Rigby5
Diamond Member
I remember when I was a kid and each time I took an IQ test, I did much better.
It was not because I was smarter, but more familiar with the type of questions they always standardized testing.
And in fact, the teachers at the elementary school I went to had their salary based on performance, so they taught us how to almost double our score, clearly without being any smarter.
Intelligence Testing: Accurate or Extremely Biased?
{...
While intelligence tests claim to be culture-fair, none of the tests created so far are one hundred percent unbiased. As Serpell (1979) found, when asked to reproduce figures from using wire, pencil and paper, and clay, Zambian children performed better in the wire task, while English children performed better in the pencil and paper task. Each group did better in the medium to which they were more accustomed. Pencil and paper IQ tests may be intrinsically biased towards Western culture.
Furthermore, while African-Americans have historically scored lower than white Americans on intelligence testing, this gap as been lessening in recent years (Dickens and Flynn 2006). This could be the result of one of two things; the first possibility is that average intelligence is increasing in the black community at a higher rate than in the white community (measured intelligence has been steadily increasing across all groups due to the Flynn effect). However, it seems more likely that post-segregation, white and black cultures have been merging, and schools have been integrated, meaning that white and black children have a better chance of receiving the same education. If this is the case, IQ tests are either measuring knowledge more than the test creators think they do, or the tests are extremely culturally biased, but this bias is lessening due to assimilation of white and black culture in America.
Not only are intelligence tests culturally biased, but they also seem to be biased in favor of neurotypical individuals. For example, while typically developing individuals generally perform similarly on RPM and the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), individuals with Autism typically score higher on RPM than on WAIS (Bolte et al. 2009, Mottron 2004). This is because while RPM is a visual task, WAIS is almost entirely verbal. Individuals with autism seem to use visual strategies to solve tasks and therefore have difficulty on tasks that can only be solved verbally (Kunda and Goel 2010). While this phenomenon is typically seen as a cognitive deficit, it is important to note that autistic individuals outperform neurotypical individuals on some visual tasks.
Therefore, by only measuring one specific part of intelligence, some IQ tests portray autistic individuals as having a cognitive deficit. What if some disorders, such as autism, are not actually disorders, but simply a way of thinking that differs from what is considered “normal”?
...}
I get all that but 68 is ridiculously low. Average IQ in the US is 98 with most people having a score between 85-115. Using Congo for example the average IQ is 76 or 8 pts higher. There is something to it. Asian counties kill it even when compared to the US and Eastern Europe.
How do you know if the test was even translated into the most common language?
With all the possible dialects, they may try to use a common one that is still not the native language to those being tested. How well do you think you would do if the test was in a foreign language?
Asian over excel because that is what they are trained for from an early age on. It is not a racial or hereditary thing.
I do not know but I do know that some genetics are just better for certain activities. NBA is 75% black but only 13% of the US population. Spelling Bees generally won by people from India. Some cultures just excel at certain activities.
It probably is true that different cultures prepare more for certain things.
But that would not have to be DNA though.
IDK what it is but the math is unmistakable.
But all it likely shows is what the parents pushed their children towards, or if the children were instead neglected.
The only time you could be sure it was DNA is if it was something like basketball, where height mattered.