How much does IQ correlate with happiness?

: We, the unequal

content

Read on one side

Intelligence tests have fallen noticeably in popularity over the past decade; in some cases they have become the object of rabid aversion - and rightly so, where the aversion is directed against excessive testing and a fetishization of intelligence. Otherwise, however, the criticism could do little to harm them; indeed, they emerged from it more firmly.

It is true that IQ tests do not measure what can make a person valuable: a sense of responsibility, courage, ability to love, willingness to work. They also do not measure what one may, with good reason, consider to be inalienable components of intelligence: understanding people, freedom from prejudices, ability to work in a team, mental and spiritual balance. But it would be ridiculous to declare a scale unusable for not showing size.

What they measure is by no means something indifferent and insignificant. As has been known from Charles Spearman's research in the 1920s, all tasks that require any conscious mental effort have one factor in common. He called him "g", for general ability, general ability. Whether it's repeating rows of numbers backwards, mazes to manage to find linguistic analogies (horse to foal is like a cow to?), to turn geometrical figures in the mind or to take them apart, picture stories in a logical order to bring or the principle of changing numbers or abstract symbol chains to recognize: As varied as the tasks are, it has been shown that they do not require completely different skills, which would have been possible, but that they all overlap in a single factor, the g-factor. It was not possible to construct a test that contained any kind of puzzles and was not at the same time strongly g-containing. What this "g" actually is, what brain procedures it is based on, is unknown. It's a construct. But electricity, too, was no less real when people had no or only erroneous ideas about its nature. Above all, intelligence tests measure this "g", the analytical ability.

The extent to which one has this is obviously not irrelevant. You can actually tell from the excitement about his measurement. That different degrees of musicality or even honesty were measured among people, the world would only notice with a shrug of the shoulders; but not that the general ability to think should be different,

One argument against the tests would be if they brought soon this, then that result. But the tried and tested among them show within limits the same results from puberty on throughout life; a favorable turn in the circumstances, even a targeted preparation can bring a person a few more points, but not as many as desired.

And they have a not inconsiderable predictive power. The correlation coefficient for the connection between IQ and the classification of a person by their fellow human beings as more or less intelligent is 0.7, between IQ and school performance 0.5, between IQ and income 0.35, between IQ and professional success 0.3. (The correlation shows the "tightness" of the relationship between the two changeable characteristics. Is expressed mathematically them by the correlation coefficient. If the one Feature exactly in the measure of other changed, it amounts to 1. There is no Relationship, amounts to he 0, grows the one characteristic to the extent that in which that other decreases, he amounts -1.) The correlation between IQ and school success is only medium high, those for IQ and professional success quite small. It is because of more direct in school than in most professions that analytical ability is required to take the IQ tests measure up. Already in the School, but then special play against it at work many other factors next to the IQ one Role: perseverance, wishes for success, not least the pure accidental Luck. As a threshold criterion however owns the IQ already for school, especially but later an inescapable one for professional success Predictive power Who a high IQ can, after all end up in any profession; but someone with an un below average IQ does not become a high school diploma do and certainly not Become a physicist.

Well possible that better Measuring instruments would be desirable, especially those the the possibly depict complex properties of intelligence in a more complex manner than in a single measure. There are just no better and no more objective ones. It was for this purpose that they were originally conceived by Alfred Binet: in order to have to send children with learning difficulties to special schools not only because of the teachers' impressions, which may be clouded by personal prejudices, and to draw attention to children whose school performance fell short of their ability. All of this has been said countless times and still applies. Behind the nonetheless continued criticism of the tests, Jensen writes, is "the intuitive insight of most people that there are individual differences in intellectual ability and that these have far-reaching and significant consequences for school, profession and society. Every instrument that claims that measuring such a valued human attribute as 'intelligence' will be viewed crookedly by laypeople and professional psychologists ".