Comments on: First-borns have higher IQ scores http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/ will.thoughts.pop Sun, 23 Nov 2008 00:28:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Will http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17220 Will Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:14:19 +0000 http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17220 I would join Mensa but I don't know how to spell 'IQ'. I would join Mensa but I don’t know how to spell ‘IQ’.

]]> By: Carl http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17219 Carl Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:06:52 +0000 http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17219 Paul, you're forgetting that you're male, and your sister is female. So of course you are more intelligent. Read here : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4183166.stm. (And no, I'm not being serious, there is no need to reply.) Paul, you’re forgetting that you’re male, and your sister is female. So of course you are more intelligent. Read here : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4183166.stm.

(And no, I’m not being serious, there is no need to reply.)

]]> By: Paul Robinson http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17156 Paul Robinson Sun, 24 Jun 2007 14:12:45 +0000 http://willj.net/blog/2007/06/22/first-borns-have-higher-iq-scores/#comment-17156 That's crap. I'm the second oldest, and I definitely score higher than my sister on classic IQ tests, have better analytical skills and am better at maths and logic. Of course, part of the problem is that IQ is learned, not innate behaviour. I've had nearly two decades of experience of writing code for fun and profit, whilst my sister (elder by 8 years) hasn't programmed since she gave up trying on her Vic20. When I was 11, I scored around 115 on 'classic' IQ tests. By the age of 14 when I'd spent a few years coding earnestly, I was scoring 136 (which qualifies you for MENSA, but they're all wankers). When I was 19 it was up to around 140 (tested for by those lovely chaps in Cheltenham). When I was about 22 I took a break from coding and just did sysadmin work and after a few years it was down to 120. I've spent the last two years writing code day in and day out and I did a test a few weeks back to test my theory, and sure enough it was back up to 140. I.e. this research is bullshit. But then, so is the measure of "IQ". It doesn't really test anything meaningful, unless your life revolves around solving problems similar to those in IQ tests. That’s crap. I’m the second oldest, and I definitely score higher than my sister on classic IQ tests, have better analytical skills and am better at maths and logic.

Of course, part of the problem is that IQ is learned, not innate behaviour. I’ve had nearly two decades of experience of writing code for fun and profit, whilst my sister (elder by 8 years) hasn’t programmed since she gave up trying on her Vic20.

When I was 11, I scored around 115 on ‘classic’ IQ tests. By the age of 14 when I’d spent a few years coding earnestly, I was scoring 136 (which qualifies you for MENSA, but they’re all wankers).

When I was 19 it was up to around 140 (tested for by those lovely chaps in Cheltenham). When I was about 22 I took a break from coding and just did sysadmin work and after a few years it was down to 120. I’ve spent the last two years writing code day in and day out and I did a test a few weeks back to test my theory, and sure enough it was back up to 140.

I.e. this research is bullshit. But then, so is the measure of “IQ”. It doesn’t really test anything meaningful, unless your life revolves around solving problems similar to those in IQ tests.

]]>