also offered games or other services that claimed to boost your IQ, so why not sneak in a claim that some area could use a little work? This is a big difference from my own practice or the practice of other School Psychologists or Psychologists. We don't make more or less money depending on the score, but we can be sued if our score proves inaccurate. Our biggest incentive is just to provide an accurate score. Setting aside all of the speculation about intentions and how a website might try to make money this way, there is also one inescapable fact: all of the tests I saw were pretty bad.     

IQtest.com gives a test of 38 True or False questions from which 13 sub scores are derived. On the WISC-V, (the most common IQ test for children) 5 sub scores come from 10 tests on which an average student will respond to between 4 and thirty questions. These are given in a dynamic manner where the student answers as many or as few questions as they can manage. This means that whereas on a real test, the student goes through a range of questions on each subtest, with at least two subtests combined to make a score in a given area, the IQtest.com test creates sub scores from two or three questions. I could literally click wrong and vastly alter my score. Other sites offer similarly limited numbers of questions, with the most impressive number being Queendom.com's test with 57 questions.

It's possible that there is, or will be a website with the motivation and capability to make a valid IQ test to be taken online, but it does not seem likely. A big enough normative sample to create valid scores would require a huge investment, and accurate scores would overwhelmingly be in the Average range, which is not what people probably want to hear, (right at the top of the page, IQtest.com reminds you that you are "Smarter than you think"). There is also no reason to make a set of tests, with lots of questions that have been heavily researched when a few dozen questions pulled from nowhere look official enough. If anyone cares to take one, I wouldn't stop them (it was fun reading ten different times that I am a genius), but I'd warn them not to take it seriously.

If you have a questions of your own, and especially if you are in Pennsylvania where I am certified to practice, then feel free to get in touch: Greg@DrGregPhD.com

How is an IQ Test Scored?

At one point, IQ was calculated based on the mental age/ chronological age, * 100. There are a few issues with this practice but the one that has stuck with me the most is that the concept of "mental age" is misleading. If an adult is intellectually disabled, and has an IQ of 60, he still has very little in common with a 7-year-old. He's probably got many weak areas in his reasoning ability and memory but, he'll have a personality and experiences that are very distinct. Thinking of him as a little kid's mind in a man's body doesn't make sense.

Now, IQ is calculated by way of comparing someone's performance with others their own age. It's more meaningful to say "you did better than 90% of your peers" than to say to a 7-year-old "you performed as if you were 15" (trust me, it's totally different chatting with a smart little kid than talking to an average teen).

Here's how scores are calculated. I'll use a real test as an example in case you want to look into it a little more. The most popular test for kids is The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children, Fifth Edition (WISC-V). When a kid takes one of the subtests like Block Design, (on which they assemble multicolored blocks to match a picture) I record the number of questions they got right. This is called their "raw score." This doesn't tell us much. A 6-year-old matched the blocks five times... is that good? Also if he gets five questions right on that test, but then eight right on a different one, does that mean he's better at that other test, or is that just what you'd expect him to get anyway?

The most important part of test development (and one that you can be sure online "IQ" tests don't do) is to give the test to thousands of people from around the country. This gives us "Norms" to compare performance to. Maybe most kids at the age of six get five questions right on Block Design. The variation in their scores is also calculated, so that if most get five questions, but a lot also get one or two more, then the extra one or two are not considered a big deal and won't pump up their score very much, whereas if it's rare to get an extra one or two right, then the kids who do will see their score go up a lot. The score created this way is called a "Scaled Score," because it is calculated to give an impression of how the child did in comparison to peers. Since Scaled Scores are always expressed as having a mean of 10 and a standard deviation of 3, it can allow us to compare different tests. If our hypothetical kid did get five questions right and so did most other kids his age, his scaled score would be a 10. If his score is a 13 on a different test, then we can confidently say he did significantly better, and a 7 would show us he did significantly worse.

The next step is to add certain scaled scores together to form a "Composite." Closely correlated subtests are grouped together so we can get an impression of the student's performance in a given area. For example, Block Design is grouped with visual puzzles, and both tests require problem solving based on pictures and not words. We'd add the Scaled Scores for both together, and the total is converted again to a "Standard Score." These are like Scaled Scores, but they have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. They also give a better impression of how a student performed than just averaging scores since they account for how common or uncommon it would be to get a certain set of Scaled Scores. If a student gets some variation but he's mostly average, then he'll get a Scaled Score close to 100. On the other hand, if he gets all significantly higher than average scores (maybe all 13s), then his Standard Score will be higher than one Standard Deviation above average (even though all of his scaled scores were one standard deviation above the mean). This is a little tricky to explain, so stick with me.

Students don't usually get any 13s (it is a significantly above average performance after all), and even fewer will get three of them, so instead of a 115, it might be a 120 or a 125 since this total is just that far above average. These are also more reliable than the scores for any single subtest, so we consider them a bigger deal. The IQ, is actually a Composite of all of the subtests on an IQ test. Put aside all of the complicated math, and what an IQ score says is "Compared to lots of other people the same age, how do you do at a wide variety of tasks?"