Einstein was about 5.53 standard deviations (SDs) more academically successful than the average Ashkenazi Jew. The correlation between IQ and academic success is 0.65, so based on simple linear regression, Einstein’s IQ was likely 0.65(5.53 SD) = 3.59 SD higher than the average Ashkenazi Jew.

On a scale where the average white has an IQ of 100 and SD of 15, Ashkenazi Jews likely have a mean IQ of 110. We don’t know their SD so we’ll assume 15. So if Einstein is 3.59 SD smarter than the average Ashkenazi, his IQ would be 3.59(15) + 110 = 164.

On the other hand, Einstein’s brain size was probably 1.93 SD smaller than the average Ashkenazi Jewish male of his era. The within sex correlation between IQ and brain size is generally thought to be about 0.4, so based on simple linear regression, Einstein’s IQ should be 0.4(1.93 SD) = 0.77 SD lower than the average Ashkenazi Jew. Thus based on brain size, his expected IQ would be 110 – 0.77(15) = 98.

So if academic success predicts an IQ of 164, but brain size predicts an IQ of 98, what is his IQ likely to be? Averaging these two estimates would be extremely sloppy. Instead, many years ago a Promethean advised me to use multiple regression. This requires us to know not only how well each predicting variable (i.e. academic success, brain size) correlates with IQ, but also how well they correlate with one another. Well assuming the correlation between brain size and academic success is mediated entirely by IQ, then the product of each variable’s correlation with IQ (0.65*0.4=0.26) tells us their correlation with each other, and from their we can calculate how well each variable predicts IQ independent of the other.

In this case, the standardized regression equation would be:

IQ Z score = 0.59(academic success Z score ) + 0.25(brain size Z score)

So plugging in the variables for Einstein

IQ Z score = 0.59(+3.59 ) + 0.25(-1.93)

IQ Z score = 2.12 – 0.48

IQ Z score = 1.64

In other words, Einstein’s IQ should be 1.64 SD above the Ashkenazi Jewish mean.

In other words:

Einstein’s IQ = 1.64(Ashkenazi SD) + Ashkenazi mean

Einstein’s IQ = 1.64(15) + 110

Einstein’s IQ = 135

Even though an IQ of 135 is extremely high, many people will claim it’s ridiculously low for Einstein and will hate me, and consider me an idiot for even entertaining the possibility that he is anything less than 160. How dare I, a mere blogger, put a number on someone as brilliant as Einstein? I don’t know what Einstein’s IQ was, but 135 would be the statistically expected IQ for an Ashkenazi Jew of his academic success and brain size, assuming I didn’t make any errors and assuming linear correlations through the full range. The combination of academic success and brain size should be quite g loaded, yet perhaps it still gives a wildly wrong number in Einstein’s case.

On the other hand, scholar Arthur Jensen stated:

There are two famous scientific geniuses, both Nobelists in physics, whose childhood IQs are very well authenticated to have been in the mid-130s. They are on record and were tested by none other than Lewis Terman himself, in his search for subjects in his well-known study ofgifted children with IQs of 140 or above on the Stanford-Binet intelligence test.

Although these two boys were brought to Terman’s attention because they were mathematical prodigies, they failed by a few IQ points to meet the one and only criterion (IQ>139) for inclusion in Terman’s study. Although Terman was impressed by them, as a good scientist he had to exclude them from his sample of high-IQ kids. Yet none of the 1,500+ subjects in the study ever won a Nobel Prize or has a biography in the Encyclopedia Britannica as these two fellows did.

It should be noted that the Stanford-Binet back then was an age ratio scale, and thus gave increasingly generous IQs above 130.

Lion of the Judah-sphere

said:I’m a regression noob. How do you determine the equation coefficients based on the product of each variables’ correlation with IQ? (or is that too complicated to explain here)

pumpkinperson

said:I’m curious to see if Mugabe knows how I did it since she’s in the BGI study & claims to have scored perfect on the old SAT math and the old GRE math.

But according to Larry Summers, women are biologically inferior at math so I don’t think she’ll comment.

Lion of the Judah-sphere

said:Please go ahead and explain it, I’m not sure Mugabe can with his 99 IQ.

Robert Gabriel Mugabe

said:i have a penis. not just a big clit.

pp on the other hand…

Robert Gabriel Mugabe

said:lion of the…

just another example:

stupid people don’t know that they’re stupid and that their fake sock puppet is transparent and crazy.pumpkinperson

said:lion of the…The fact that Mugabe can’t remember the rest of Lion’s name indicates low g, and/or brain shrinkage caused by getting drunk every night.

just another example:stupid people don’t know that they’re stupid and that their fake sock puppet is transparent and crazy.The fact that Mugabe thinks the Lion of the Judah-sphere & I are the same person indicates low social IQ.

Low social IQ + his obsessive personality + his underemployment + math major = autism

pumpkinperson

said:Please go ahead and explain it, I’m not sure Mugabe can with his 99 IQ.I’ll email the explanation to you. What is your email?

Lion of the Judah-sphere

said:Check your email. Thanks for the response.

Robert Gabriel Mugabe

said:i don’t think that.

swank said so.

swank smart.

pp dumb.

“underemployment”?

my God you are a loser.

Another William Playfair Web

said:http://faculty.cas.usf.edu/mbrannick/regression/regbas.html

when b=r (Sy/Sx), and the correlation between, for example

when Brain size is the y, and academic success the x, and IQ the z

assuming that, the SD of brain size could be anywhere from 0.26 to 1/0.26 (which is 3.84) times the SD of academic success, you get anywhere from 0.26(0.26)(-0.77)= -0.0525 SDs

or up to 0.26(3.84)(-0.77)= -0.77 SDs

and of course using the 3.59 SDs of academic success can also be used

0.26(0.26)(3.59)= +0.24 SDs

or 0.26(3.84)(3.59)=+3.59 SDs, so essentially, it’s almost like a proof, because you get the potential values of -0.77 SDs, to 3.59 SDs, so one would be left with the values,

110+ -0.0525(15) + 0.24(15)= 113

110 + -0.0525(15) + 3.59(15)= 163

110 + -0.77(15)+0.24(15)= 102

110+ -0.77(15) + 3.59(15)= 152

wouldn’t Einstein’s IQ be one of these values?

not knowing the SDs, so assuming for them.

pumpkinperson

said:Your math can sometimes be kind of hard to follow because you don’t elaborate on where you’re getting your numbers and formulas.

The technique I learned from a Promethean is very, very simple and elegant.

Just as the standardized regression coefficients in simple regression are just the slope of a regression LINE in two-dimensional space, the coefficients in multiple regression are just the slopes of a regression PLANE in three-dimensional space, etc.

Santoculto

said:All the stupid people (independent of its quantitative or qualitative level of intelligence) are potentially evil.

It is called egocentric projection. Most people are not concerned with seeking the truth, including one that may not be very good for itself (but, real and complete truth is very diplomatic). Most ” smart ” people (which mostly are not wise) use of sophisticated strategies to find the answers that are sufficient to fill your self confidence, feed your ego. The smart stupid differs from stupid-less smart just by the degree of sophistication with which become dogmatic.

According to the exotic oriental media (common language to refer to a certain people in the early twentieth century), Einshtaijn was the greatest genius that humanity has ever seen. However, there are many complaints about this statement. Even if this were true, of course, without the fanciful exaggeration of extremely ethnocentric and biased people, rational people do not despise all the ” rest ” to praise him in particular.

….

Santoculto

said:wow!!

cale

said:Lol, I would commit suicide if I was this guy.

cale

said:Pumpkin you should estimate Marie Curie’s IQ. A lot of things about her suggest really high IQ.

Santoculto

said:And my comment Pump**

And i want a answer…

cale

said:An answer need a question.

And Pumpkin is a CELEBRITY he have other things to do !!!!

pumpkinperson

said:He wants to know how I can be a precocious IQ research if I’m in my 30s. The answer is i wasn’t always in my 30s. I made my first IQ test at 11 just before I took the WISC at 12.

But I wouldn’t say I’m the most precocious because despite all my fame & celibrity, I’ve never published in a peer reviewed journal & I’m not recognized in the field

cale

said:Tony Blundetto IQ is 158. Einstein is dumb in comparaison.

Santoculto

said:Pump,

any note about John Nash death????

pumpkinperson

said:I’m very sorry to hear that! I’m speechless!

Santoculto

said:Car accident. He and their wife. You do not see news??

cale

said:That’s ironic because died like a low IQ.

cale

said:he*

cale

said:Btw I also act like a low IQ by forgetting a word in my sentence.

Another William Playfair Web

said:pumpkinperson-Would John Nash be an example of the mental illness- creativity link?

What a great man.

Not to give away my family origins, but my Grandfather’s family went to Church with his family.

They both fled, and went North, married a “Spanesh” woman.

He would have been a race traitor to these AmRen types!

Santoculto

said:Why you can accept my comment??

pumpkinperson

said:I responded below

Santoculto

said:no, no.

Animekitty

said:Hi Pumpkin person

i was thinking about how IQ can be measured

this site says Einstein has an IQ of 215

http://www.eoht.info/page/Genius+IQs

how can we tell when this happens to be the case(accumulation of solved problems?)

by looking at your blog post:

https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/forget-iq-scores-a-shocking-new-scale-for-measuring-intelligence/

PS my (g) score is 115

how can recognizing the levels of abstraction to be dealt with is infered if (g) means that a holistic pattern is seen or that abstraction includes making multiple inferences at the same time:

http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/synchronicity-of-meta-reflective-artificial-intelligence-6

pumpkinperson

said:That’s interesting that they estimated Einstein so high. I wonder how they arrived at that figure.

Stetind

said:Once he’s ventured into I.Q. territory, Libb Thims is a jive turkey, plain and simple. Here’s his take on psychometrics:

If a person agrees with “human thermodynamics” (Libb’s area of study), then he/she has a super-high IQ.

If someone disagrees with human thermodynamics, then he/she has a low I.Q., and probably is a closet Christian, to boot.

He cites Cox’s book, even though Cox’s book presents ratio I.Q.s, which aren’t reliable.

He thinks I.Q.s above 150/160 exist, and even believes I.Q.s as high as 230 exist.

But Thims’ knowledge within the discipline of chemistry is abysmal. He’s definitely super smart.

Tenn

said:Wouldn’t a more accurate method be to start with the mean IQ of 155 for extremely eminent scientists, and calculate Einstein’s based off of his outsized success in that arena? I’d be surprised if the IQ of the most revolutionary scientist since Newton was 1.33 SD below the mean for successful scientists of his day.

pumpkinperson

said:Wouldn’t a more accurate method be to start with the mean IQ of 155 for extremely eminent scientists, and calculate Einstein’s based off of his outsized success in that arena?That would be like trying to predict Michael Jordan’s height from his outisized basketball performance among other NBA stars as opposed to the general population. You’d get a similar result because although you’re now regressing to a much higher mean, the degree of regression is so much more severe in restricted samples that it should roughly cancel out.

I’d be surprised if the IQ of the most revolutionary scientist since Newton was 1.33 SD below the mean for successful scientists of his day.Michael Jordan is shorter than the average NBA player.

Animekitty

said:Flynn values for Einsteins Birth.

(2016 – 1879) = 137

137 – 18(age at test) = 119 years ago

0.28 * 119 = 33.32

135 + 33.32 = 168.32

In 1897 Einsteins IQ would be 135

In 2016 Einsteins IQ would be 168

Dates matter 🙂

https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/01/01/explaining-the-entire-flynn-effect/

pumpkinperson

said:By definition, IQ is how well you score compared to your own generation. An IQ of 100 means you are as smart as the average (white) American of your age and birth year.

rohan67877

said:This is nonsense. According to the scientific literature he had much higher levels of acetylcholine than regular people and had a parietal lobes 15% larger. Thus his IQ would have to be at least 15% 135, being 155+. If we should be modest, it would be at least 180.

Jay Cee

said:I recall, on two occasions, hearing a figure of 186 for Einstein. Both mentions were 30+ years ago, both on TV, and at least one was by a Psychologist discussing intelligence testing. I found it interesting that, years later, in the movie “IQ”, Tim Robbins’ character – an auto mechanic – in an effort to impress Meg Ryan’s character – Albert Einstein’s niece – was surreptitiously aided by a recently befriended Einstein and friends in a public display and psychometric assessment of Robbins’ “genius”. Robbins’ dazzling performance, it was concluded, equated to an IQ of 186.