# Is IQ/EQ really taken seriously?!



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Been watching this curious little TV show, even though I disagree with the whole IQ/EQ stuff that mum was studying during her PhD studies (in which she acknowledged herself that the studies are flawed, it never sat well with me either, there were alot of holes in the methology behind the "facts" presented not to mention measuring human intelligence as a singular value)

Alas I am finding the show rather very entertaining. However...
Did anyone read up on the real Walter O'Brien and his crazy claims? :surprise:

Regardless of the laughable authenticity behind his claims, it would seem American media and popular culture is treating IQ/EQ like solid facts, but how about scientifically? I always considered IQ/EQ questionable, and never took my own score seriously.

How about you guys?


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

I think corporate HRs take it seriously.

I don't know much about it. But I do realise that a lot of "softskills" are very important in the workplace.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

The only "HR" department in my country I came across that used IQ testing was during my aptitute tests for the army at 17. In the various industries that followed I had not done an IQ test once during any of their selection processes, nor have I heard of any educational course that uses IQ to measure students' ability, they use scores from secondary schools or tests to determine comprehension/mathematical ability but never IQ/EQ tests.

Is it different in your country?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I wonder if we are from the same country, RandomDude . Same here plus testing in high school...

There's a lot of truth in IQ or EQ being important. But not in the way people think it is.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Wat truth?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Think of IQ as the SAT or the GRE. If I have two people that have very similar stories, the higher IQ, whatever that is, will be the differentiation factor. It won't mean that he/she will be better. He/she will be perceived as better. Witness the tests that places like Google administer to their candidates for employment. Score high enough and prove you can solve puzzles or whatever. This mean you have a bit of spark in you, measurable higher than the other person who missed the question. Does it mean you're better? no.

A lot of it is perceptions. I've worked with a LOT of smart people. But those people lack the empathy (EQ) to understand how all that krap we design and build are used. All they care is to show the rest of us how smart they are or to earn bonus points for the next promotion.

A high IQ or EQ will help, but only if you're good in promoting it and even better in not going overboard promoting it. People expect a 140+ IQ to work miracles for them. It may, it may not.


----------



## Vinnydee (Jan 4, 2016)

I have an IQ in the 99.8 percentile and without a college education, born of uneducated parents, I became one of the top two experts in my field worldwide. I co-authored the reference book for my profession. I learn things faster than most, do them better and solve problems quicker. IQ is a real measure of intelligence. I assure you that it matters. I think people have the wrong impression of what IQ is and often confuse it with being smart. IQ is potential. It is the ability to excel at all that you do presuming you have an aptitude for it. If you do nothing with your intelligence, it is just wasted talent much like someone born with a natural ability to sing, not pursuing a singing career.

I never learned what my IQ was until I turned 40 when I had to be tested to get a job I wanted. I did not need it though. I knew I was different than most from a very early age. I was reading 1st and 2nd grade school books when I was 4. I obtained a professional license that had a 3% pass rate, that usually required at least 10 years experience before even attempting to take the test, within 10 months of starting my job. They thought that I cheated. I was the second youngest person ever to do what I did. When I joined the Army at 17 I qualified for officer candidate school and than after further testing, offered a career in Army Intelligence which I turned down. I made alternate for West Point but was offered it again after I enlisted. I was leading men in Vietnam when I was 18. I have appeared on TV as an expert, quoted in national business magazines and chased by many companies just to use my name. I have a bunch of professional licenses in several professions. As long as the testing was based on something I could read, I would read it in a night or two and then pass the test, usually scoring 100% and finishing before everyone else. I only spent a year in college under a scholarship before I quit. I was getting A's by just showing up for the midterm and final exams in subjects like advanced calculus and computer science. It was boring and they went too slow for me. Give me access to information and I can become an expert in anything I enjoy. I lear at a very rapid rate. 

I changed professions 5 times. Each time I started at the bottom and within 2 years was second to only the president of the company. I had Ph.d's and men with Master Degrees from ivy league schools working under me. I did excel at everything I had an interest in whether it be business or a hobby. I learn very fast and see solutions to problems quickly when others say it cannot be done. Everyone I worked for recognized my intelligence and used it. I now work 3 days a week from anywhere in the world where there is an internet connection. I get paid a full salary' second only to the President of my national company and given 25% of the net profits. They lured me away from another company that sort of treated me like a prized bull. I was trothed out to impress potential clients. I can list many things I have done. Those who know me say I should write a book. I have worked in 21 countries, rubbed elbows with the rich and famous and I think it was more than just blind luck that made everything go my way.

So I beg to differ. IQ does matter but it is only as good as the person who uses it. It is no coincidence that the smartest and most successful people in every company I worked for, had high IQs. I was hired a few times based on my IQ score. It enabled me to get jobs that required a college degree. If big companies believe that IQ scores matter, it is because they have proven to be a good indicator of how well a person might do. It really comes down to what your IQ score is. I have a feeling that you took an online IQ test. Those are not real IQ tests and everyone scores high on them. Unless you take a proctored and accepted IQ test, you do not know your IQ. Those who have a high IQ know that they do better than others. It is self evident as it was for me since I did not know my IQ until I was 40 but knew I was more intelligent than most others because they could not understand or see things as quickly and easily as I can. I have to make an effort not to get frustrated when people do not learn something or see solutions as easily as I do. It is something I have to be careful of with my wife. Only my wife knows my IQ outside of the company that had me tested. I did not need to know it or to have others know it. I just was better at things than others who have been it it much longer than me. Plus I have a need to know how everything works. 

As Einstein said when asked about the difference between someone with a high IQ and a person with an average IQ, and I paraphrase: If given the task to find a needle in a haystack, those with an average IQ will find the needle and finish the task. Those with high IQs will look to see if there is more than one needle and look to see what else might be hidden in that haystack. I like his explanation because it does not say one is better than the other but rather thinks differently. I know the difference between me and people with an average or even higher than average intelligence I live in a world built by and for people of average intelligence. Average is not a derogatory term when in the context of IQ. It is just where most people fall on the bell curve of IQ scores. It means they are normal. I am the one who has a hard time fitting in. People do not want to sit next to me at social gatherings because they do not want to appear stupid. I never ever make people feel stupid and yet they do as does my wife. It is by comparison. I have to learn to accept everything that people say because they do not like if you bring in facts to prove them wrong or ask them why they believe what they say is true. Now I just go along with the others and nod my head in agreement when they say things like nuke the entire middle east with no thought to what the radioactive cloud would do to the rest of us.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anecdotal data is useful but it's not dogma.

The most important metrics I use when hiring are:

- can he get along with the team
- does he have an ego
- does he know what he doesn't know
- can he learn
- what's his HQ (humility quotient)

And the most important...

- is he in it for money?

I'm not familiar with a single US company that uses IQ scores in hiring....


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

RD industry here does look to a certain extent at IQ, they will seek out students with the highest ATAR scores as they enter Uni to offer them future employment, even the AFD offer pre employment to high scorers.
But they also look at leadership and community skills and certificates. My son just finished VCE with the second highest ATAR (by a measly .5% damn it) at his school. He also received an IB certificate that would have assured him a place at Uni above a student that got the same ATAR.

But high IQ without high EQ can mean a less balanced life. High IQ people without much EQ are the once that comes across as arrogant. Thankfully my boy has a reasonable EQ for his age and I am sure that with more life experience that will develop even further. It is quite common in my family for high IQ to go hand in hand with high EQ, IMHO this is the best balance and gives intelligent people a good grounding and ability to function well in society.

As for relationships it is vital for a person to have a good level of EQ. The more threads I read here the clearer it becomes that many of the partners that have issues are very low in EQ. It took me a long time to truly appreciate that the best type of man is one with a high EQ and it is a life lesson I am teaching my children, to only consider a partner with a good level of EQ for a happy and healthy relationship.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

ATAR is based on percentages, not marks, unlike IQ/EQ. These percentages are also isolated, and it's there to measure a student's learning capability prior to entry into uni, not their absolute intelligence. I remain unconvinced, most likely because I have my own theories in relation to human intelligence, and I also see no real distinction between IQ/EQ having found nothing throughout my life that I could not learn nor anyone I could not understand nor group that I could not fit into, contradicting established theories by the experts and my own experience of intellectual/emotional ability being trained, rather than gifted. Smartest lesson I ever learnt (and always have to relearn) was/is the acknowledgement of my own stupidity.

As for learning fast, I do not see it as an ability. For me personally, my speed of learning has always been a choice, with its own advantages and disadvantages, learning slowly allows more to sink in, more angles to be covered, learning quickly brings you literally 'up to speed' but leaves more room for mistakes and hidden details missed. I've done both, as well as trained others in both styles observing the results. Personally I strive to strike a balance in my approach when learning from new experiences, and I never used one's speed of learning to gauge ability.

As for the IQ test I did, as I mentioned before, it was conducted by the army during my aptitude tests, in which after they recommended me for officer training instead of general entry at 17. I declined as instead of feeling flattered at the opportunity I was more disturbed that such controversial tests are being used and I also disagreed with the commissioning of lieutenants straight out of school as I strongly believe in meritocracy, experience and ability over qualifications and birthright, which is also a historical cultural tradition among my people. Furthermore, I didn't take the test seriously not even to this day, and consider my own score a fluke because I didn't even bother trying.

BTW John as for those "smart" people you mentioned, I doubt they were any smarter than the rest of the team, only more self-centered, pretentious and eager to prove themselves to compensate for their lack of ability. I have no room for such in my teams and operate my business with a flattened structure, open door policy with an emphasis on teamwork. Speaking of IQ/EQ in the workplace I have not encountered any HR department that uses IQ/EQ and furthermore as an employer it's not what I look for. Either than aspects that make one employable that John already mentioned in his list - IQ/EQ have never been the numbers I look for in one's portfolio. I want to see revenue, growth, the real indicators of success not just "oh btw, I scored this number"

But hey, 'tis just my opinion, debate.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

No.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Standardized tests, as my DD20 found out the hard way, are so manipulated statistically that it makes comparisons hard. 

The Aussie ATAR I am not familiar with. But the SAT is graded bizarrely, and your score depends not only on how much you score but on how much everyone else does that day. 1 wrong answer out of 70 or so means a 760 instead of 800. That's how Angry Birds 2 Arena is scored 

Standardized tests tend to miss people's innate abilities.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

The ATAR is graded in a similar fashion, each grade is dependent on other candidate's scores to come up with its percentile 'rank'. I also question the methodology behind these tests, judging by what I've learnt from those who have undertaken it prior to their studies. They had several sections, one which tested the candidate's comprehension skills, and as such - is reliant on one's grasp of the English language. The other tests are mathematical, which is reliant on one's education. Both these methods, as such, fail to measure overall intelligence IMO. It can be used as an indicator of one's ability to comprehend and understand the subject material presented to them in Australian universities but as for intelligence itself? I disagree.

Education is also not a luxury that everyone has access to. During my troubled childhood you could have presented me with a difficult maths problem and ask me to solve it and I would have no idea as I have not been taught the formulas that others around my age had access to. However due to self-study and innate curiouscity I've never been left too far behind and have also remedied my lack of education and now deal with numbers everyday. As such - my so-called "IQ", is a learned trait, and a trait that is always in constant revision, sprinkled with random acts of stupidity!

Meh, it's still all bogus to me.


----------



## jdesey (Dec 6, 2015)

Early in your post you said it was a woman studying this crap. Enough said.


----------



## zzzman99 (Oct 23, 2015)

IQ and EQ are very relevant. But I'd give and edge to those with high EQ. There are alot of smart people that don't have the people skills necessary to work with other people. You really need both to be successful.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

When I passed a Mensa pretest many years ago, I was like "Hell yeah! I'm a genius!" 

Then when I tallied up the fees for proctoring the 'actual' test and dues for basically...nothing...I was like "F U, I'll be a genius without a certificate.".

With regard to IQ and EQ...I'd much rather have a higher EQ than IQ. Wisdom > Intelligence.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

@Fozzy - EQ >< wisdom


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

True, but it's more closely related than IQ. EQ lends insight that IQ does not.


----------



## phazari (Jun 5, 2016)

You need to make sure IQ test results come from a real IQ test, not those half-ass ones you see posted on Facebook or random tumblr websites.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Fozzy,
The reason I like the concept of EQ, is that in my experience there is a low correlation between the logical, analytical and spatial skills that IQ assesses, and the softer skills we often take for granted. 

Funny thing is - most of the bad behavior that I see at work - is driven by either insecurity, narcissism or both. 

We had some help desk people who when asked: how do I XYZ with the software? 

Would say: you can't 

Thing is, usually there was a work around - if not a direct feature. 

They were too insecure to say: let me check and get back to you (subtext: I'm not sure). And they were putting their ego ahead of the customers well being. 

To be fair - it's the companies responsibility to create a culture that rewards - constructive behavior. 






Fozzy said:


> When I passed a Mensa pretest many years ago, I was like "Hell yeah! I'm a genius!"
> 
> Then when I tallied up the fees for proctoring the 'actual' test and dues for basically...nothing...I was like "F U, I'll be a genius without a certificate.".
> 
> With regard to IQ and EQ...I'd much rather have a higher EQ than IQ. Wisdom > Intelligence.


----------



## southbound (Oct 31, 2010)

IQ does make a difference. I assume this thread is addressing people with average to above average IQs. I am not a psychologist and do not test and calculate IQ scores, but I work with people in the 70 and below range; a lot are 55 and below. Nobody within a group with the same IQs are exactly alike, but the ones i work with usually lack reasoning and problem solving abilities as it is applied to the real world, and they usually perform significantly below their non-disabled peers academically.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

I have seen no evidence that EQ is a meaningful notion.

IQ, on the other hand, does mean quite a bit. For example, the higher your IQ (above +1 SD), the less likely you are to have sex early in life. However, this is only statistically true, because according to the curve I saw, I should still be a virgin in my late 60's. >


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

EQ is not taken seriously by people in the field - just ask any research psychologist. 

IQ is still the most meaningful correlator to ability and success that we currently have at our disposal.


----------



## TheTruthHurts (Oct 1, 2015)

Hmmmm I would say US businesses are enamored of EQ and its surrogates as a means to build teams and further diversity (of thought if not also race, religion, etc.).

My current employer embeds these measures and "truths" in virtually every class we are required to take.

I personally have no doubt a high or very high IQ matters immensely, just as a low IQ does.

My kids take tests these days that are on-line and continue to push harder and harder material until they tap out. My DD12 just took a battery of tests to look for anxiety, ADHD or depression (early signs so we are being proactive) and she scored at a doctoral level in some of the language and expression tests. I have no idea what that means  but I am always amused when the test interpretation software takes exceptional results and tries to align then with "normal" patterns. One test broke - she scored through the roof on one test and abysmally in another - which was intended as a denominator in a ratio causing a nonsense interpretation of the results.

So what does this mean? DD has no intellectual or neurological deficits so there are emotionally driven anxiety issues to resolve. That and the fact that interpretation of test results can be misleading - because I wouldn't want DD12 sitting in next to a doctoral student in a language class.

For me it's pretty simple - high IQ means I immediately see patterns others may never see, I see differences among similar items and I see similarities among different items. So to me it is a processing and thinking advantage. I've worked with a few other high IQ people and it's a pleasure to not have to spend time discussing things we see as obvious.

As far as EQ goes, I see the use of it more as a way to herd the sheep.

That said I do enjoy social voyeurism - I love to watch women talk. They are so expressive, their mouths slightly agape and eyes riveted to one another, drawing out the smallest details about how the other FEELS about this and that. I don't have those feelings myself, but from what I observe it must be intoxicating to have a taste of the others emotions and feelings.


----------

