Cultural competence, also known as intercultural competence, is a range of cognitive, affective, behavioural, and linguistic skills that lead to effective and appropriate communication with people of other cultures. Intercultural or cross-cultural education are terms used for the training to achieve cultural competence.
Effective intercultural communication
relates to behaviors that culminate with the accomplishment of the
desired goals of the interaction and all parties involved in the
situation. Appropriate intercultural communication includes behaviors
that suit the expectations of a specific culture, the characteristics of
the situation, and the level of the relationship between the parties
involved in the situation.
Characteristics
Individuals
who are effective and appropriate in intercultural situations display
high levels of cultural self-awareness and understand the influence of
culture on behavior, values, and beliefs.
Cognitive processes imply the understanding of situational and
environmental aspects of intercultural interactions and the application
of intercultural awareness, which is affected by the understanding of
the self and own culture. Self-awareness in intercultural interactions
requires self-monitoring to censor anything not acceptable to another
culture. Cultural sensitivity
or cultural awareness leads the individual to an understanding of how
their own culture determines feelings, thoughts, and personality.
Affective processes define the emotions that span during intercultural interactions. These emotions are strongly related to self-concept, open-mindedness, non-judgmentalism, and social relaxation. In general, positive emotions generate respect for other cultures and their differences.
Behavioral processes refer to how effectively and appropriately the
individual directs actions to achieve goals. Actions during
intercultural interactions are influenced by the ability to clearly
convey a message, proficiency with the foreign language, flexibility and
management of behavior, and social skills.
Creating intercultural competence
Intercultural
competence is determined by the presence of cognitive, affective, and
behavioral abilities that directly shape communication across cultures.
These essential abilities can be separated into five specific skills
that are obtained through education and experience:
Mindfulness: the ability of being cognitively aware of how the
communication and interaction with others is developed. It is important
to focus more in the process of the interaction than its outcome while
maintaining in perspective the desired communication goals. For example,
it would be better to formulate questions such as "What can I say or do
to help this process?" rather than "What do they mean?"
Cognitive flexibility: the ability of creating new categories of
information rather than keeping old categories. This skill includes
opening to new information, taking more than one perspective, and
understanding personal ways of interpreting messages and situations.
Tolerance for ambiguity: the ability to maintain focus in situations
that are not clear rather than becoming anxious and to methodically
determine the best approach as the situation evolves. Generally,
low-tolerance individuals look for information that supports their
beliefs while high-tolerance individuals look for information that gives
an understanding of the situation and others.
Behavioral flexibility: the ability to adapt and accommodate
behaviors to a different culture. Although knowing a second language
could be important for this skill, it does not necessarily translate
into cultural adaptability. The individual must be willing to assimilate
the new culture.
Cross-cultural empathy: the ability to visualize with the
imagination the situation of another person from an intellectual and
emotional point of view. Demonstrating empathy includes the abilities of
connecting emotionally with people, showing compassion, thinking in
more than one perspective, and listening actively.
Assessment
The
assessment of cross-cultural competence is a field that is rife with
controversy. One survey identified 86 assessment instruments for 3C.
A United States Army Research Institute study narrowed the list down to
ten quantitative instruments that were suitable for further exploration
of their reliability and validity.
The following characteristics are tested and observed for the assessment of intercultural competence as an existing ability or as the potential to develop it: ambiguity tolerance, openness to contacts, flexibility in behavior, emotional stability, motivation to perform, empathy, metacommunicative competence, and polycentrism. According to Caligiuri,
personality traits such as extroversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, emotional stability, and openness have a favorable
predictive value to the adequate termination of cross-cultural
assignments.
Quantitative assessment instruments
Three examples of quantitative assessment instruments are:
Research
in the area of 3C assessment, while thin, points to the value of
qualitative assessment instruments in concert with quantitative ones. Qualitative instruments, such as scenario-based assessments, are useful for gaining insight into intercultural competence.
The provision of culturally tailored health care can improve patient outcomes. In 2005, California passed Assembly Bill 1195 that requires patient-related continuing medical education courses in Californiamedical school to incorporate cultural and linguistic competence training in order to qualify for certification credits.
In 2011, HealthPartners Institute for Education and Research
implemented the EBAN Experience™ program to reduce health disparities
among minority populations, most notably East African immigrants.
Cross-cultural competence (3C) has generated confusing and
contradictory definitions because it has been studied by a wide variety
of academic approaches and professional fields. One author identified
eleven different terms that have some equivalence to 3C: cultural savvy,
astuteness, appreciation, literacy or fluency, adaptability, terrain,
expertise, competency, awareness, intelligence, and understanding.
The United States Army Research Institute, which is currently engaged
in a study of 3C has defined it as "A set of cognitive, behavioral, and
affective/motivational components that enable individuals to adapt
effectively in intercultural environments".
Organizations in academia, business, health care, government
security, and developmental aid agencies have all sought to use 3C in
one way or another. Poor results have often been obtained due to a lack
of rigorous study of 3C and a reliance on "common sense" approaches.
Cross-cultural competence does not operate in a vacuum, however. One theoretical construct posits that 3C, language proficiency,
and regional knowledge are distinct skills that are inextricably
linked, but to varying degrees depending on the context in which they
are employed. In educational settings, Bloom's affective and cognitive taxonomies
serve as an effective framework for describing the overlapping areas
among these three disciplines: at the receiving and knowledge levels, 3C
can operate with near-independence from language proficiency and
regional knowledge. But, as one approaches the internalizing and
evaluation levels, the overlapping areas approach totality.
The development of intercultural competence is mostly based on
the individual's experiences while he or she is communicating with
different cultures. When interacting with people from other cultures,
the individual experiences certain obstacles that are caused by
differences in cultural understanding between two people from different
cultures. Such experiences may motivate the individual to acquire skills
that can help him to communicate his point of view to an audience
belonging to a different cultural ethnicity and background.
Intercultural competence models
Intercultural
Communicative Language Teaching Model. In response to the needs to
develop EFL learners’ ICC in the context of Asia, a theoretical
framework, which is an instructional design (ISD) model ADDIE with five
stages (Analyze – Design – Develop – Implement – Evaluate) is employed
as a guideline in order to construct the ICLT model for EFL learners.
The ICLT model is an on-going process of ICC acquisition. There are
three parts: Language-Culture, the main training process.
(Input – Notice – Practice – Output), and the ICC, which are
systematically integrated. The second part is the main part consisting
of four teaching steps to facilitate learners’ ICC development, and each
step reflects a step of the knowledge scaffolding and constructing
process to facilitate learners’ ICC development.
Immigrants and international students
A
salient issue, especially for people living in countries other than
their native country, is the issue of which culture they should follow:
their native culture or the one in their new surroundings.
International students
also face this issue: they have a choice of modifying their cultural
boundaries and adapting to the culture around them or holding on to
their native culture and surrounding themselves with people from their
own country. The students who decide to hold on to their native culture
are those who experience the most problems in their university life and
who encounter frequent culture shocks.
But international students who adapt themselves to the culture
surrounding them (and who interact more with domestic students) will
increase their knowledge of the domestic culture, which may help them to
"blend in" more. In the article it stated, "Segmented assimilation
theorists argue that students from less affluent and racial and ethnic
minority immigrant families face a number of educational hurdles and
barriers that often stem from racial, ethnic, and gender biases and
discrimination embedded within the U.S. public school system". Such individuals may be said to have adopted bicultural identities.
Another issue that stands out in intercultural communication is the attitude stemming from ethnocentrism.
LeVine and Campbell defines ethnocentrism as people's tendency to view
their culture or in-group as superior to other groups, and to judge
those groups to their standards.
With ethnocentric attitudes, those incapable to expand their view of
different cultures could create conflict between groups. Ignorance to
diversity and cultural groups contributes to prevention of peaceful
interaction in a fast-paced globalizing world. The counterpart of
ethnocentrism is ethnorelativism: the ability to see multiple values,
beliefs, norms etc. in the world as cultural rather than universal;
being able to understand and accept different cultures as equally valid
as ones' own. It is a mindset that moves beyond in-group out-group to
see all groups as equally important and valid and individuals to be seen
in terms of their own cultural context.
According to Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory,
cultural characteristics can be measured along several dimensions. The
ability to perceive them and to cope with them is fundamental for
intercultural competence. These characteristics include:
Autonomy of the individual has the highest importance;
Promotes the exercise of one's goals and desires and so value independence and self-reliance;
Decisions prioritize the benefits of the individual rather than the group;
Individualistic cultures are Australia, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the United States.
Masculinity versus femininity
Masculine Cultures
Value behaviors that indicate assertiveness and wealth;
Judge people based on the degree of ambition and achievement;
General behaviors are associated with male behavior;
Sex roles are clearly defined and sexual inequality is acceptable;
Masculine cultures include Austria, Italy, Japan, and Mexico.
Feminine Cultures
Value behaviors that promote the quality of life such as caring for others and nurturing;
Gender roles overlap and sexual equality is preferred as the norm;
Nurturing behaviors are acceptable for both women and men;
Feminine cultures are Chile, Portugal, Sweden, and Thailand.
Uncertainty avoidance
Reflects the extent to which members of a society attempt to cope with anxiety by minimizing uncertainty;
Uncertainty avoidance dimension expresses the degree to which a
person in society feels comfortable with a sense of uncertainty and
ambiguity.
High uncertainty avoidance cultures
Countries exhibiting high Uncertainty Avoidance Index or UAI
maintain rigid codes of belief and behavior and are intolerant of
unorthodox behavior and ideas;
Members of society expect consensus about national and societal goals;
Society ensures security by setting extensive rules and keeping more structure;
High uncertainty avoidance cultures are Greece, Guatemala, Portugal, and Uruguay.
Low uncertainty avoidance cultures
Low UAI societies maintain a more relaxed attitude in which practice counts more than principles;
Low uncertainty avoidance cultures accept and feel comfortable in
unstructured situations or changeable environments and try to have as
few rules as possible;
People in these cultures are more tolerant of change and accept risks;
Low uncertainty avoidance cultures are Denmark, Jamaica, Ireland, and Singapore.
Power distance
Refers to the degree in which cultures accept unequal distribution of power and challenge the decisions of power holders;
Depending on the culture, some people may be considered superior to
others because of a large number of factors such as wealth, age,
occupation, gender, personal achievements, and family history.
High power distance cultures
Believe that social and class hierarchy and inequalities are
beneficial, that authority should not be challenged, and that people
with higher social status have the right to use power;
Cultures with high power distance are Arab countries, Guatemala, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
Low power distance cultures
Believe in reducing inequalities, challenging authority,
minimizing hierarchical structures, and using power just when necessary;
Low power distance countries are Austria, Denmark, Israel, and New Zealand.
Cultures value tradition, personal stability, maintaining "face", and reciprocity during interpersonal interactions
People expect quick results after actions
Historical events and beliefs influence people's actions in the present
Monochronic cultures are Canada, Philippines, Nigeria, Pakistan, and the United States
Long-term or Polychronic Orientation
Cultures value persistence, thriftiness, and humility
People sacrifice immediate gratification for long-term commitments
Cultures believe that past results do not guarantee for the future and are aware of change
Polychronic cultures are China, Japan, Brazil, and India
Criticisms
Although
its goal is to promote understanding between groups of individuals
that, as a whole, think differently, it may fail to recognize specific
differences between individuals of any given group. Such differences can
be more significant than the differences between groups, especially in
the case of heterogeneous populations and value systems.
Madison (2006)
has criticized the tendency of 3C training for its tendency to simplify
migration and cross-cultural processes into stages and phases.
Historically, IQ was a score obtained by dividing a person's mental age
score, obtained by administering an intelligence test, by the person's
chronological age, both expressed in terms of years and months. The
resulting fraction (quotient) was multiplied by 100 to obtain the IQ score. For modern IQ tests, the raw score is transformed to a normal distribution with mean 100 and standard deviation 15.
This results in approximately two-thirds of the population scoring
between IQ 85 and IQ 115 and about 2 percent each above 130 and below
70.
Scores from intelligence tests are estimates of intelligence.
Unlike, for example, distance and mass, a concrete measure of
intelligence cannot be achieved given the abstract nature of the concept
of "intelligence". IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as nutrition, parental socioeconomic status, morbidity and mortality, parental social status, and perinatal environment. While the heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, there is still debate about the significance of heritability estimates and the mechanisms of inheritance.
IQ scores are used for educational placement, assessment of intellectual disability, and evaluating job applicants. In research contexts, they have been studied as predictors of job performance and income. They are also used to study distributions of psychometric intelligence in populations and the correlations
between it and other variables. Raw scores on IQ tests for many
populations have been rising at an average rate that scales to three IQ
points per decade since the early 20th century, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. Investigation of different patterns of increases in subtest scores can also inform current research on human intelligence.
Historically, even before IQ tests were devised, there were attempts to classify people into intelligence categories by observing their behavior in daily life.
Those other forms of behavioral observation are still important for
validating classifications based primarily on IQ test scores. Both
intelligence classification by observation of behavior outside the
testing room and classification by IQ testing depend on the definition
of "intelligence" used in a particular case and on the reliability and error of estimation in the classification procedure.
The English statistician Francis Galton (1822–1911) made the first attempt at creating a standardized test for rating a person's intelligence. A pioneer of psychometrics
and the application of statistical methods to the study of human
diversity and the study of inheritance of human traits, he believed that
intelligence was largely a product of heredity (by which he did not
mean genes, although he did develop several pre-Mendelian theories of particulate inheritance). He hypothesized that there should exist a correlation between intelligence and other observable traits such as reflexes, muscle grip, and head size.
He set up the first mental testing center in the world in 1882 and he
published "Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development" in 1883, in
which he set out his theories. After gathering data on a variety of
physical variables, he was unable to show any such correlation, and he
eventually abandoned this research.
French psychologist Alfred Binet, together with Victor Henri and Théodore Simon, had more success in 1905, when they published the Binet–Simon test, which focused on verbal abilities. It was intended to identify "mental retardation" in school children,
but in specific contradistinction to claims made by psychiatrists that
these children were "sick" (not "slow") and should therefore be removed
from school and cared for in asylums. The score on the Binet–Simon scale would reveal the child's mental age.
For example, a six-year-old child who passed all the tasks usually
passed by six-year-olds—but nothing beyond—would have a mental age that
matched his chronological age, 6.0. (Fancher, 1985). Binet thought that
intelligence was multifaceted, but came under the control of practical
judgment.
In Binet's view, there were limitations with the scale and he
stressed what he saw as the remarkable diversity of intelligence and the
subsequent need to study it using qualitative, as opposed to
quantitative, measures (White, 2000). American psychologist Henry H. Goddard published a translation of it in 1910. American psychologist Lewis Terman at Stanford University revised the Binet–Simon scale, which resulted in the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales (1916). It became the most popular test in the United States for decades.
The many different kinds of IQ tests include a wide variety of item
content. Some test items are visual, while many are verbal. Test items
vary from being based on abstract-reasoning problems to concentrating on
arithmetic, vocabulary, or general knowledge.
The British psychologist Charles Spearman in 1904 made the first formal factor analysis of correlations
between the tests. He observed that children's school grades across
seemingly unrelated school subjects were positively correlated, and
reasoned that these correlations reflected the influence of an
underlying general mental ability that entered into performance on all
kinds of mental tests. He suggested that all mental performance could be
conceptualized in terms of a single general ability factor and a large
number of narrow task-specific ability factors. Spearman named it g for "general factor" and labeled the specific factors or abilities for specific tasks s. In any collection of test items that make up an IQ test, the score that best measures g is the composite score that has the highest correlations with all the item scores. Typically, the "g-loaded"
composite score of an IQ test battery appears to involve a common
strength in abstract reasoning across the test's item content.
United States military selection in World War I
During
World War I, the Army needed a way to evaluate and assign recruits to
appropriate tasks. This led to the development of several mental tests
by Robert Yerkes, who worked with major hereditarians of American psychometrics—including Terman, Goddard—to write the test.
The testing generated controversy and much public debate in the United
States. Nonverbal or "performance" tests were developed for those who
could not speak English or were suspected of malingering. Based on Goddard's translation of the Binet–Simon test, the tests had an impact in screening men for officer training:
...the tests did have a strong impact in some areas,
particularly in screening men for officer training. At the start of the
war, the army and national guard maintained nine thousand officers. By
the end, two hundred thousand officers presided, and two- thirds of them
had started their careers in training camps where the tests were
applied. In some camps, no man scoring below C could be considered for
officer training.
In total 1.75 million men were tested, making the results the first
mass-produced written tests of intelligence, though considered dubious
and non-usable, for reasons including high variability of test
implementation throughout different camps and questions testing for
familiarity with American culture rather than intelligence. After the war, positive publicity promoted by army psychologists helped to make psychology a respected field. Subsequently, there was an increase in jobs and funding in psychology in the United States. Group intelligence tests were developed and became widely used in schools and industry.
The results of these tests, which at the time reaffirmed
contemporary racism and nationalism, are considered controversial and
dubious, having rested on certain contested assumptions: that
intelligence was heritable, innate, and could be relegated to a single
number, the tests were enacted systematically, and test questions
actually tested for innate intelligence rather than subsuming
environmental factors. The tests also allowed for the bolstering of jingoist narratives in the context of increased immigration, which may have influenced the passing of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924.
L.L. Thurstone
argued for a model of intelligence that included seven unrelated
factors (verbal comprehension, word fluency, number facility, spatial
visualization, associative memory, perceptual speed, reasoning, and
induction). While not widely used, Thurstone's model influenced later
theories.
David Wechsler
produced the first version of his test in 1939. It gradually became
more popular and overtook the Stanford–Binet in the 1960s. It has been
revised several times, as is common for IQ tests, to incorporate new
research. One explanation is that psychologists and educators wanted
more information than the single score from the Binet. Wechsler's ten or
more subtests provided this. Another is that the Stanford–Binet test
reflected mostly verbal abilities, while the Wechsler test also
reflected nonverbal abilities. The Stanford–Binet has also been revised
several times and is now similar to the Wechsler in several aspects, but
the Wechsler continues to be the most popular test in the United
States.
IQ testing and the eugenics movement in the United States
Eugenics, a set of beliefs and practices aimed at improving the genetic quality of the human population by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior and promoting those judged to be superior, played a significant role in the history and culture of the United States during the Progressive Era, from the late 19th century until US involvement in World War II.
The American eugenics movement was rooted in the biological determinist ideas of the British Scientist Sir Francis Galton.
In 1883, Galton first used the word eugenics to describe the biological
improvement of human genes and the concept of being "well-born".
He believed that differences in a person's ability were acquired
primarily through genetics and that eugenics could be implemented
through selective breeding in order for the human race to improve in its overall quality, therefore allowing for humans to direct their own evolution.
Henry H. Goddard was a eugenicist. In 1908, he published his own version, The Binet and Simon Test of Intellectual Capacity, and cordially promoted the test. He quickly extended the use of the scale to the public schools (1913), to immigration (Ellis Island, 1914) and to a court of law (1914).
Unlike Galton, who promoted eugenics through selective breeding
for positive traits, Goddard went with the US eugenics movement to
eliminate "undesirable" traits. Goddard used the term "feeble-minded"
to refer to people who did not perform well on the test. He argued that
"feeble-mindedness" was caused by heredity, and thus feeble-minded
people should be prevented from giving birth, either by institutional
isolation or sterilization surgeries.
At first, sterilization targeted the disabled, but was later extended
to poor people. Goddard's intelligence test was endorsed by the
eugenicists to push for laws for forced sterilization. Different states
adopted the sterilization laws at different paces. These laws, whose
constitutionality was upheld by the Supreme Court in their 1927 ruling Buck v. Bell, forced over 60,000 people to go through sterilization in the United States.
California's sterilization program was so effective that the
Nazis turned to the government for advice on how to prevent the birth of
the "unfit".
While the US eugenics movement lost much of its momentum in the 1940s
in view of the horrors of Nazi Germany, advocates of eugenics (including
Nazi geneticist Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer) continued to work and promote their ideas in the United States.
In later decades, some eugenic principles have made a resurgence as a
voluntary means of selective reproduction, with some calling them "new eugenics". As it becomes possible to test for and correlate genes with IQ (and its proxies), ethicists and embryonic genetic testing companies are attempting to understand the ways in which the technology can be ethically deployed.
Raymond Cattell (1941) proposed two types of cognitive abilities in a revision of Spearman's concept of general intelligence. Fluid intelligence (Gf) was hypothesized as the ability to solve novel problems by using reasoning, and crystallized intelligence
(Gc) was hypothesized as a knowledge-based ability that was very
dependent on education and experience. In addition, fluid intelligence
was hypothesized to decline with age, while crystallized intelligence
was largely resistant to the effects of aging. The theory was almost
forgotten, but was revived by his student John L. Horn
(1966) who later argued Gf and Gc were only two among several factors,
and who eventually identified nine or ten broad abilities. The theory
continued to be called Gf-Gc theory.
John B. Carroll (1993), after a comprehensive reanalysis of earlier data, proposed the three stratum theory,
which is a hierarchical model with three levels. The bottom stratum
consists of narrow abilities that are highly specialized (e.g.,
induction, spelling ability). The second stratum consists of broad
abilities. Carroll identified eight second-stratum abilities. Carroll
accepted Spearman's concept of general intelligence, for the most part,
as a representation of the uppermost, third stratum.
In 1999, a merging of the Gf-Gc theory of Cattell and Horn with
Carroll's Three-Stratum theory has led to the Cattell–Horn–Carroll
theory (CHC Theory), with g as the top of the hierarchy, ten
broad abilities below, and further subdivided into seventy narrow
abilities on the third stratum. CHC Theory has greatly influenced many
of the current broad IQ tests.
Modern tests do not necessarily measure all of these broad abilities. For example, quantitative knowledge and reading & writing ability may be seen as measures of school achievement and not IQ. Decision speed may be difficult to measure without special equipment. g
was earlier often subdivided into only Gf and Gc, which were thought to
correspond to the nonverbal or performance subtests and verbal subtests
in earlier versions of the popular Wechsler IQ test. More recent
research has shown the situation to be more complex.
Modern comprehensive IQ tests do not stop at reporting a single IQ
score. Although they still give an overall score, they now also give
scores for many of these more restricted abilities, identifying
particular strengths and weaknesses of an individual.
Other theories
An alternative to standard IQ tests, meant to test the proximal development of children, originated in the writings of psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1896–1934) during his last two years of his life. According to Vygotsky, the maximum level of complexity and difficulty
of problems that a child is capable to solve under some guidance
indicates their level of potential development. The difference between
this level of potential and the lower level of unassisted performance
indicates the child's zone of proximal development.
Combination of the two indexes—the level of actual and the zone of the
proximal development—according to Vygotsky, provides a significantly
more informative indicator of psychological development than the
assessment of the level of actual development alone.
His ideas on the zone of development were later developed in a number
of psychological and educational theories and practices, most notably
under the banner of dynamic assessment, which seeks to measure developmental potential (for instance, in the work of Reuven Feuerstein and his associates, who has criticized standard IQ testing
for its putative assumption or acceptance of "fixed and immutable"
characteristics of intelligence or cognitive functioning). Dynamic
assessment has been further elaborated in the work of Ann Brown, and John D. Bransford and in theories of multiple intelligences authored by Howard Gardner and Robert Sternberg.
J.P. Guilford's Structure of Intellect
(1967) model of intelligence used three dimensions, which, when
combined, yielded a total of 120 types of intelligence. It was popular
in the 1970s and early 1980s, but faded owing to both practical problems
and theoretical criticisms.
Alexander Luria's
earlier work on neuropsychological processes led to the PASS theory
(1997). It argued that only looking at one general factor was inadequate
for researchers and clinicians who worked with learning disabilities,
attention disorders, intellectual disability, and interventions for such
disabilities. The PASS model covers four kinds of processes (planning
process, attention/arousal process, simultaneous processing, and
successive processing). The planning processes involve decision making,
problem solving, and performing activities and require goal setting and
self-monitoring.
The attention/arousal process involves selectively attending to a
particular stimulus, ignoring distractions, and maintaining vigilance.
Simultaneous processing involves the integration of stimuli into a group
and requires the observation of relationships. Successive processing
involves the integration of stimuli into serial order. The planning and
attention/arousal components comes from structures located in the
frontal lobe, and the simultaneous and successive processes come from
structures located in the posterior region of the cortex. It has influenced some recent IQ tests, and been seen as a complement to the Cattell–Horn–Carroll theory described above.
Current tests
Normalized IQ distribution with mean 100 and standard deviation 15
IQ scales are ordinally scaled. The raw score of the norming sample is usually (rank order) transformed to a normal distribution with mean 100 and standard deviation 15. While one standard deviation
is 15 points, and two SDs are 30 points, and so on, this does not imply
that mental ability is linearly related to IQ, such that IQ 50 would
mean half the cognitive ability of IQ 100. In particular, IQ points are
not percentage points.
Reliability and validity
IQ scores can differ to some degree for the same person on
different IQ tests, so a person does not always belong to the same IQ
score range each time the person is tested. (IQ score table data and
pupil pseudonyms adapted from description of KABC-II norming study cited
in Kaufman (2009).)
Pupil
KABC-II
WISC-III
WJ-III
A
90
95
111
B
125
110
105
C
100
93
101
D
116
127
118
E
93
105
93
F
106
105
105
G
95
100
90
H
112
113
103
I
104
96
97
J
101
99
86
K
81
78
75
L
116
124
102
Reliability
Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. Reliability represents the measurement consistency of a test. A reliable test produces similar scores upon repetition.
On aggregate, IQ tests exhibit high reliability, although test-takers
may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing
occasions, and may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at
the same age. Like all statistical quantities, any particular estimate
of IQ has an associated standard error that measures uncertainty about
the estimate. For modern tests, the confidence interval can be
approximately 10 points and reported standard error of measurement can be as low as about three points. Reported standard error may be an underestimate, as it does not account for all sources of error.
Outside influences such as low motivation or high anxiety can occasionally lower a person's IQ test score.
For individuals with very low scores, the 95% confidence interval may
be greater than 40 points, potentially complicating the accuracy of
diagnoses of intellectual disability. By the same token, high IQ scores are also significantly less reliable than those near to the population median. Reports of IQ scores much higher than 160 are considered dubious.
Validity as a measure of intelligence
Reliability
and validity are very different concepts. While reliability reflects
reproducibility, validity refers to whether the test measures what it
purports to measure.
While IQ tests are generally considered to measure some forms of
intelligence, they may fail to serve as an accurate measure of broader
definitions of human intelligence inclusive of, for example, creativity and social intelligence. For this reason, psychologist Wayne Weiten argues that their construct validity must be carefully qualified, and not be overstated.
According to Weiten, "IQ tests are valid measures of the kind of
intelligence necessary to do well in academic work. But if the purpose
is to assess intelligence in a broader sense, the validity of IQ tests
is questionable."
Some scientists have disputed the value of IQ as a measure of intelligence altogether. In The Mismeasure of Man (1981, expanded edition 1996), evolutionary biologistStephen Jay Gould compared IQ testing with the now-discredited practice of determining intelligence via craniometry, arguing that both are based on the fallacy of reification, "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities". Gould's argument sparked a great deal of debate, and the book is listed as one of Discover Magazine's "25 Greatest Science Books of All Time".
Along these same lines, critics such as Keith Stanovich
do not dispute the capacity of IQ test scores to predict some kinds of
achievement, but argue that basing a concept of intelligence on IQ test
scores alone neglects other important aspects of mental ability. Robert Sternberg,
another significant critic of IQ as the main measure of human cognitive
abilities, argued that reducing the concept of intelligence to the
measure of g does not fully account for the different skills and knowledge types that produce success in human society.
Despite these objections, clinical psychologists generally regard IQ scores as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.
Test bias or differential item functioning
Differential
item functioning (DIF), sometimes referred to as measurement bias, is a
phenomenon when participants from different groups (e.g. gender, race,
disability) with the same latent abilities give different answers to specific questions on the same IQ test.
DIF analysis measures such specific items on a test alongside measuring
participants' latent abilities on other similar questions. A consistent
different group response to a specific question among similar types of
questions can indicate an effect of DIF. It does not count as
differential item functioning if both groups have an equally valid
chance of giving different responses to the same questions. Such bias
can be a result of culture, educational level and other factors that are
independent of group traits. DIF is only considered if test-takers from
different groups with the same underlying latent ability level have a different chance of giving specific responses.
Such questions are usually removed in order to make the test equally
fair for both groups. Common techniques for analyzing DIF are item response theory (IRT) based methods, Mantel-Haenszel, and logistic regression.
A 2005 study found that "differential validity in prediction suggests that the WAIS-R
test may contain cultural influences that reduce the validity of the
WAIS-R as a measure of cognitive ability for Mexican American students,"
indicating a weaker positive correlation relative to sampled white
students. Other recent studies have questioned the culture-fairness of
IQ tests when used in South Africa. Standard intelligence tests, such as the Stanford–Binet, are often inappropriate for autistic
children; the alternative of using developmental or adaptive skills
measures are relatively poor measures of intelligence in autistic
children, and may have resulted in incorrect claims that a majority of
autistic children are of low intelligence.
Since the early 20th century, raw scores on IQ tests have increased in most parts of the world.
When a new version of an IQ test is normed, the standard scoring is set
so performance at the population median results in a score of IQ 100.
The phenomenon of rising raw score performance means if test-takers are
scored by a constant standard scoring rule, IQ test scores have been
rising at an average rate of around three IQ points per decade. This
phenomenon was named the Flynn effect in the book The Bell Curve after James R. Flynn, the author who did the most to bring this phenomenon to the attention of psychologists.
Researchers have been exploring the issue of whether the Flynn
effect is equally strong on performance of all kinds of IQ test items,
whether the effect may have ended in some developed nations, whether
there are social subgroup differences in the effect, and what possible
causes of the effect might be. A 2011 textbook, IQ and Human Intelligence, by N. J. Mackintosh,
noted the Flynn effect demolishes the fears that IQ would be decreased.
He also asks whether it represents a real increase in intelligence
beyond IQ scores. A 2011 psychology textbook, lead authored by Harvard Psychologist Professor Daniel Schacter, noted that humans' inherited intelligence could be going down while acquired intelligence goes up.
Research has suggested that the Flynn effect has slowed or
reversed course in some Western countries beginning in the late 20th
century. The phenomenon has been termed the negative Flynn effect.
A study of Norwegian military conscripts' test records found that IQ
scores have been falling for generations born after the year 1975, and
that the underlying cause of both initial increasing and subsequent
falling trends appears to be environmental rather than genetic.
Age
IQ can change to some degree over the course of childhood.
In one longitudinal study, the mean IQ scores of tests at ages 17 and
18 were correlated at r=0.86 with the mean scores of tests at ages five,
six, and seven and at r=0.96 with the mean scores of tests at ages 11, 12, and 13.
For decades, practitioners' handbooks and textbooks on IQ testing
have reported IQ declines with age after the beginning of adulthood.
However, later researchers pointed out this phenomenon is related to the
Flynn effect and is in part a cohort
effect rather than a true aging effect. A variety of studies of IQ and
aging have been conducted since the norming of the first Wechsler
Intelligence Scale drew attention to IQ differences in different age
groups of adults. The current consensus is that fluid intelligence generally declines with age after early adulthood, while crystallized intelligence
remains intact. Both cohort effects (the birth year of the test-takers)
and practice effects (test-takers taking the same form of IQ test more
than once) must be controlled to gain accurate data. It is unclear whether any lifestyle intervention can preserve fluid intelligence into older ages.
The exact peak age of fluid intelligence or crystallized
intelligence remains elusive. Cross-sectional studies usually show that
especially fluid intelligence peaks at a relatively young age (often in
the early adulthood) while longitudinal data mostly show that
intelligence is stable until mid-adulthood or later. Subsequently,
intelligence seems to decline slowly.
Genetics and environment
Environmental and genetic factors play a role in determining IQ. Their relative importance has been the subject of much research and debate.
The general figure for the heritability of IQ, according to an American Psychological Association report, is 0.45 for children, and rises to around 0.75 for late adolescents and adults. Heritability measures for g factor in infancy are as low as 0.2, around 0.4 in middle childhood, and as high as 0.9 in adulthood.
One proposed explanation is that people with different genes tend to
reinforce the effects of those genes, for example by seeking out
different environments.
Shared family environment
Family
members have aspects of environments in common (for example,
characteristics of the home). This shared family environment accounts
for 0.25–0.35 of the variation in IQ in childhood. By late adolescence,
it is quite low (zero in some studies). The effect for several other
psychological traits is similar. These studies have not looked at the
effects of extreme environments, such as in abusive families.
Non-shared family environment and environment outside the family
Although
parents treat their children differently, such differential treatment
explains only a small amount of nonshared environmental influence. One
suggestion is that children react differently to the same environment
because of different genes. More likely influences may be the impact of
peers and other experiences outside the family.
Individual genes
A
very large proportion of the over 17,000 human genes are thought to
have an effect on the development and functionality of the brain.
While a number of individual genes have been reported to be associated
with IQ, none have a strong effect. Deary and colleagues (2009) reported
that no finding of a strong single gene effect on IQ has been
replicated.
Recent findings of gene associations with normally varying intellectual
differences in adults and children continue to show weak effects for
any one gene.
Gene-environment interaction
David Rowe reported an interaction of genetic effects with socioeconomic status, such that the heritability was high in high-SES families, but much lower in low-SES families. In the US, this has been replicated in infants, children, adolescents, and adults. Outside the US, studies show no link between heritability and SES. Some effects may even reverse sign outside the US.
Dickens and Flynn (2001) have argued that genes for high IQ initiate an environment-shaping feedback cycle,
with genetic effects causing bright children to seek out more
stimulating environments that then further increase their IQ. In
Dickens' model, environment effects are modeled as decaying over time.
In this model, the Flynn effect can be explained by an increase in
environmental stimulation independent of it being sought out by
individuals. The authors suggest that programs aiming to increase IQ
would be most likely to produce long-term IQ gains if they enduringly
raised children's drive to seek out cognitively demanding experiences.
Interventions
In
general, educational interventions, as those described below, have
shown short-term effects on IQ, but long-term follow-up is often
missing. For example, in the US, very large intervention programs such
as the Head Start Program
have not produced lasting gains in IQ scores. Even when students
improve their scores on standardized tests, they do not always improve
their cognitive abilities, such as memory, attention and speed. More intensive, but much smaller projects, such as the Abecedarian Project, have reported lasting effects, often on socioeconomic status variables, rather than IQ.
Recent studies have shown that training in using one's working memory
may increase IQ. A study on young adults published in April 2008 by a
team from the Universities of Michigan and Bern supports the possibility
of the transfer of fluid intelligence from specifically designed working memory training.
Further research will be needed to determine nature, extent and
duration of the proposed transfer. Among other questions, it remains to
be seen whether the results extend to other kinds of fluid intelligence
tests than the matrix test used in the study, and if so, whether, after
training, fluid intelligence measures retain their correlation with
educational and occupational achievement or if the value of fluid
intelligence for predicting performance on other tasks changes. It is
also unclear whether the training is durable for extended periods of
time.
Musical training in childhood correlates with higher than average IQ. However, a study of 10,500 twins found no effects on IQ, suggesting that the correlation was caused by genetic confounders.
A meta-analysis concluded that "Music training does not reliably
enhance children and young adolescents' cognitive or academic skills,
and that previous positive findings were probably due to confounding
variables."
It is popularly thought that listening to classical music raises IQ. However, multiple attempted replications (e.g.)
have shown that this is at best a short-term effect (lasting no longer
than 10 to 15 minutes), and is not related to IQ-increase.
Several neurophysiological factors have been correlated with
intelligence in humans, including the ratio of brain weight to body
weight and the size, shape, and activity level of different parts of the
brain. Specific features that may affect IQ include the size and shape
of the frontal lobes, the amount of blood and chemical activity in the
frontal lobes, the total amount of gray matter in the brain, the overall
thickness of the cortex, and the glucose metabolic rate.
Health is important in understanding differences in IQ test scores
and other measures of cognitive ability. Several factors can lead to
significant cognitive impairment, particularly if they occur during
pregnancy and childhood when the brain is growing and the blood–brain
barrier is less effective. Such impairment may sometimes be permanent,
or sometimes be partially or wholly compensated for by later growth.
Since about 2010, researchers such as Eppig, Hassel, and
MacKenzie have found a very close and consistent link between IQ scores
and infectious diseases, especially in the infant and preschool
populations and the mothers of these children.
They have postulated that fighting infectious diseases strains the
child's metabolism and prevents full brain development. Hassel
postulated that it is by far the most important factor in determining
population IQ. However, they also found that subsequent factors such as
good nutrition and regular quality schooling can offset early negative
effects to some extent.
Developed nations have implemented several health policies
regarding nutrients and toxins known to influence cognitive function.
These include laws requiring fortification of certain food products and
laws establishing safe levels of pollutants (e.g. lead, mercury,
and organochlorides). Improvements in nutrition, and in public policy
in general, have been implicated in worldwide IQ increases.
Cognitive epidemiology is a field of research that examines the
associations between intelligence test scores and health. Researchers in
the field argue that intelligence measured at an early age is an
important predictor of later health and mortality differences.
Social correlations
School performance
The American Psychological Association's report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns
states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on
tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school
than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and
grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%.
Achieving good grades depends on many factors other than IQ, such as
"persistence, interest in school, and willingness to study" (p. 81).
It has been found that the correlation of IQ scores with school
performance depends on the IQ measurement used. For undergraduate
students, the Verbal IQ as measured by WAIS-R has been found to
correlate significantly (0.53) with the grade point average (GPA) of the
last 60 hours (credits). In contrast, Performance IQ correlation with
the same GPA was only 0.22 in the same study.
Some measures of educational aptitude correlate highly with IQ tests – for instance, Frey & Detterman (2004) reported a correlation of 0.82 between g (general intelligence factor) and SAT scores; another research found a correlation of 0.81 between g and GCSE scores, with the explained variance ranging "from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design".
Job performance
According
to Schmidt and Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous
experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is
general mental ability." The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance
is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of
job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6. The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods was controlled for. While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function, IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations.
That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management)
low IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance,
whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual
strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) is more likely to influence
performance.
The prevailing view among academics is that it is largely through the
quicker acquisition of job-relevant knowledge that higher IQ mediates
job performance. This view has been challenged by Byington & Felps
(2010), who argued that "the current applications of IQ-reflective tests
allow individuals with high IQ scores to receive greater access to
developmental resources, enabling them to acquire additional
capabilities over time, and ultimately perform their jobs better."
Newer studies find that the effects of IQ on job performance have
been greatly overestimated. The current estimates of the correlation
between job performance and IQ are about 0.23 correcting for
unreliability and range restriction.
In establishing a causal direction to the link between IQ and
work performance, longitudinal studies by Watkins and others suggest
that IQ exerts a causal influence on future academic achievement,
whereas academic achievement does not substantially influence future IQ
scores.
Treena Eileen Rohde and Lee Anne Thompson write that general cognitive
ability, but not specific ability scores, predict academic achievement,
with the exception that processing speed and spatial ability predict
performance on the SAT math beyond the effect of general cognitive
ability.
However, large-scale longitudinal studies indicate an increase in
IQ translates into an increase in performance at all levels of IQ: i.e.
ability and job performance are monotonically linked at all IQ levels.
Income
It has
been suggested that "in economic terms it appears that the IQ score
measures something with decreasing marginal value" and it "is important
to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that
much".
The link from IQ to wealth is much less strong than that from IQ
to job performance. Some studies indicate that IQ is unrelated to net
worth. The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns
stated that IQ scores accounted for about a quarter of the social
status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical
controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive
power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many
factors that influence social outcomes. Charles Murray (1998) showed a more substantial effect of IQ on income independent of family background.
In a meta-analysis, Strenze (2006) reviewed much of the literature and
estimated the correlation between IQ and income to be about 0.23.
Some studies assert that IQ only accounts for (explains) a sixth
of the variation in income because many studies are based on young
adults, many of whom have not yet reached their peak earning capacity,
or even their education. On pg 568 of The g Factor, Arthur Jensen
says that although the correlation between IQ and income averages a
moderate 0.4 (one-sixth or 16% of the variance), the relationship
increases with age, and peaks at middle age when people have reached
their maximum career potential. In the book, A Question of Intelligence, Daniel Seligman cites an IQ income correlation of 0.5 (25% of the variance).
A 2002 study
further examined the impact of non-IQ factors on income and concluded
that an individual's location, inherited wealth, race, and schooling are
more important as factors in determining income than IQ.
Crime
The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlation between IQ and crime
was −0.2. This association is generally regarded as small and prone to
disappearance or a substantial reduction after controlling for the
proper covariates, being much smaller than typical sociological
correlates.
It was −0.19 between IQ scores and the number of juvenile offenses in a
large Danish sample; with social class controlled for, the correlation
dropped to −0.17. A correlation of 0.20 means that the explained variance
accounts for 4% of the total variance. The causal links between
psychometric ability and social outcomes may be indirect. Children with
poor scholastic performance may feel alienated. Consequently, they may
be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior, compared to other
children who do well.
In his book The g Factor (1998), Arthur Jensen
cited data which showed that, regardless of race, people with IQs
between 70 and 90 have higher crime rates than people with IQs below or
above this range, with the peak range being between 80 and 90.
The 2009 Handbook of Crime Correlates stated that reviews
have found that around eight IQ points, or 0.5 SD, separate criminals
from the general population, especially for persistent serious
offenders. It has been suggested that this simply reflects that "only
dumb ones get caught" but there is similarly a negative relation between
IQ and self-reported offending. That children with conduct disorder have lower IQ than their peers "strongly argues" for the theory.
A study of the relationship between US county-level IQ and US
county-level crime rates found that higher average IQs were very weakly
associated with lower levels of property crime, burglary, larceny rate,
motor vehicle theft, violent crime, robbery, and aggravated assault.
These results were "not confounded by a measure of concentrated
disadvantage that captures the effects of race, poverty, and other
social disadvantages of the county."
However, this study is limited in that it extrapolated Add Health
estimates to the respondent's counties, and as the dataset was not
designed to be representative on the state or county level, it may not
be generalizable.
It has also been shown that the effect of IQ is heavily dependent
on socioeconomic status and that it cannot be easily controlled away,
with many methodological considerations being at play.
Indeed, there is evidence that the small relationship is mediated by
well-being, substance abuse, and other confounding factors that prohibit
simple causal interpretation.
A recent meta-analysis has shown that the relationship is only observed
in higher risk populations such as those in poverty without direct
effect, but without any causal interpretation. A nationally representative longitudinal study has shown that this relationship is entirely mediated by school performance.
Health and mortality
Multiple
studies conducted in Scotland have found that higher IQs in early life
are associated with lower mortality and morbidity rates later in life.
Other accomplishments
Average adult combined IQs associated with real-life accomplishments by various tests:
Elementary school graduates (completed eighth grade)
90
Elementary school dropouts (completed 0–7 years of school)
80–85
Have 50/50 chance of reaching high school
75
Average IQ of various occupational groups:
Accomplishment
IQ
Test/study
Year
Professional and technical
112
Managers and administrators
104
Clerical workers, sales workers, skilled workers, craftsmen, and foremen
101
Semi-skilled workers (operatives, service workers, including private household)
92
Unskilled workers
87
Type of work that can be accomplished:
Accomplishment
IQ
Test/study
Year
Adults can harvest vegetables, repair furniture
60
Adults can do domestic work
50
There is considerable variation within and overlap among these
categories. People with high IQs are found at all levels of education
and occupational categories. The biggest difference occurs for low IQs
with only an occasional college graduate or professional scoring below
90.
Group differences
Among
the most controversial issues related to the study of intelligence is
the observation that IQ scores vary on average between ethnic and racial
groups, though these differences have fluctuated and in many cases
steadily decreased over time.
While there is little scholarly debate about the continued existence of
some of these differences, the current scientific consensus is that
they stem from environmental rather than genetic causes. The existence of differences in IQ between the sexes has been debated, and largely depends on which tests are performed.
While the concept of "race" is a social construct,
discussions of a purported relationship between race and intelligence,
as well as claims of genetic differences in intelligence along racial
lines, have appeared in both popular science and academic research
since the modern concept of race was first introduced. Despite the
tremendous amount of research done on the topic, no scientific evidence
has emerged that the average IQ scores of different population groups
can be attributed to genetic differences between those groups. Growing evidence indicates that environmental factors, not genetic ones, explain the racial IQ gap.
A 1996 task force investigation on intelligence sponsored by the American Psychological Association concluded that there were significant variations in IQ across races. However, a systematic analysis by William Dickens and James Flynn
(2006) showed the gap between black and white Americans to have closed
dramatically during the period between 1972 and 2002, suggesting that,
in their words, the "constancy of the Black–White IQ gap is a myth".
The problem of determining the causes underlying racial variation has been discussed at length as a classic question of "nature versus nurture", for instance by Alan S. Kaufman and Nathan Brody. Researchers such as statistician Bernie Devlin have argued that there are insufficient data to conclude that the black–white gap is due to genetic influences.
Dickens and Flynn argued more positively that their results refute the
possibility of a genetic origin, concluding that "the environment has
been responsible" for observed differences.
A review article published in 2012 by leading scholars on human
intelligence reached a similar conclusion, after reviewing the prior
research literature, that group differences in IQ are best understood as
environmental in origin.
More recently, geneticist and neuroscientist Kevin Mitchell has argued,
on the basis of basic principles of population genetics, that
"systematic genetic differences in intelligence between large, ancient
populations" are "inherently and deeply implausible".
The effects of stereotype threat have been proposed as an explanation for differences in IQ test performance between racial groups, as have issues related to cultural difference and access to education.
With the advent of the concept of g or general intelligence, many researchers have found that there are no significant sex differences in general intelligence, though ability in particular types of intelligence does vary. Thus, while some test batteries show slightly greater intelligence in males, others show greater intelligence in females. In particular, studies have shown female subjects performing better on tasks related to verbal ability, and males performing better on tasks related to rotation of objects in space, often categorized as spatial ability. These differences remain, as Hunt (2011) observes, "even though men and women are essentially equal in general intelligence".
Some research indicates that male advantages on some cognitive tests are minimized when controlling for socioeconomic factors. Other research has concluded that there is slightly larger variability in male scores in certain areas compared to female scores, which results in slightly more males than females in the top and bottom of the IQ distribution.
The existence of differences between male and female performance on math-related tests is contested,
and a meta-analysis focusing on average gender differences in math
performance found nearly identical performance for boys and girls.
Currently, most IQ tests, including popular batteries such as the WAIS
and the WISC-R, are constructed so that there are no overall score
differences between females and males.
In the United States, certain public policies and laws regarding military service, education, public benefits, capital punishment, and employment incorporate an individual's IQ into their decisions. However, in the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co. in 1971, for the purpose of minimizing employment practices that disparately impacted racial minorities, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the use of IQ tests in employment, except when linked to job performance via a job analysis. Internationally, certain public policies, such as improving nutrition and prohibiting neurotoxins, have as one of their goals raising, or preventing a decline in, intelligence.
A diagnosis of intellectual disability is in part based on the results of IQ testing. Borderline intellectual functioning
is the categorization of individuals of below-average cognitive ability
(an IQ of 71–85), although not as low as those with an intellectual
disability (70 or below).
In the United Kingdom, the eleven plus exam
which incorporated an intelligence test has been used from 1945 to
decide, at eleven years of age, which type of school a child should go
to. They have been much less used since the widespread introduction of comprehensive schools.
Physicist Stephen Hawking. When asked his IQ, he replied: "I have no idea. People who boast about their IQ are losers."
IQ classification is the practice used by IQ test publishers for
designating IQ score ranges into various categories with labels such as
"superior" or "average".
IQ classification was preceded historically by attempts to classify
human beings by general ability based on other forms of behavioral
observation. Those other forms of behavioral observation are still
important for validating classifications based on IQ tests.
There are social organizations, some international, which limit
membership to people who have scores as high as or higher than the 98th
percentile (two standard deviations above the mean) on some IQ test or
equivalent. Mensa International is perhaps the best known of these. The largest 99.9th percentile (three standard deviations above the mean) society is the Triple Nine Society.
![[picture of an example IQ test item]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Raven_Matrix.svg)
