Commenter illuminaticatblog was kind enough to share with us his intelligence test scores at age 12 and at age 26. Both times he took the Wechsler intelligence scales: WISC-III at age 12; WAIS-IV at age 26.
Below is a chart comparing results at both ages. I wanted to compare apples to apples so I only included the subtests that were administered on both occasions, and used only these to calculate his verbal, performance, and full-scale IQs respectively (prorating when required). I did not adjust for the Flynn effect so scores at both ages are likely slightly inflated, but to similar degrees.
| Wechsler IQ equivalent at age 12 | Wechsler IQ equivalent at age 26 | |
| VERBAL ABILITIES | 125 (very bright) | 133 (brilliant)* |
| Information (general knowledge) | 130 (brilliant) | 140 (very brilliant) |
| Similarities (verbal abstract reasoning) | 110 (bright) | 120 (very bright) |
| Arithmetic (mental math) | 110 (bight) | 125 (very bright) |
| Vocabulary (word knowledge) | 125 (very bright) | 120 (very bright) |
| Comprehension (common sense & social judgement) | 130 (brilliant) | 115 (bright) |
| NON-VERBAL VISUAL-MOTOR ABILITIES | 113 (bright) | 99 (average)* |
| Picture Completion (visual alertness) | 125 (very bright) | 80 (dull) |
| Block Design (visual organization) | 115 (bright) | 125 (very bright) |
| Digit Symbol (Rapid hand-eye coordination) | 90 (average) | 95 (average) |
| OVERALL GLOBAL INTELLECTUAL ABILITY | 123 (very bright) | 121 (very bright) |
The first thing we notice is how remarkably consistent the overall IQ is from age 12 to 26, declining by only 2 points over those 14 years, despite the incredible amount of drama the he endured over that time.
This remarkable consistency is not surprising, as the long-term stability (over 13+ years) of Wechsler IQ is in the 0.73 to 0.9 range.
Also consistent is his verbal IQ > Performance IQ gap, though this nearly triples from 12 points at age 12 to 34 points at age 26.
At the subtest level, we see a lot less consistency than we observe with the overall score. This is not surprising because individual subtests are a lot less reliable than a composite score that combines eight different subtests (allowing error in both directions to cancel out).
Given the unreliability of individual subtests and the number of subtests, it’s statistically expected to see a few big changes and one shouldn’t over-interpret this. However the 45 point drop on Picture Completion is concerning.
Picture Completion tests one of the most important parts of intelligence because visual awareness to our environment is crucial to our ability to adapt. A close friend of mine scored low on this particular subtest despite being otherwise quite bright and I was shocked when he had driven himself to my remote winter cottage on a deflated tire.
“Did you not notice one side of the car is way lower than the other?” I asked.
No he had not. He’s extremely lucky it didn’t go flat as he was driving up there, otherwise he would have found himself stranded on an unpaved deserted forest road with no cell phone reception in the pitch blackness of a cold Canadian night.
Pumpkin Person 
I really don’t understand IQ skepticism.
It’s pretty obvious that an IQ 145 person is going to be much brighter colloquially speaking than an IQ 115 person 99 times out of 100. Who cares if IQ doesn’t correlate strongly with income? And who cares if it might not be strongly heritable?
It gives you a good rough estimate of your qualitative brightness.
Does IQ have a positive correlation with obsessing over IQ?
I think it’s a bell curve with the middle being somewhere around 125 then dropping off very quickly at both ends.
Most people say that intelligent people are humble and don’t speak about intelligence and it’s a « big hat no cattle » case.
But I think the opposite : the more intelligent the people are the more interested they are inclined to be about intelligence. But then the field is so poor, and numbers so rare by definition, that most people don’t care to deal with the topics . The ideal is when you meet someone your level or more .
IQ obsessed people are generally people who are high IQ, technically or verbally only, though. Those who are spatially intelligent don’t necessarily subscribe to IQism.
I’m obsessed with IQ. I don’t give a shit about mensa, but took the test. I’ve also taken a million tests with scores ranging between 125-145.
Because I suck at life – am remarkably mediocre, and yet unremarkable – I put a lot of stock on IQ. I’m hoping I’ll have some surge of insight and do something great; I’ll most likely fail and lead on this pathetic life. Not having kids if my IQ turns out to be less than 125 tbh. Regression to the mean will be a real bitch for me.
You may have other traits unrelated to midly gifted IQ that are unfavorable. Have you taken one 5 dimensions personality test and look at your industriousness ? Orderliness ? Neuroticism ? Volatility ? Withdrawal ?
About kids, is it because you are gay ? If that’s the case, at least in France, some gays have kids, either in couple or as bachelor.
As for me, I love enjoying each moment of life and I don’t care is they look remarkable to others. Many times, socialized exceptional moments (being on top of a Pyramid or in a Palace in the Seychelles, or doing a celebrated talk in front of important people) is less remarkable than enjoying a good cup of coffee while doing something you like.
Sometimes I have moments of clarity where anxiety is gone and I stop avoiding things.
I found this in a research paper.
The Cancellation subtest should theoretically also constitute a good means of assessing visual field neglect. Visual field neglect can adversely affect any number of higher-order cognitive functions.
—
OVERALL GLOBAL INTELLECTUAL ABILITY – 121
When I met the man with a 170 claimed IQ. He said my IQ was not 112 but 118, close to the 121 number. Philosopher agrees I am higher than 112. An explanation is that I am lopsided in my cognitive stability. I believe my emotion causes me to have a “sluggish cognitive tempo”. That may look like Autism.
schizoaffective disorder is what I am diagnosed with.
But
What I have may in fact be:
Schizotypal personality disorder (STPD)
It is not something that is treated with medication.
both are the same but the personality disorder is permanent not caused by degeneration.
If you’re 112, what does that put me!?
Sorry, meant where. As in “where does that put me.”
I never said you were above 112. Why do you keep misquoting me?
I don’t claim you claimed what my IQ was. I claimed it was 112.
You never said I was 112. I did. You said I was smarter than 108.
definitely you said I seemed smarter than 108.
if I misquote you that is just me having poor memory.
it should not be hard to see that I do not do it on purpose.
Honestly I think you’re much lower than 108
No cat’s very smart & even socially smart in my humble opinion. But his mental illness/medication dumbs him down for sometimes months at a time
Puppy you calling him socially intelligent is an act of social stupidity
I understand why you perceive him as socially dumb but he’s taken several tests of social intelligence & never scores low.
It’s time to look for a new hypothesis to explain his behaviour.
Thats because your test was garbage!!! Hahaha even bruno got max score on that and he cant read peoples faces.
That was just one of several tests. He also did well on the wechsler subtests involving social judgement as well as theory of mind test from his psychologist.
Your problem is you trust your own intuition more than you trust science
but history is full of examples where science proved intuition wrong
Intuition says the world is flat
Science proved it was round
The fact you were willing to call bruno socially intelligent after your dumb test even though you knew about all his autistic symptoms tells me you don’t get it.
I get why you consider certain people autistic & I can predict ahead of time which people you’ll consider autistic, but I require more scientific criteria than the gut feeling you rely on.
I also think social IQ is multidimensional. The fact that Bruno is funny & can analyze Kevin McDonald books shows social IQ. Bruno’s overall IQ is so high (per Mensa tests) that it would be unlikely for even his social IQ to be low because even social situations involve logic & reasoning
What part of ‘he can’t recognise emotions on peoples faces’ dont you understand? Bruno is totally clueless. Anime is even worse! These people are extremely autistic.
What part of social IQ is multidimensional do you not get? Just because Bruno lacks emotional recognition does not mean he’s nessecarily bad at higher level more abstract social judgements. It’s like the difference between being a good political candidate vs a good political advisor or pundit. They’re not identical skill sets. It’s reading a room vs interpreting a poll.
Pill, you’re not a social savant. Your social intelligence isn’t even that high,to be frank. You’re very blunt and come across as having shallow emotions and not being charismatic or anything. Any signs of social genius in you is counteracted by traits that a social genius ACTUALLY has to have in order to be validated as one.
Its not ‘multidimensional’ at all. Its only ‘multidimensional’ if you depend on rigid criteria to make your own mind up about something that should be intuitive.
The earth is flat. All these rigid autistic scientists who think it’s round lack my brilliant intuition
#think like pill
Phil : “Bruno is totally clueless.”
My education background is like Caltech followed by a combined degree of Harvard Law school and Harvard Kennedy school of government to wich you could add the specialized masters degrees in different fields ….
Or in the UK, it woud a joint bachelor in philosophy, economics and politics doubled by a bachelor in statistics followed by an admission as a barrister at Wilberforce chambers or sollicitor at Slaughter and May …
you see the picture.
So I had enough social clue to get that. Even if its true that it didnt cost me much IQ material, so that I was far clueless of peers who would have been preparing this with their families since they were born, all their actions and social activities being turned into elite french schools … So my logica aptitudes really supplied at very high level.
Probably none of my colleagues would be commenting on blogs, so I recognize I am a bit of a weirdo. But being totally clueless is a bit exaggerated 🙂
Talleyrand (who was a remarkable social and political person) said “All what is exaggerated is by the same token insignificant”
But I like when you analize my case.
Most social situations are logical and/or require common-sense. If we were as socially clueless as people assume we are, we’d be dead.
Pingback: child to adult IQ | illuminaticatblog
My sister told me her IQ was 92. Which is 20 points below 112.
Adding 9 points gives 101 and 121 for her and me.
I wonder what that difference means?
My sister s able to draw photo-realistically. She is a great artist.
The word you’re looking for is “trauma,” not “drama,” Pumpkin. Hahaha.
I was originally going to say trauma but I decided dramma was more polite
I think “trauma” would be more polite than “drama” because drama has so many negative connotations and besides, trauma is what he actually experienced, no use in denying his actual experiences.
Many others show malleabilty.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2019/09/02/the-malleability-of-iq/
Thanks for posting this.
However, your strategy of converting subtest scores to IQ scores may cause gleeful confusion, suggesting that IQs themselves are very variable.
He took the WISC at 12 and Wechsler IV at 26, which if I recall changed some of the actual test material. My wife is with me, and I have turned down her offer of going into the attic to look at the relevant tests.
Showing the scaled scores would be more prudent, I think.
Best
James
Yes they changed several subtests so I only included the ones common to both scales & calculated composite IQs only from these (prorating when required).
I converted subtest scaled scores to IQ because people are more familiar with the IQ scale. But your point about gleeful confusion is well taken.
God, these ads are insufferable.
Get fucking ad block you retards.
I never see ads on you or pumpkin’s site
I’ve always been very self-conscious about my intelligence because there are people out there who seem to be very dull who actually come across as competent and vice versa. Super frustrating and annoying to deal with, I suppose.
Would someone mind explaining to me if there is any correlation between a CogAT composite standard age score and IQ? There are some indications that the two are very similar (the average CogAT score is 100 and it has a ceiling of 160) and sample test questions look like those on IQ tests. Mensa also lists the CogAT as a qualifying test score.
However, many sites explain how the CogAT is NOT an IQ test because it measures a child’s ability and is thus something one can prepare for and improve upon. I’m not positive how that argument makes any sense because a synonym for ability is aptitude, something that is defined as “a natural tendency.” It doesn’t seem to me that a score which measures natural ability can be improved upon, as these sites suggest.
Just curious since I took the CogAT as a kid and was wondering if I could use that score as a proxy for my IQ.
Thank.
Hey Pumpkin I got a question.
So I was going to convert the ranked vocabularies of rappers to IQ using the little bit of mathematics I’ve learned here. I think people on r/hiphopheads might be interested in it. Im just multiplying the z score of their vocabulary by the correlation of vocabulary to IQ and then multiplying that by the SD of the mean IQ of the population and you know the rest. But, I was wondering if I should use the mean white IQ of 100 or the mean Black IQ of 85? Or maybe I should just make two separate lists? I dont know if you remember William ( may he rest in piece) but he suggested that the average IQ of hiphop listeners was around 88 so maybe I should go with that. I realize this math isn’t really an objective way to infer IQ but I think it’d be an intriguing project nonetheless. Do you also happen to know offhand the correlation between IQ and vocabulary, I was just going to dig around myself but if you already know it then fuck it.
Also would it be possible to make something similar to your biodemographic IQ test but for rappers. Instead of just vocabulary I could also factor in income, promiscuity, height, weight, etc?
Z scores are calculated using the mean and SD of some population so you need to know the IQ of that population from which the Z scores are derived. Vocabulary correlates 0.7-0.8; so high that vocabulary is often used as an IQ score itself, not something which predicts IQ so you’re better off predicting IQ from biodemograohics & then validating the predictions with vocabulary scores
If you want you can publish it here as a guest post with me as the co-author revising the stats when required.
Then you could link to it from anywhere.
But if you prefer to work independently then just let us know when it’s published so we can read it
“Z scores are calculated using the mean and SD of some population so you need to know the IQ of that population from which the Z scores are derived.”
Right so I should probably make two separate lists, or I could just use the white IQ and notify the audience that the black IQ is inflated.
“you’re better off predicting IQ from biodemograohics & then validating the predictions with vocabulary scores”
Okay, so how did you calculate IQ from biodemographics? Should be easy for me to get.
Right so I should probably make two separate lists, or I could just use the white IQ and notify the audience that the black IQ is inflated.
As you know Z score = raw score – mean raw score/SD. So in order to calculate it, you have to have a mean and an SD. The mean and SD of what group? I assume your’re comparing the vocab of famous rappers to other famous rappers, so I would use the mean IQ of famous rappers which is probably like 102 with an SD of 12. So if someone has a Z score of 2 (using famous rappers as the reference group) their IQ is 2(12) + 102 = 126.
Okay, so how did you calculate IQ from biodemographics? Should be easy for me to get.
Well let’s say the average ghetto thug has an IQ of 75 with an SD of 15 and Jay Z is the richest ghetto thug in America. That would give him a money Z score of perhaps +5 with respect to ghetto thugs, but since IQ and money only correlate 0.5, that would give him an IQ Z score of (0.5)+5 = 2.5
An IQ Z score of +2.5 with reference to ghetto thugs equals an IQ of 2.5(15) + 75 = 113
Seems a little low in his case, but then that’s to be expected given the large margin of error in these predictions.
Also, where did you get the .7 correlation from?
My first google search gave me 6.2.
https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-6f5ee46ca8b32d737f3b20aa4a8cbed3
” I assume your’re comparing the vocab of famous rappers to other famous rappers, so I would use the mean IQ of famous rappers
(using famous rappers as the reference group)”
Well im trying to figure out the IQ for multiple rappers based on their relative vocabularies to each other. So I feel like it’d be circular to use the mean IQ of famous rappers, since that’s what I’m trying to figure out. I was basically going to calculate the mean and SD of vocabulary from this chart here: https://pudding.cool/projects/vocabulary/index.html
and then convert it into a relative scale like you did with height here: https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/08/29/height-iq/
So let’s say eminem has a vocabulary z-score of +2 the formula I’d use would be (2x.75)15+100= expected IQ And let’s say Tupac has a z-score of +1 i would instead use (1x.75)12+85= expected IQ. basically what I’m asking is should I just go with that? Or would it be better to use the mean white IQ for tupac or vice versa? I also thought about using the SAT scores of hiphop listeners. Isn’t the SAT essentially an IQ test or at least highly correlated?
“Well let’s say the average ghetto thug has an IQ of 75 with an SD of 15 and Jay Z is the richest ghetto thug in America. That would give him a money Z score of perhaps +5 with respect to ghetto thugs, but since IQ and money only correlate 0.5, that would give him an IQ Z score of (0.5)+5 = 2.5”
Well yeah, I knew all that I’m talking about how to integrate multiple factors not just income or vocabulary.
Like for you biodemographic test you used religiosity,political affiliation, drug addiction, height, weight etc.
” I assume your’re comparing the vocab of famous rappers to other famous rappers, so I would use the mean IQ of famous rappers
(using famous rappers as the reference group)”
Well im trying to figure out the IQ for multiple rappers based on their relative vocabularies to each other. So I feel like it’d be circular to use the mean IQ of famous rappers, since that’s what I’m trying to figure out.
But you can’t figure that out from your data because your data only includes famous rappers, it does not include a general population reference group with with which to compare the famous rapper to. Now maybe if you went out and found a group of non-famous wannabe rappers and analyzed their lyrics for vocab, you’d have a control group, which would be really interesting, but would require a lot of independent research.
So instead what you can do is say, we have the equivalent of IQ scores for these famous rappers which ranks them from highest to lowest, & we can convert them to Z scores where a Z score of 0 = the average famous rapper’s IQ. We also have some independent research suggesting famous rappers average IQs of 102 with an SD of 12, so w’re going to assign a Z score of 0 in this sample an IQ of 102 with each Z score point above or below 2 equaling 12 points, and from here we can convert the vocab of every famous rapper in our sample to an IQ equivalent. So it’s not circular because you’re still finding out something that was not already known (the IQ of individual rappers) but you’re using the IQ of rappers as a group to find it.
So let’s say eminem has a vocabulary z-score of +2 the formula I’d use would be (2x.75)15+100= expected IQ And let’s say Tupac has a z-score of +1 i would instead use (1x.75)12+85= expected IQ.
I wouldn’t multiply by 0.75 because that implies you’re using their vocab to predict IQ which is technically fine, but leads to an unsatisfying article. Better to make predictions from biodemographics, and then using vocab as the psychometric data being predicted because vocab is essentially an IQ test (see the Peabody Picture Vocabulary test for example). If you use everything as a prediction, then you have no final data to test if the predictions were right and where’s the fun in that?
basically what I’m asking is should I just go with that? Or would it be better to use the mean white IQ for tupac or vice versa? I also thought about using the SAT scores of hiphop listeners. Isn’t the SAT essentially an IQ test or at least highly correlated?
yes but famous rappers are an especially successful subset of hip hoppers so equating the mean vocab of famous rappers with the mean IQ of their listeners will underestimate them.
“Well let’s say the average ghetto thug has an IQ of 75 with an SD of 15 and Jay Z is the richest ghetto thug in America. That would give him a money Z score of perhaps +5 with respect to ghetto thugs, but since IQ and money only correlate 0.5, that would give him an IQ Z score of (0.5)+5 = 2.5”
Well yeah, I knew all that I’m talking about how to integrate multiple factors not just income or vocabulary.
Like for you biodemographic test you used religiosity,political affiliation, drug addiction, height, weight etc.
Using multiple predictions requires a huge number of calculations because it involves n-dimensional space. I actually made a computer program to do it. Most rappers only have one salient IQ correlate, but if you prefer to use multiples, this formula should serve your purposes:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/05/17/revised-formula-for-estimating-iq-from-bio-demographics/
“I wouldn’t multiply by 0.75 because that implies you’re using their vocab to predict IQ which is technically fine, but leads to an unsatisfying article. Better to make predictions from biodemographics, and then using vocab as the psychometric data being predicted because vocab is essentially an IQ test (see the Peabody Picture Vocabulary test for example). If you use everything as a prediction, then you have no final data to test if the predictions were right and where’s the fun in that?”
Yeah I was thinking it’d be boring if I only used the prior formula. The results would be extremely predictable that’s why I asked about your biodemographic test.
So I guess I should calculate rapper IQ using your biodemographic formula and see how well it predicts the vocabularies of rappers? And then whatever that correlation is I could multiply it by the Z-score of their VQ (vocabulary quotient) and convert it to IQ. I think that would give more varied/interesting results. Or would that be redundant. If so then I should probably just stick with just seeing how well IQ predicts their vocab huh? I wouldn’t think it’s redundant because I’d be adding another causal factor on top of all the other factors utilized in your biodemographic formula and therefore it should technically be more accurate than only using the formula itself? Am I wrong for believing that?
So I guess I should calculate rapper IQ using your biodemographic formula and see how well it predicts the vocabularies of rappers?
Your main goal should simply be converting the rappers’ vocabs into IQ scores. That in and of itself would be a major contribution to the field. The biodemographics would simply be a way of validating your results & could even be left to a follow-up article.
And then whatever that correlation is I could multiply it by the Z-score of their VQ (vocabulary quotient) and convert it to IQ. I think that would give more varied/interesting results. Or would that be redundant.
It would be redundant. Traditionally biodemographics have been used to predict IQ and vocabulary has been used to measure it so I would maintain that distinction. It keeps things nice and simple & allows you to actually come to a conclusion.
I wouldn’t think it’s redundant because I’d be adding another causal factor on top of all the other factors utilized in your biodemographic formula and therefore it should technically be more accurate than only using the formula itself? Am I wrong for believing that?
imagine you wanted to know the height of rappers in inches. You had a formula for predicting their height from biodemographic traits like weight and gender, but you also had a list of their stadiometer measures (in cm). Would you simply add the stadiometer measure as yet another predictor to be used with the biodemographics, or would you simply convert it into inches and accept it as the final result? You would probably do the latter because the whole point of biodemographic formulas is to predict how people will perform on the actual measurement. The stadiometer is an actual measurement of height just as a vocabulary score is the actual measurement of IQ (though admittedly not as accurate as a stadiometer).
“Your main goal should simply be converting the rappers’ vocabs into IQ scores.”
Right, so you’re saying I should convert Vocab to IQ and THEN compare it to the biodemographic results, but how should I do this? You keep suggesting a mean of 102 and a SD of 12 as the reference group but I’m not sure how you’re getting those figures. If that’s just an example then fine, but if I’m going to do this I want to make sure the reference group is an accurate representation. That’s why I was using the mean white and black IQ’s because at the end of the day most rappers are still apart of those demographics. And honestly I don’t see how your way is more accurate than simply finding the correlation between their VQ and their biodemographic results. It actually seems like it’d accomplish the same thing, because if Vocab measurements are basically IQ tests then converting it is kind of pointless…Right?
Sorry if my questions and shit seem dumb Pumpkin. I’m not educated in this stuff but I want to learn because it’s interesting to me.
“imagine you wanted to know the height of rappers in inches. You had a formula for predicting their height from biodemographic traits like weight and gender, but you also had a list of their stadiometer measures (in cm). Would you simply add the stadiometer measure as yet another predictor to be used with the biodemographics, or would you simply convert it into inches and accept it as the final result? You would probably do the latter because the whole point of biodemographic formulas is to predict how people will perform on the actual measurement. The stadiometer is an actual measurement of height just as a vocabulary score is the actual measurement of IQ (though admittedly not as accurate as a stadiometer).”
Ah. so because vocab is essentially an IQ test itself, it would be redundant to add it to the biodemographic formula?
Right, so you’re saying I should convert Vocab to IQ and THEN compare it to the biodemographic results, but how should I do this? You keep suggesting a mean of 102 and a SD of 12 as the reference group but I’m not sure how you’re getting those figures. If that’s just an example then fine, but if I’m going to do this I want to make sure the reference group is an accurate representation.
The figures come from a very brief unpublished article I wrote about a year ago called “The average IQ of top rappers” where I used the known IQs of Jay Z & Will Smith to estimate the average IQ of successful rappers in general. The idea is that if you know the IQs of the smartest 1% or 2% of a group, you can crudely estimate the average IQ of the group.
That’s why I was using the mean white and black IQ’s because at the end of the day most rappers are still apart of those demographics.
But just because rappers are black, you can’t assume they have the average IQ of blacks. That’s like assuming because the NBA is black, they have the average height of blacks.
Sorry if my questions and shit seem dumb Pumpkin. I’m not educated in this stuff but I want to learn because it’s interesting to me.
no they don’t seem dumb.
“imagine you wanted to know the height of rappers in inches. You had a formula for predicting their height from biodemographic traits like weight and gender, but you also had a list of their stadiometer measures (in cm). Would you simply add the stadiometer measure as yet another predictor to be used with the biodemographics, or would you simply convert it into inches and accept it as the final result? You would probably do the latter because the whole point of biodemographic formulas is to predict how people will perform on the actual measurement. The stadiometer is an actual measurement of height just as a vocabulary score is the actual measurement of IQ (though admittedly not as accurate as a stadiometer).”
Ah. so because vocab is essentially an IQ test itself, it would be redundant to add it to the biodemographic formula?
Exactly. Using vocab to predict IQ is like using IQ to predict IQ. Technically it can be done, but doing so would likely make your article needlessly confusing.
Sorry for the late reply.
Two more questions Pumpkin, i’ve been doing alot of digging but I can’t seem to find anything similar to what you’re proposing to do as far as using the z scores and the correlations. Can you explain the logic behind it for me as to why this would be accurate or at least cite some reading material?
I also forgot to ask you that if I don’t multiply by .75 then what am I supposed to multiply it by?
Besides that though I think I have an idea of what I’m going to do, but I would like to hear some criticism and insight from you before you publish it. Because if I can go back and make some improvements I will.
Two more questions Pumpkin, i’ve been doing alot of digging but I can’t seem to find anything similar to what you’re proposing to do as far as using the z scores and the correlations. Can you explain the logic behind it for me as to why this would be accurate or at least cite some reading material?
The logic is based upon the fact that when you have a scatter plot, the best way to predict a value of Y if all you know is the value of X is to draw a line of best fit, because by definition, the line of best fit maximizes the closeness of all the values to the line.
Now the formula to predict the likely value of Y given X from the line of best fit is:
Y = mX + b (where m is the slope of the line and b is the Y intercept).
Now the beauty of converting data to Z scores is that assuming a bivariate normal distribution, m will equal the correlation between X and Y and b will equal zero, so given a 0.5 correlation, the formula is just:
Z score of Y = 0.5(Z score of X) + 0
The reason you don’t read much about this is that most researchers prefer to keep their data in its original units, so rather than expressing everything as Z scores, height is expressed in inches, weight expressed in pounds, etc.
I also forgot to ask you that if I don’t multiply by .75 then what am I supposed to multiply it by?
You multiply by 12 since that’s the likely SD of famous rappers, and then you add it to the mean IQ of famous rappers. Remember since vocab is arguably an IQ test in its own right, you’re not using vocab to predict IQ, so you’re not multiplying by a correlation, but rather you’re multiplying by the SD of the group from which the Z scores were derived.
It would be like if someone told me a certain NBA player had a height Z score of 2 compared to other NBA players. If I knew the average NBA player has a height of 78 inches with an SD of 2 inches, then his Z score can be converted to height as follows:
height Z score * height SD + mean height,
2 * 2 inches + 78 inches
82 inches
Besides that though I think I have an idea of what I’m going to do, but I would like to hear some criticism and insight from you before you publish it. Because if I can go back and make some improvements I will.
sounds good
I even thought about doing linear regression but I don’t have any y values for it, so at that point im just treading water.
“Now the beauty of converting data to Z scores is that assuming a bivariate normal distribution, m will equal the correlation between X and Y and b will equal zero, so given a 0.5 correlation, the formula is just:”
Ah, but my data has a positive skew so maybe that isn’t the best way to convert the data into IQ.
“You multiply by 12 since that’s the likely SD of famous rappers, and then you add it to the mean IQ of famous rappers. Remember since vocab is arguably an IQ test in its own right, you’re not using vocab to predict IQ, so you’re not multiplying by a correlation, but rather you’re multiplying by the SD of the group from which the Z scores were derived.”
Oh wow I’m a dumbass that makes sense. But of course that rests on the assumption that the vocabulary test for rappers is highly correlated to say the Peabody. I wonder how I’d go about testing that? I assume if my vocab test predicts similar things that an IQ test would I would be safe to assume, but I don’t think that is actually the case simply on the nature of the rap game. For example IQ predicts income to some degree so if this Vocab test is similar to IQ it should predict income among rappers, but it doesn’t because Jay z is slightly above average despite being the richest MC.
” If I knew the average NBA player has a height of 78 inches with an SD of 2 inches, then his Z score can be converted to height as follows:”
Speaking of height I think I found a way to measure the average IQ of famous Rappers, which I could then use as the y intercept for converting their individual Vocab to IQ. Since height and IQ are both normally distributed then the slope of the line of best fit is equal to the correlation (like you said). Since I know the height of most of my sample I should be able to calculate their Average IQ. Assuming the correlation between height and IQ is about .3, that gives rappers an average IQ of 88 because Rappers are only an Inch taller than the black mean and the SD is about 3 inches (Though I’m not sure if I used the right formula for converting SE into SD). I should note, this figure is startlingly close to the figure William produced for the average hip hop listener.
It seems a little low doesn’t it? But maybe it isn’t When you think about it, it may not actually take much IQ to be a famous rapper. There is video evidence that Lil Pump is extremely stupid, he doesn’t even understand BASIC math but yet he’s worth 8 million and is one of the most famous rappers out right now.
Either way, I have already started writing it and if I run into any problems I’ll holla at you. But let me know what you think of my figure of 88 based on height.
Actually i was wrong the figure is 86
Mean black height is 69.5 inches with an SD of 3.85
Mean Rapper height is 70.6 inches with an SD of 3.1
Height correlation to IQ is about .3
70.6-69.5 =1.1
1.1/3.85= .3
.3*.3=.09
.09*12=1.1
1.1+85= 86
Height correlation to IQ is about .3
Most studies would put at 0.25. I realize you’re just rounding but small differences can have big effects here
70.6-69.5 =1.1
1.1/3.85= .3
.3*.3=.09
In this case it would make sense to divide by the correlation not multiply. Rappers are not really selected for height; rather they’re selected for musical achievements which are crudely correlated with IQ which in turn is crudely correlates with height so their height has regressed from their IQ which in turn has regressed from their success.
.09*12=1.1
Since you’re trying to estimate how far they deviate from the black population,you should use the black SD (15) not the SD of the profession itself (12)
LMAO I love how that just “magically” equals 102. Im on to you….
Also I assumed the Black SD was 12 that’s why I was using it.
Yes I noticed that too. I know it’s suspicious that it so perfectly confirms my estimate of rapper IQ but it’s not BS.
See this article from years ago when I used the height of my readers to estimate their mean IQ (which was much higher in those days)
https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/09/10/brain-size-readers-tower-with-an-average-iq-of-147/
Also note this was the technique Michael Woodley used to estimate Victorians had an iq of 115.
They were 0.5 faster in reaction time but since RT only correlates around 0.54 with IQ (he claimed) he divided 0.5 by 0.54 to infer a 1 SD advantage.
He discussed it with me here:
https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/06/15/were-the-victorians-genetically-smarter-than-modern-westerners/comment-page-1/#comment-66
make sure to add mfdoom
I will, he’s on the list I got.
Pumpkin would help a lot social clueless people like me if he did a presentation of the 20 most frequent commenters and also some of the former commenters people refer to (like those two girls, the giant one and the other) , and their usual (pseudo)name. It could be just 2/10 lines per persona. But with the relevant data.
I try to do what I am bad at in order to improve my skills !
Philo :
Self proclaimed antisemitic schizoid male , in his late thirties, and midly autistic, but denying the latter, he is adept of right wing conspiracy theories.
He comes from a disfunctional family. He has experience working in the Uk. He has been fired many times. But he keeps finding new jobs easilly. He probably works in a mass market job like merchant bank, higher lever call center job, property salesman or even higher end fashion shop salesman
He presumes of being attractive but not caring too much (not much gym, pretty face) about it. He didn’t build up much rapport with the 2 girls who used to comment on the blog though.
He is paradoxically quite open to new ideas. He likes being a contrarian and claims to be insensitive to other people feelings, wich is probably partially true. He engages in compulsive fights with other commenters, but more in a playful way, not always understood.
He doesn’t like gay people and mocks blacks, more as a group than person. He is liked by Gondwanaman (an intelligent and kind self deprecating black guy working in Florida, attending a law school part time and self funded).
He succeeded in getting Afro out (a rich French black adopted young lawyer, metrosexual bodybuilder) out while staying in the blog.
He is not good at math/science but didn’t rationalize it away. He is quite creative. More than everyone else, he is less important to the blog than he claims and believes to be, but much more than most people would admit.
So many incorrect details its unbelievable. Especially about the part where you say I have autism, even though you are the most obvious autist outside of anime here. In fact I’m the only person here who has proof that he ISNT autistic since I was tested for it by a psychologist.
Bruno:
Rigid aspergers male with southern european ancestry. Very intense aspergers. Has no imagination or creativity. Cannot understand emotions on peoples faces. His girlfriend compared him to Sheldon from the big bang theory.
Bruno also obsessively learned 14 other languages in his spare time including really obscure ones like Finnish and Sanskrit. Seems to be a kind of ‘rain man’ lite. Talks like a robot on many occasions with over the top formalism in his comments.
Bruno also never really denies he has autism unlike others because hes probably been told by many people in his offline life that he has it.
Apologist for jews. Supports the jews no matter what the position is they hold even if its contradictory. Likes using the word ‘antisemitic’ seriously like its some sort of medical condition. Has aspergers.
In fact I’m the only person here who has proof that he ISNT autistic since I was tested for it by a psychologist.
You weren’t tested, you were given a questionnaire that allowed you to rate yourself (hardly objective), and you were only given it after not one, but two psychologists independently accused you of having autism. By contrast Bruno & Anime took an actual test of social intelligence (which you’re too scared to take) and both scored above average. Admittedly the test was not that good, but it’s more proof than you have.
Has no imagination or creativity.
Has enough creativity to make interesting comments that are sometimes quite funny.
His girlfriend compared him to Sheldon from the big bang theory.
Just the fact that he has a girlfriend who is socially aware enough to make that comparison belies him having autism.
Bruno also obsessively learned 14 other languages in his spare time including really obscure ones like Finnish and Sanskrit.
And that’s a bad thing?
Apologist for jews. Supports the jews no matter what the position is they hold even if its contradictory.
Actually Bruno has agreed with Kevin MacDonald’s analysis of Jewish influence, he’s just not as tribal as you, nor is he a bigot who lumps all Jews together as if they were the same. You’re the one who is contradictory in that you attack Jews while worshiping the wildly pro-Israel trump who’s leaving a huge chunck of his fortune to Jewish grandkids & has pissed all over the Palestinians. You’re not even truly anti-semetic either, you just really hate blacks & blame Jews for helping them get civil rights. Sad.
Puppy if I went to court and said a psychologist proved I don’t have autism and Bruno went to court and said he did Puppy’s online social reasoning test which gave him 12/12 even though he can’t recognise emotions on people’s faces – which one one the court rule aspergers?
Thats right puppy.
Case closed.
They’d rule you do because Bruno has a good job & girlfriend while you’ve been fired 15 times & live in someone’s basement. Plus that social reasoning test was made by psychologists & published in a peer reviewed journal.
And on cross-examination your psychologist would be forced to admit his clinical impression was you had autism, as was the psychologist’s before him, plus the questionnaire he gave is subjective & lacks construct validity
😂
Philo, i hope you didn’t resent my description because I like your persona (at least)
In fact weirdly, people strongly opposes me when I say I may be an aspie, because they say I make people laugh and feel confortable . They say I am always happy without mood and people see me as roc they can rely on. I think all this is formally true but I feel inside I have emotional restrictions.
So the fact is exactly the oppoite to your analysis : people see me as normal but I analyse myself and feel not normal .