Flynn Effect – IQ Test Scores say We Are Getting Smarter Every Year

Are we getting smarter or do we have more access to information?

It's hard for me to tell in day to day life but apparently people are getting smarter. It's called the Flynn Effect.

Human Intelligence

The Flynn Effect deals with the issue of how the general IQ scores of a population change over time. Below are three graphs indicating possible trends and fluctuations of IQ scores over time. Click on the image which most accurately portrays how you think IQ scores have changed with time?

Oddly enough... while standardized testing in schools doesn't reflect an increase in intelligence IQ scores do.

What does that tell us about our school system? I'm going to guess the internet has more to do with any increase in awareness or intelligence than any of our archaic school systems.

Human Intelligence

Ironically, in spite of the fact that children spend longer on average in school than in previous decades, the Flynn Effect does not show up on the parts of standardized tests that measure school-related subjects. That is, tests of vocabulary, arithmetic, or general knowledge (such as the sorts of facts one learns in school) have showed little increase, but scores have increased markedly on tests thought to measure ‘general intelligence’ (or ‘g’), such as Raven’s Progressive Matrices which require mental manipulation of objects, logical inference, or other abstract reasoning.

So what do you think? Are people getting more intelligent? Why doesn't it reflect in the standardized test scores and is our model of education going to stay relevant in an increasingly changing world?

Better health and access to food makes smarter people

I'm actually surprised by this. I thought for sure stupid people were vastly out-breeding smart people and that it would have a detrimental effect.

I think we all know our current education system (at least up to high school level) is barely any better than the learn-by-rote repetition based learning of centuries past, but I'm not sure of a better way to engage modern kids as a whole. We all learn best in different ways, some learn better from reading, some from practical examples, some from listening.

I think there would need to be massive reform in order to improve our current education system to something notably better - though obviously some inner-city schools could clearly use more funding and motivated teachers in the short term.

I think perhaps in the near future our education will be designed on an individual basis for each person based on their learning styles.

I wonder if we are getting smarter in spite of our education simply by means of slowly evolving (or perhaps just society evolving) to be more cunning? I mean, all the challenges humans face are caused for the most part by other humans. Most of us compete only with each other.

a reply to: onequestion

If you beat rocks together for a living as in the stone age, you range of concepts are going to be very limited to that "what is" about the universe. Throw in Google and concepts become unlimited. Where is there any doubt? That is not to say that "smarter" is better.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: onequestion
That is not to say that "smarter" is better.

Ahaha, wise, you remind me of a System of a Down lyric;

Stupid people do stupid things,
Smart people outsmart each other,
Then themselves, then themselves.

edit:

No point me taking a 3rd post in this thread, just wanted to add that I think if we added regular debating/debates to the curriculum it would go a long way in making people think for themselves.

a reply to: onequestion
I think there are two things to do with information.
One is how we collect it and the other is what we do with that information. How we arrange it and connect it within our selves and use it to build our own interpretation of reality.
Gathering information in the first manner can lead to people who accumulate trivia yet know little of what it all means in a larger context and allow for IQ test success while the other manner it serves as building blocks for a more enlightened approach to being.

a reply to: onequestion

IQ and standardized testing are measuring different things, furthermore IQ is measuring different things for adults and children. The reason standardized testing doesn't reflect things though is because of the grading system. Schools are encouraged to grade such that a student improves throughout the year, not necessarily in learning more material but rather than they go from being a C student at the start to an A student at the end.

The effect you're talking about is very real though, there's more access to knowledge and teaching methods are improving, that's leading to people becoming smarter over time. It's typically quoted as being worth 3 points/year but I suspect that's not correct.

Anyways, the real take away here is that you shouldn't trust IQ tests. They're capable of identifying but not evaluating outliers, and they're capable of ranking people in the middle. None of which is all that useful.

a reply to: onequestion

Just wait till we broach the singularity, then watch Humanity or whatever Humanity becomes really take off.

To evolve as a species each generation will have to get "smarter" at some stage.

a reply to: andy06shake

i think humanity will get left behind

a reply to: onequestion

I would have thought the flat-earther type popularity indicates a reversal of common sense.

But perhaps there is another reason, namely, the type and content of 'intelligence test' questions.

I was tested by standardised test at school (it seems centuries ago) and was fortunate to have a score sufficient to qualify me for Mensa membership. I was subsequently tested two other times (by Mensa testers) and although my scores varied, they were in the same range.

However, I did an online test recently (www.free-iqtest.net...) and it came out with a ridiculously high score (I suspect I may have answered every one of their questions correctly). To me, the 20 questions were heavily weighted towards the mathematical (which I'm admittedly not that great at) and didn't really involve much deductive work to answer.

Anyway, I believe that an aptitude for doing intelligence tests at best only indicates an aptitude for doing intelligence tests.

a reply to: chr0naut

You have an IQ of 158
IQ Test for Free

Show your friends how smart you are by placing an official badge on your blog, profile or forums!

I could kill someone with my brainpower!

lmao

It definitely isn't accurate. I've done a proper test and scored about 25 points less.

I don''t think they are looking at IQ scores, more like internet scores!

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: chr0naut

You have an IQ of 158
IQ Test for Free

Show your friends how smart you are by placing an official badge on your blog, profile or forums!

I could kill someone with my brainpower!

lmao

It definitely isn't accurate. I've done a proper test and scored about 25 points less.

Perhaps if IQ had mass, we'd be singularities?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: BelowLowAnnouncement
a reply to: chr0naut

You have an IQ of 158
IQ Test for Free

Show your friends how smart you are by placing an official badge on your blog, profile or forums!

I could kill someone with my brainpower!

lmao

It definitely isn't accurate. I've done a proper test and scored about 25 points less.

Perhaps if IQ had mass, we'd be singularities?

I retook the test another 2 times with the exact same answers, it gave me 162 and on the last one 175 lol. I'm getting smarter by the minute!

a reply to: onequestion

IQ and (especially g) isn't supposed to measure ones knowledge and capabilities. If we imagine it measuring buckets instead of brains: IQ would measure the capacity of the bucket, not the amount or nature of what it actually has in it. My mother told me about an IQ test she received from a fellow student way back that claimed Catholics had higher IQs than the general public. She noted it was filled with questions such as: "where is the Vatican located?", among other questions regarding the history of the papacy. This type of test is not considered a valid IQ test though. One may be very capable of learning the history of Catholicism, and devote their time studying other things instead(or even just wasting their time and seeming stupid).

As noted earlier, health will enable a higher IQ. Mental exorcise (including video gaming) has also been found to increase IQ to a degree.

As for the quality of schooling; I'd say education has always been a low priority in the US, it seems to have been going down hill as it becomes ever more engulfed by bureaucracy with no real accountability from students or parents.

a reply to: onequestion

originally posted by: chr0naut
However, I did an online test recently (www.free-iqtest.net...) and it came out with a ridiculously high score (I suspect I may have answered every one of their questions correctly). To me, the 20 questions were heavily weighted towards the mathematical (which I'm admittedly not that great at) and didn't really involve much deductive work to answer.

These tests are not accurate, they're basically designed to take some answers and then throw a high number at you, in order to make you buy your way into a high iq group they're advertising. Only qualified doctors supervising you can give an accurate test.

a reply to: onequestion

I imagine you could be right pertaining to a significant percentage of the Human race, then again will it even matter once we have created a better entity without all our weaknesses and fallibility's?

Lets just hope its more benevolent than its creators.