Intelligence Quotient.

The concept of mental age (MA) is of limited value because it is

suggested that a ratio based on the comparison of mental age with chronological age
would tend to be relatively stable. Stern proposed the following formula:
IQ = MA/CA * 100
IQ stands for intelligence quotient. The IQ is a score derived from one of several
different standardized tests designed to assess intelligence. The IQ is a quotient because
it is the result of a division process. MA stands for mental age. CA stands for
chronological age.
CA is divided into MA and multiplied by 100. Stern suggested the multiplication
step be employed with the aim of getting rid of decimals in the final quotient. For
example, instead of an IQ being reported as 1.15, it is reported as 115.
Research has demonstrated that the IQ score is a random variable, meaning a
variable distributed according to the laws of chance. This means that in a large sample of
scores the scores will tend to take on a bell-shaped distribution. This distribution, well
studied by statisticians, goes by three names: (1) the bell- shaped curve, (2) the
normal curve, and (3) the Gaussian curve. The third name is in honor of the
nineteenth-century German mathematician Karl Friedrich Gauss, who first studied the
curve’s properties.
IQ Categories
IQ Classification Percent
130 and above Very Superior 2.2
120-129 Superior 6.7
110-119 Bright Normal 16.1
90-109 Normal (or Average) 50.0
80-89 Dull Normal 16.1
70-79 Borderline 6.7
69 and below Cognitively Deficient 2.2

IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and
mortality, parental social status, and to a substantial degree, parental IQ. While the
heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, controversy remains
regarding the significance of heritability estimates, and the mechanisms of inheritance
are still a matter of some debate.
Environmental factors play a role in determining IQ. Proper childhood nutrition
appears critical for cognitive development; malnutrition can lower IQ. For example,
iodine deficiency causes a fall, in average, of 12 IQ points.
Musical training in childhood may also increase IQ. Recent studies have shown
that training in using one's working memory may increase IQ.

Intelligence tests. Many uses are made of intelligence tests. Students are given
them periodically in school. Everyone who serves in the armed forces takes at least one
such test. Many large businesses also give them to job applicants. In each case there is
one objective--to find out how well a person is able to learn. There are two general types
of intelligence tests: individual and group. The first is given to one person at a time. The
second type is administered to a number of people at the same time.
Intelligence tests differ in the nature of the psychological theories underlying
them, and in the procedures employed in standardizing them. Therefore, the results
obtained by these examinations must be well understood and cautiously used.
Some tests are less successful than others in determining a person's basic
intelligence. Their results may reflect, instead, the person's background and experience.
Furthermore, the older the person, the more probable it is that his experience will affect
the test results.
Intelligence test scores can be used in school to predict a child's performance in
learning to read, in comprehending difficult reading matter or written directions, or in
interpreting experiments. These tasks involve primarily verbal competence, the ability to
generalize, or abstract reasoning. The scores are less useful for predicting success in
such things as handwriting, shopwork, typing, or painting. Only qualified and trained
persons should attempt to interpret the results of intelligence tests. Devices such as
personality or achievement examinations are not reliable measures of intelligence
though intellectual ability may be involved, to a certain extent, in answering the
questions on these tests.
Testing Problems. Validity and reliability are important aspects of any kind of
measurement and testing. Intelligence tests are—like gauges, clocks, and rulers
measuring instruments.
Consequently, before they can be used to measure intelligence with any degree
of confidence, their validity and reliability must be assessed.
A valid test is one that measures what it is supposed to measure. If an
intelligence test really does in fact measure intelligence, then it is valid. But how can one
ascertain that the test is valid? Just because the questions in a test seem valid does not
mean they actually are. This kind of validity is called face validity, meaning that the
questions have a surface appearance of validity.
In order to evaluate the validity of an intelligence test, it is necessary to compare
test scores with an outside criterion. An outside criterion is a measurement instrument
that is independent of the intelligence test being evaluated. A useful outside criterion is
grade point average. If intelligence means anything at all, then students with high IQ
scores should have high grade point averages. In research, this relationship is evaluated
with a statistical tool called the correlation coefficient, a measure of the magnitude of
the relationship between two variables.
If the correlation between IQ scores and grade point average is high, then it
seems reasonable to conclude that the intelligence test in question has validity.

The higher the correlation coefficient, the more valid the test is considered to be. Other
outside criteria that can be used are teacher ratings and evaluations made by parents. A
reliable test is one that gives stable, repeatable results.
An intelligence test has to be carefully assessed for reliability. This is also
accomplished with the use of the correlation coefficient. Let’s say that a 100- question
test is split into two versions, Form A and Form B. The original 100 questions are
randomly assigned to two forms. Form A has 50 questions. Form B has 50 questions.
The two tests are administered, for example, one week apart to the same group of
children. If one obtains an IQ score of 119 on Form A, he or she should obtain a score
close to 119 on Form B. However, if a person obtains 119 on form A and 87 on Form B,
the reliability of the test is in question. Comparing paired scores for each child in the
group, a high score on Form A should predict a high score on Form B. And a low score
on Form A should predict a low score on Form B. If these predictions aren’t obtained,
then the test is not reliable.
The two related factors of validity and reliability generate four possibilities for
any kind of measuring instrument. The instrument may be neither valid nor reliable,
valid, but not reliable, reliable, but not valid, both valid and reliable. This fourth happy
circumstance is the one we usually associate with rulers, clocks, and thermometers.
These are the primary measuring instruments of physics. They are some of the reasons
why it has such a high status as a science.
In psychology, both personality tests and intelligence tests are forced to deal with
the mutual problems of validity and reliability. Fortunately, with the use of the
correlation coefficient applied to large sets of scores, a reasonable level of validity and
reliability can be obtained. The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and the Wechsler
Scales have been subjected to a substantial amount of scrutiny and evaluation. On the
whole, they are considered to be both valid and reliable measuring instruments.