IQ

Post Reply New Topic

You can search this forum for threads about "Asperger's IQ diagnostic criteria" and I'm sure you will find some of the discussions. What I said was not FSIQ score is used, but "normal or higher IQ" is used as a diagnostic criteria, and in some discussions somewhere on this forum, that was specified further to 70 or higher, since 100 +- 30, or 70-130, is considered normal. The part I asked you about was if FSIQ is the only IQ used for these kind of diagnostic criteria, or if tests like only logical / spatial reasoning also is used. I didn't mean to claim anything, only to acknowledge what you said by repeating it and agreeing.

So what I'm saying is that "normal or higher IQ" is a diagnostic criteria, if the IQ is lower than 70, from what I've read, you end up in the classic autism box, or atleast outside the Asperger-box

1 of 177 have an IQ of 138, or 99.43% like you said, but thats beside my point. Aspies usually have lower verbal IQ, this is true, but also usually higher logical IQ. If you can give me a link to where you read that aspies IQ is slightly lower than the mean of the general population, I would surely enjoy reading it. Cause I have read the oposite during my weeks of Asperger's Syndrome obsession.

I saw the poll, voted, and then saw the post underneath that said "only if you have never been tested".

Um, I have been tested but not told. And I have also done online tests and have an unofficial answer.

So my answer really reflects the results of online tests.

I feel exactly the same.

On the one hand, I know I can't possibly be unintelligent, based upon empirical evidence to the contrary, but various things I do that are just SO DUMB (but aren't actually signs of non-intelligence) like forgetting things, being slow to realise what people mean sometimes etc. make me think otherwise.

[What a convoluted sentence that was. I'm sorry. I'm too tired to re-read and fix it. I'm sure all you smarty pants will figure it out.]

I rely on what other people (psychotherapist, teachers from my childhood) tell me, as well as evidence like looking back at how freaking advanced my school work was when I was just an 11-year old kid etc.).

I couldn't bear to do an IQ test and get what I would perceive as a low score and forever feel dumb and slow and behind everyone else.

I'm used to feeling "ahead of the game" and feeling like I'm on warp speed compared to the people I'm with. I'd be afraid that finding out I had a low IQ would change my perception of myself and my thinking abilities.

Don't worry, there are more difficult cases here, without meaning to offense, TechnoDog, Mydar, sometimes MrXxx... They are inspiring. Believe me, I'm a foreigner!

Anyway, I just don't understand why an IQ test would be so scary. I had no choice but to take one, as it was part of my evaluation. I realized well before that that my IQ is not actually as high as some of the people's I knew either in real life or on the internet.

An IQ test is an IQ test, no more. Think of it as an exam, with no particular consequences. What they measure is the ability to take such tests, no more. Real intelligence is different, let alone life skills intelligence.

No, there's no clear (non-controversial) evidence for a typical VIQ>PIQ or PIQ>VIQ for Aspies in the studies. Some argue that a stereotypical Aspie would have a higher verbal IQ than performance IQ which would mean that such a person would be very close to someone with NVLD, but the majority think that such a distinction is meaningless. Indeed, if you look into the typical scatter of IQ subtests and sub-indexes, you'll see every kind of pattern, and no consistent findings as of yet. For example, my largest split is within PIQ, as my PRI (POI) is 44 points higher than my PSI. They not even calculated my PIQ and VIQ, perhaps for this very reason.

Anyway, here are some links to read:

Essentials of Wisc-iv Assessment
http://books.google.hu/books?id=taaLZsy ... &q&f=false
(look at pages 247-248 )

Clinical Presentation of Autism Spectrum Disorders in Intellectually Gifted Students:
http://books.google.hu/books?id=eby-FW0 ... &q&f=false
(read pages 35-38 )

I Google informs me that the average college student is 115-125 IQ. The results of various studies came about by either inferring IQ from SAT scores (I am in the U.S.) or outright giving IQ tests to college students. I couldn't find any study that parsed it out by specific schools. All the data was lumped together, so students at M.I.T. and students at party schools got lumped together, thus the wide range. I got B's and C's at a reputable university long ago- neither an Ivy nor a party school. So if I took an IQ test back then I might have scored in the middle of their average: 120. I got middle grades at a mid-tier school so I put myself in the middle of their party-school-to-Ivy range.

So why did I rank myself down below 120 now? Because I'm middle aged. I know the standard line is that IQ is "set" in adulthood and what you were at 22 is what you are at 42 and beyond. If somebody takes an IQ test in their early 20's and scores 120, that's presumed to be their permanent IQ. But I have read a fair amount of IQ research and some researchers say otherwise. They say that crystallized intelligence goes up with age (the wisdom of experience) but other measures such as working memory capacity and processing speed go down. There is also a certain mental flexibility that people in their 20's have that is lost in age. Thus great scientists generally do their best work in youth and spend the rest of their lives refining that work with increasing crystallized knowledge but slower and slower and more and more forgetful.

Would the increase in my crystallized knowledge offset the decrease in my processing speed, short term memory capacity and mental flexibility? Probably not on a timed test. And real (rather than online) IQ tests are time. My best guess for myself right this minute were I to take a test is 115. Some days I feel foggy and slow, depending on such things as how much sleep I got- which affects me far more than it did in youth. So I could dip down to 110 or even lower on those days. That's why I chose 100-115 rather than 115-129.

Last edited by Janissy on 31 May 2012, 2:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.

At this point in the conversation I'm going to shut up and tell you to read what Ojani wrote to you. Forget what you've read about this stuff on WP and read the links OJani provided you, good stuff, especially the 2nd link. Thanks OJani.

Thanks alot for the links, very interesting reads.


On page 246 there are mentioned some research papers (Ghaziuddin & Mountain-Kimchi, 2004 / Koyama et al., 2007;Klin et al., 2005) that conclude that Verbal IQ is higher in children with Asperger's than in children with Autism. On page 247 the graph also shows that Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI) is higher than the average. While PRI is also higher, PSI is much lower than average, and therefore PIQ is hard to determine. The graph does show VCI being higher than PRI, and since PSI is alot lower, the PIQ would not be higher than VCI. So what I'm reading from that link you gave me, is that Verbal Comprehension Index(a part of Verbal IQ) is, on average, higher than Performance IQ in individuals with Asperger's. But Working Memory Index (WMI) is lower on average, so it's wrong to say that Verbal IQ is higher than Performance IQ, you are correct there, and thanks for making me aware of that. If we rephrase it to VCI > PIQ in individuals with Asperger's then we should be on the right track, but this would not be entirely correct when we take a look at DSM-5 (see below).


After reading both those links, I get the impression that "normal or higher IQ" is such a novel idea to all those with Asperger's that they have clinged to that notion since it was first suggested.

I also noticed that in DSM-5, there is no mention of IQ, or cognitive ability other than "Deficits in nonverbal communicative behaviors used for social interaction; ranging from poorly integrated- verbal and nonverbal communication, or deficits in understanding and use of nonverbal communication". It's basicly a lack of nonverbal communication, not verbal, other than "poorly integrated verbal communication" which, from what I understand, does not refer to VCI, but rather PSI, since the communication does not really process fast enough to be well integrated.

So basicly, individuals with AS / ASD(in DSM-5) do have lower performance IQ, more precisly the Processing Speed Index (PSI part of the performance IQ. On average VCI wont compensate enough to make the average FSIQ of someone with AS / ASD as high as the average of NTs, so all in all, is seems to be, based on the relativly small clinical samples, that the IQ(FSIQ) of Aspies are infact lower than NTs.

What this means is only that instead of people with AS being between 70 and 150 on the IQ scale, they may be between 70 and 145 instead(not below 70, since then it is defined as mental retardation). However, there is still a big span, like in the general population, to visualize it you can imagine a bell curve with 95 as the peak instead of 100.

You are welcome!

Hmm.. when I think about it, if the fact that a person is legally mentally ret*d, aka an IQ lower than 70, would exclude AS, then it would change alot. Does anyone know if you can be legally ret*d and have Asperger's, or does the one exclude the other?

If we compare Aspie-scores(minus all below 70) to the IQ scores spread across the general population where the 0-70 is still included, that would result in Aspies having an average IQ that is higher. But this is with the above thought criteria of course, which I am not sure is true.

Last edited by Blownmind on 31 May 2012, 3:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Solidarity vote from me. 60-80.

Even if we accept that people diagnosed with AS on average have higher VCI than PIQ (or rather, PRI or POI), this is by no means should be used as a rule when diagnosing. Even the DSM-IV says nothing that would exclude any other figure.


The DSM-IV only says this:

"E. There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood."

So a normal or close to normal cognitive development is well enough for an AS diagnosis even now.


I think it's the truth. We get the impression that AS folks are highly intelligent (IQ-wise) because we don't see or don't hear enough about those people who are actually more impaired, lower functioning, maybe have co-morbids that impose on them further impediments. However, I wouldn't narrow down the range, their IQs can be anywhere over 70.

The proportion of MR people in the general population is low. Their effect could be marginal in comparison to those factors that may result in a lower IQ in AS.

My IQ is definitely below 60 sometimes.

I voted in the poll according to my officially tested IQ - but I think the idea that a test can tell you someone's intelligence is ludicrous.

Fair enough. ~15% of the general population have an IQ between 95 and 100, while only ~2% are mentally ret*d. The 5 points from 95 to 100 far outweights the 69 points below 70.

Last edited by Blownmind on 01 Jun 2012, 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.