Do ALL people with AS have above average intelligence?

Post Reply New Topic

Aspergers isn't - it's a difference. And with the other parts of the Spectrum the retardation is secondary, not primary.

Thanks for clearing this up, it got confusing. Where I live HFA is still diagnosed as AS and it confuses the hell out me that it's not used the same everywhere.



Which proper testing procedure though? Wechsler, IST, Cattell or else? I was talking about random scores in just these tests. It is often a problem to determine the IQ of children on the spectrum with these tests, let alone the IQ of nonverbal adults. Of course, to determine mental retardation or above average is very possible with these tests, just the exacts are blurry. To determine whether someone has an average or above average IQ is a little harder on non-standard-people.



Another thing I wanted to write for some time now, but didn't have time for. It's about the average IQ based on current definition of the IQ. That's not particularly directed at TLPG, but very much towards the general audience. I see many people on the boards comparing IQs which is often nonsense.

The average IQ can't be 80 to 100 according to the current definition that considers the Gauss'sche Glockenkurve (I hope this is legible, I don't know the translation), because average intelligence is defined as two standard deviations from the average. So, let's think of a sd of 15 (it's 15 in the original Wechsler tests). Then an IQ between 85 and 115 is average.

This is based on the following:

100 is the midpoint, the mode and the median. About 68,26% of the population always score in the range from 100+15 and 100-15, which translates into an average IQ of 85 to 115.
By the way, of course 34,13% scores between 85 and 100, as well as 34,13% of the population scores between 100 and 115. And because of that, the whole range in considered as 'average'.

If we said an IQ between 80 and 100 is average, then it's not correct according to Gauß.


About Mensa...
I don't know about Mensa elsewhere, but it seems highly unlikely that there's an official statement on IQs, because depending on the test, an IQ score of 118 is equivalent to that of 130 which means highly gifted and Mensa level.

So it should say only the top 2& are allowed in (as Mensa International still says), because it's useless to talk about IQ numbers when talking, when percentile ratings matter in comparisons.


It's one thing to have an IQ of 172 in American tests or tests that use a sd of 24. Someone who has an IQ of 146 in a tests that is based on a sd of 15 is still brighter, if only just. (172 = 145)

Officially it's rather impossible to score higher than 145 though. Everything that goes higher than the third sd is guesswork. And guesswork tends to be tricky. It can be accurate, but there's no indication that it is so.

Sora the mid point isn't 100. It's 90. Which means the 15 SD you refer to (which although I don't agree neccessarily I do accept) would be 75 to 105.

Proper testing procedure? Because I'm not familiar with the specifics of the tests you nominated I don't know, but at a guess it would be a combination of all of the above - because of the very problems you described with certain aspects of some tests giving scores that don't truly reflect the intelligence of the person on the Spectrum.

I think the intelligence percentages you gave reflect on the general improvement in the education systems of the world - although there are gaps developing here and there.

If the the scores don't accurately reflect the intelligence of the person on the Spectrum, then how is the IQ pre-requisite a fair diagnostic criteria? If the scores don't accurately reflect their intelligence, then how can the diagnosis of an ASD be reliant upon IQ, when the tests, as you said, don't accurately reflect the intelligence of the person?

Until the release of the DSM-V, the DSM-IV is the correct and proper source. And above average IQ is not a requirement for diagnosis.

Sorry, but this is driving me crazy as my son has the PDD-NOS diagnosis -

PDD-NOS = meets some but not enough of the diagnostic criteria to receive a full autism diagnosis. That's it. Whoever's saying PDD-NOS = autism + low IQ, stop it.

Well, a lot of our crazy spellings are due to the way words used to be pronounced. Unfortunately, at around the time the printing press was developed and spelling began to be standardized, the "Great Vowel Shift" occurred. Result? Crazy spelling!

As someone who will have my Masters in speech pathology in a few months, I feel qualified to comment on the subject. By the way, I agree with Daniel.

2ukenkerl, you listed just a few examples of possible speech disorders. There are many more possibilities than those few. Difficulty with the prosody (timing and intonation) of speech can definitely be a speech disorder (depending on the level of severity of course and the impact on the person), and is something that speech pathologists frequently target when working with clients with autism, aphasia, dysarthria, apraxia, etc. Of course, prosody is at a "higher level" in the hierarchy of speech subsystems, so prosody is usually only targeted when lower level deficits have been ameliorated (ex. respiratory support, articulation, etc.).

Last edited by LostInSpace on 12 Jan 2008, 12:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Stuttering is a speech disorder. Yes, everyone has *disfluencies* at times. Everyone is not a stutterer at times, however. There are actually criteria for what constitutes a stutterer (although it's not always as straightforward as counting disfluencies- there are important cognitive and affective components as well).

Difficulty using speech appropriately to communicate ideas, emotions, etc. (which prosody is pretty important for) is considered a disorder of pragmatic language. Even something like not being able to carry out the give-and-take of conversation would be considered to be part of a pragmatic language disorder. Maybe you don't consider yourself to have a pragmatic language disorder. That's fine. But there of plenty of people with autism who do, and difficulty with prosody usually plays a role.

Actually, generally the WISC-IV (for kids- the WAIS for adults) is used in the US. That has a standard deviation of 15. I've never heard of a real IQ test which has a standard deviation above 16- maybe online tests do. You're right about difficulties above 145 though. Generally the Stanford-Binet LM is used when it is necessary to differentiate the highest IQs, but that is pretty old, and it has produced results that don't conform to the expected probability curve.

Although the Wechsler tests technically go up to 160, the cap is generally considered to be in the 140s. It's really unusual for someone to score above the upper 140s on the Wechsler tests, and difference of 5 or 10 points on the WISC can be a 30-40 point difference on the Stanford-Binet. Incidentally, my verbal IQ on the WISC was 147 (measured as a teenager so they used the kid one), but I'm looking into getting tested with the Stanford-Binet, for curiosity's sake (and, I admit, to feel good about myself- sad as it sounds, my intelligence is the one thing I really like about myself).

Honestly, does it really matter whether you're talking about speech or language disorders? They are both treated by the same type of professional. Writing "speech disorder" is shorter than writing "speech and language disorder." Was that what the argument was about to start with? That wasn't the impression I got. It seems to be me that the argument was not going well for you, and then it suddenly devolved into a debate on semantics.

Last edited by LostInSpace on 12 Jan 2008, 12:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

The midpoint is 100 for pretty much all IQ tests (all I know of, and I know a lot about neuropsychological testing). Sora is right. The mean score is 100, and the standard deviation is 15 (except for the Stanford-Binet and maybe some others, which have a standard deviation of 16). The mean has been 100 since the first IQ test was developed by Binet. In fact, a lot of speech and language tests (which are not IQ tests) provide a scale to translate a raw score into a standardized score with 100 as the mean. I don't know why you think it's 90.

Some kinds of tests which evaluate nonverbal, fluid intelligence, like Raven's Progressive Matrices, often produce much higher scores for individuals with autism, and may more closely reflect someone's actual level of intelligence. Fluid intelligence should be more highly weighted than crystallized intelligence when testing IQ anyway. There have been some really interesting studies done with individuals who test as ret*d on the most commonly administered IQ tests, but who do much better on Raven's Progressive Matrices (not because it's easy either- it just gets at the idea of intelligence in a different way).

Wow, I just posted a lot. Sorry! I haven't been on lately, and this debate is pretty interesting. It gets at two of my major interests- speech language pathology and neuropsychological testing.

Additionally, my Masters thesis is on prosody in autism (I've got 100+ articles to start wading though this weekend). If people are curious, I can post a link to it when it's finished, since I'll probably have it available on my online portfolio.

LostInSpace - I have no idea where you got the idea the mid point was 100. Online tests maybe? Sorry, I've know since I was at school that the mid point is 90, and that 80 is within the acceptable range of "average". The Binet Test by the way is one of the worst going around - I've heard. If it's based on a mid point of 100 then no wonder. Don't do that test.

Also, you don't write "speech and language disorder" unless both are there. Then you HAVE to write both. If there's one but not the other, you put one only. And the dispute was always about semantics - because Daniel was mixing things that he shouldn't have and was causing confusion as a result.

Myboys - PDD-NOS is Autism + average IQ, not low IQ. So it wasn't me saying that - and I don't think anyone was.

And finally;

Unless anyone else in here has a trained source - as I do (I'm not clinically trained myself, my views are based on a person who is as we have discussed this a lot) it's not productive to debate interpretation in here. Just wanted to point that out.

IQ tests are inaccurate for people with Aspergers Syndrome.
What people need to understand; it's not really greater intelligence that is gained, though it is highly probable. No, what is truly the "trade-off" in Aspergers (trading social understanding) is the ability to think logical and technically. The ability to interpret or apply such is dependant upon the person. Aspergers affects the way in which you think - not how well you do it.
That said, I am, technically, a genius. So is my youngest sibling. I have the ability to exploit my Aspergers. Not everyone can, and not everyone has a high level of logical understanding.
A good example, people with Aspergers or Autism are far more likely to be computer literate than neurotypicals. That said, again, not always the case.