The constant increase in IQ implies that the members of future generations will be geniuses compared to us
28 years ago, James R. Flynn (Flynn), a researcher at the University of Otago in New Zealand, discovered a phenomenon that social scientists have not yet been able to explain: since the beginning of the 20th century, there has been a constant increase in IQ in many parts of the world. Flynn looked at IQ test results in more than 25 countries and found that IQ increased in all of them by 0.3 points each year, meaning an increase of 3 full points every decade. Follow-up studies conducted for about 30 years confirmed the statistical findings [of Flynn] indicating a worldwide increase, known today as the "Flynn effect". And the rise still continues.
"To my astonishment, the trend of increasing IQ continues even in the 21st century," Flynn said before the publication of his latest book on the subject: "Are we getting smarter?" which was published in September 2012. "The latest figures from the US continue to show a steady increase of three tenths of a point every year."
One of the strange and interesting aspects of the Flynn effect is the uniformity of the phenomenon: the increase is constant, without slowing down and without stops and renewed increases. The increase in IQ continues steadily "as if an invisible hand is directing it," says Flynn. Joseph Rogers, a psychologist from the University of Oklahoma, examined the intelligence test results of about 13,000 American students to find out if the Flynn effect is also manifested over shorter periods of time. "We asked ourselves if the students' scores [on the IQ tests] would also improve over time periods of five or ten years. Well, it turns out they improve even over the course of one year," says Rogers. "The increase in achievements continues steadily, systematically, year after year after year. Children born in 1989 have a slightly higher IQ than children born in 1988."
The meaning of the Flynn effect is that, on average, the IQ of children will be about 10 points higher than that of their parents. At the end of this century, our descendants will have an IQ about 30 points higher than ours. This is also the difference between the average IQ and that of the top two percent of the population - all this, assuming that the Flynn effect will continue. But can this phenomenon continue forever? Is the trend going to continue indefinitely, so that the members of future generations will be considered geniuses according to the standards accepted today? Or is there a natural limit to the Flynn effect and the development of human intelligence?
Intelligence in the modern era
Almost simultaneously with the identification of the Flynn effect, the researchers identified another phenomenon. They noticed that the increase in scores on IQ tests was achieved almost entirely by better performance on certain parts of the most commonly used tests. One of these tests, the Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children (WISC), has several sections, each of which assesses different skills. It was possible to expect an improvement specifically in the field of consolidated intelligence, the one acquired at school, such as math skills and vocabulary. But contrary to expectations, this is not the case. It turns out that the scores on the parts of the test that measure these skills remain constant over time.
Most of the increase in IQ results from an improvement in achievements in two subtests that focus on abstract thinking. One subtest deals with similarities between objects or between concepts and poses questions along the lines of: "How are an apple and an orange similar to each other?" An answer like "both are edible" will earn a low score, while an answer like "both are fruits", which includes characteristics beyond simple physical properties, will earn a higher score. In the second subtest, the examinees are presented with a series of geometric shapes and must identify some abstract relationship between them.
Tests such as these were originally designed as culture-independent non-verbal tests designed to measure what psychologists call "fluid intelligence": an innate ability to solve unfamiliar problems. It seems as if this contradicts the Flynn effect, since the increase he documents shows a clear connection between environmental influences and components of intelligence that are seemingly independent of culture, a connection that is found in various populations around the world. Ainsley Mitcham and Mark Fox, psychologists from the University of Florida who conducted detailed studies on the differences between the generations as reflected in the achievements in intelligence tests, hypothesize that the improvement in our ability to think abstractly is related to a new flexibility that characterizes the way we perceive objects in the world today.
"We all know the 'start' button on the computer screen, but it's not really a button," says Mitcham. "I tried to explain to my grandmother how to turn off the computer and I told her: first you press the 'Start' button and choose the option 'Shutdown.' She realized that she had to actually click on some physical thing and clicked the mouse on the computer monitor."
Mitcham adds that her grandmother is not without intelligence. But she grew up in a world where buttons were real [not virtual] buttons and phones were phones and not cameras. Many researchers, including Flynn, claim that the increase in IQ test scores does not reflect an improvement in our basic mental ability. In fact, the researchers say, the Flynn effect reflects how "modern" our brains have become. Tests such as these require skill in identifying abstract categories and finding connections between them. And this skill, Flynn says, has become more useful over the past century than it has ever been in human history.
"If you're not able to categorize abstract concepts and if you're not used to logical thinking, then you really can't master life in the modern world," says Flynn. "Soviet psychologist Alexander Luria conducted a series of instructive interviews with peasants in the rural districts of Russia in the 20s. He used to pose this question to them: 'In areas where there is snow forever, the bears are always white. In the North Pole there is snow all year round. What color are the bears there?' The farmers always answered that all the bears they had ever seen were brown. They didn't imagine that a hypothetical question could have meaning."
The peasants were not stupid. They simply lived in a world where other skills were required. "It seems to me that the most fascinating aspect of this phenomenon is not the fact that our scores on IQ tests are so good," says Flynn, "but the new light it sheds on what I call the 'history of thinking in the 20th century.'"
An overly simplistic interpretation of the Flynn effect will lead us to very strange conclusions. For example, if we try to extrapolate the effect back in time, we find that the average person in Britain in 1900 had an IQ of about 70, according to the standards of 1990. understand the rules of the game of cricket,” says David Hambrick, a cognitive psychologist at Michigan State University. "Obviously this is an absurd conclusion."
We may not be smarter than our ancestors, but there is no doubt that our mental capacity has changed. Flynn believes that the change began in the days of the Industrial Revolution, which brought in its wake a mass education system, smaller families and a society where technical and managerial professions took the place of agricultural pursuits. New classes of professionals were created: engineers, electricians, industrial designers, and their new occupations required mastery of abstract principles. Education in turn becomes the driving force for innovation and other social changes. Thus, a continuous positive feedback was created between our intellectual abilities and a technology-based culture, and it does not seem that this feedback is going to end anytime soon.
Most researchers agree with Flynn's premise that it was the industrial revolution and technological development that brought about the effect named after him. However, it is difficult to precisely identify exact factors that can be used to design educational or social policies that will increase the effect. Improving education undoubtedly contributes to progress. Until the beginning of the 20th century, most Americans attended no more than seven years of school. Today, about half of the adult population in the USA has a post-secondary education, at least partially.
But formal education alone cannot explain the whole story. Some of the researchers in the field have put forward the hypothesis that the trend of the increase in the IQ level during the 20th century mostly reflects the improvement in achievements at the low end of the bell curve that represents the distribution of the level of intelligence, a result that most likely originates from the many more options open today to acquire an education. However, Jonathan Vai and Martha Potalaz from Duke University recently conducted a study that encompassed 1.7 million intelligence test results given to fifth, sixth, and seventh grade students over a 20-year period, and found that the scores of students ranked in the top 5 percent correspond Amazingly the Flynn effect. "For the first time we found evidence of an increase in the entire intelligence curve," says Vai. He and Futalaz therefore assume that the rise of the entire intelligence curve shows that the cultural forces driving the improvement in achievement affect everything equally. In an article to be published soon, the researchers hypothesize that the widespread exposure, worldwide, to sophisticated video games and even to certain television programs provides a "training ground" that develops the problem-solving skills necessary for success in IQ tests.
The universality of the Flynn effect confirms, in Rogers' opinion, the claim that there is no point in looking for a single cause of the phenomenon. "There are probably four or five main factors and each of them can balance and regulate the others," says Rogers. Improved childhood nutrition, education for all, smaller families and the influence of educated mothers on their children are probably some of the factors that are at the root of this phenomenon. "Even if only two of the factors are influential, then even when the other two are absent, as happened, for example, in World War II, the Flynn effect continues to exist," adds Rogers.
Mental evolution
What awaits us in the future? Will IQ scores continue to rise? One thing we can be sure of: the world around us will continue to change, largely due to our own actions.
Flynn often uses an analogy from the field of technology to describe the long-term interplay between thinking and culture. "In 1900, cars drove absurdly slow because the roads were in such terrible condition," says Flynn. "Every ride you felt like your bones were falling apart." Since then the roads and the cars have been perfected at the same time. As the roads improved, so did the cars, and the improvement in the roads spurred engineers to design even faster cars.
Our thinking and culture are also related to each other in a similar feedback. We are creating a world where information takes on new forms and moves at speeds that were unimaginable just a few decades ago. Every advance in technology develops minds that will be able to master it, and the improved thinking adds to changing the world. It is hard to assume that the Flynn effect will stop in this century, and this heralds a world in which we, living today, are unfortunately expected to be considered ignorant and outdated creatures.
Our intelligence of course also changes in ways that are not reflected in IQ tests. "People are getting faster, I'm convinced of that," Hambrick says. "In studies examining response times, it is customary to ignore results below 200 milliseconds. This was previously assumed to be the fastest response time possible. But if you ask those involved in the field, they will tell you that they have to ignore more and more results: people are getting faster. We send text messages, play video games and perform many other actions that require extremely fast response times. I believe that once we have enough data, we will be able to see that the Flynn effect also applies to measures of perceptual speed.
And perhaps the existence of the Flynn effect should not be surprising. Its absence was far more astonishing and startling, for it meant that we ceased to respond to the world of our own making. The Flynn effect in itself is neither good nor bad, it is only a sign of our ability to adapt to the environment, and the abilities it reflects allow us to destroy or build equally. If we are lucky, we will continue to build a world that will allow us to continue to develop and continue to wait - a world where our descendants will be dumbfounded by our lack of sophistication.
About the author
Tim Folger is the author and scientific editor of the "Best American Writing on Science and Nature" book series.
in brief
IQ scores have been rising steadily for a hundred years, a phenomenon known today as the "Flynn effect".
The increase in scores on IQ tests is due to improved performance on tests that are considered culture-independent, such as pattern matching tests.
The researchers believe that the roots of the effect lie in the more abstract and complex nature of modern life.
Improved thinking creates technologies that restore and in turn strengthen our thinking capacity. There is currently no indication that this feedback loop is about to stop.
Intelligence of a certain kind
How do you measure intelligence quotient, or IQ? One of the most common tests is the Wechsler Intelligence Test for Children (WISC), which consists of several subtests [each of which assesses a different skill]. Some of them measure the children's vocabulary, their talent in math or their general knowledge - what we call trivia. Other subtests test the children's perceptual abilities. In the test dealing with similarities between objects or concepts, the children are asked to find abstract similarities between words (for example, fox and rabbit). Only in those subtests focusing on abstract thinking was there an increase in achievement. The Flynn effect thus reflects our adaptation to abstract thinking.
And more on the subject
Flynn's Effect. Marguerite Holloway in Scientific American, Vol. 280, no. 1, pages 37-38; January 1999.
Solving the IQ Puzzle. James R. Flynn in Scientific American Mind, Vol. 18, no. 5, pages 24-31; October 2007.
Are We Getting Smarter? Rising IQ in the Twenty-First Century. James R. Flynn. Cambridge University Press, 2012.
32 תגובות
Judaism encourages questions that come out of a desire to believe out of faith that there is an answer to the question only as long as I don't know. It's hard for me to believe, indeed, questions that a person asks only to defy without wanting to know and to believe. Of course, even though there are answers, Judaism says that there is a problem with that person because he is not looking for the truth. And regarding the claim that Judaism demeans other peoples, the question comes from the ignorance of Judaism, which says that Jews are born with the ability to ascend in holiness, which is not the case with Gentiles, even though he is human and in any case he has a superior soul as a Gentile, his ability to ascend is limited, but Judaism allows him to join and in any case it depends on his desire whether to ascend or not
Gentlemen, if you look deeper, you will notice that Judaism states that anyone can ascend from the level of an ordinary human being to a holier one. Gentiles do not have this ability, since the entire possibility of ascension comes from the Torah, but Judaism does not discriminate against them, it also gives them the ability to convert and ascend themselves, although the main claim is on people who were born with the ability (Jews) and despite this, you don't get over your mistake, that Judaism requires obedience, the question comes from ignorance.
The effect of liberalism and education in a liberal environment on intelligence should be examined
Miracles, thank you
I agree with what you said
But most of the values I mentioned are taken from Kabbalah, which is based on the Torah
Today the reality is different, but the values have not changed
By the way, there are many beautiful things in the Torah that are still understood today
I don't agree with you that you shouldn't be curious, I think it's allowed and even desirable
But we always have to remember our basics
Always when there is a new discovery we feel as if we have reached the essence but we are constantly discovering more endlessly.
I think that being a chosen people means leading, it doesn't mean better or more successful
Some people are not leaders and they are still good, strong and successful people
To be a chosen people, in my opinion, is to be the first of the sense to lead
But we are all people who want to be appreciated and we all want a good life and not just the leaders we built.
A chosen people should behave like this, that is, not hide behind the image of a chosen people, but really behave like this
If it is to appear in the press and explain our side more
And if it is by taking a stand
And if by helping others who need it
and by understanding each other
Rose Bauer
The values they specify are indeed beautiful. But they are contrary to what Judaism, and many other religions think. In Judaism they teach: don't be curious, accept authority without question, you are part of a chosen people, the others are worth less than you, killing is good... And so on.
In my humble opinion, we need as many sources as possible. Certainly one cannot be satisfied with one source
But the basic values always remain. Respect others, don't think you are better than someone else
Listen to the people around you and give them the feeling that you care about them
Bring out the best that is in you, but always look and see that you are not stepping on the path of others
Demand your place, in the gentlest way you can
Remember that there is room for everyone and there is no need to push
Remembering that people are people no matter what their origin, everyone needs to exist, everyone wants to express themselves
Knowing how to take responsibility for ourselves, because it is not small
Don't be afraid of a lot of work, because that's the only way to get results
People who only read the Bible were the stupidest people, even compared to people who never read a book and simply drew conclusions from the reality around them.
Even today, the difference between religious people who read "external literature" apart from "holy" texts and between religious people who only studied Talmud, etc., is a big difference.
People who rely on books with one ideology and another that is disconnected from the truth, such as the books of the monotheistic religion, are extremely stupid people.
The fact that they claim that there is everything there and you don't need anything else - proves it.
Where would we be today if we only studied the stories of the Bible (which apart from being disconnected from reality or having a very weak connection to reality, have no moral value in them. On the contrary)? If we had followed their path, we would have killed ourselves a long time ago.
On the other hand, the idiots make a lot more children. So in any case there are also many more stupid people around.
Last week I read in "The Marker" that Bill Gates resents scientists who prefer to develop an anti-baldness preparation than a cheap and accessible vaccine for malaria, because baldness is where the money lies. That's why the claim that people get wiser from generation to generation is true.
There is a wonderful movie called "Idiocracy" that describes the future of humanity - a world of idiosyncratic idiots who know nothing about anything. The reason: the best minds focused on finding a solution to baldness and impotence, instead of solving the real problems of humanity.
IQ cannot increase over the years. What can come up is how average humanity fares in Ballina. My parents who lived in a village in the former Barham read a lot, but their parents only opened the Bible and nothing else. I read everything in three languages in numbers and on the Internet, and there is no doubt that the urban environment provides me with three-dimensional stimuli that help me succeed in IQ tests.
The real test of humanity is whether our lives have improved since last year, and the answer to that is subjective.
...and the difference between you is?
Another Eric appeared to him..
And I want to add that you are also one big sin
Eric I agree with you
In the humanities this is one big sin
The Russian peasants examined not only the question and the data.
They also tested the man who tested them!
And their conclusion was that this man is wrong and misleading!
This conclusion fits nicely into their culture!
Not only is he wrong and misleading, but he does it by force!
The Russian peasants were much smarter than the man who tested them!
They did not want to tell him explicitly that he was wrong and also misleading. That's why they told him implicitly.
The last paragraph appears twice. Please delete the unnecessary.
hi father
I'll throw in my "two cents" on the matter...
The way I understand abstract thinking is the ability to find a point of view that focuses on features that are essential to a certain understanding. Roughly something that is the opposite of "mental fixation".
And it also seems to me that this should be a point of view that unites features of elements that in a less abstract way of thinking would appear to be unrelated.
And in my opinion there is no connection between skepticism and abstract thinking.
Could it be that you are confusing a conservative person with a skeptical person?
Because intuitively there seems to be a connection between the two, but the essential difference - as I see things - is precisely the matter of fixed thinking. (No offense to conservative people - that's just how things look to me).
I'm not saying that skepticism entails the ability to think abstractly. Indeed, there are many established skeptics (who are not necessarily conservative, these are more "ego-driven")...
But good skepticism certainly requires abstract thinking. The ability to find failures that arise from social conventions for example...
A good skeptic is not one who automatically says "no" to anything new.
A good skeptic is one who does not accept a position without understanding it, and agreeing with its assumptions.
I have a question: how exactly do you define abstract thinking? Does skepticism limit abstract thinking? After all, skepticism casts doubt on everything that cannot be felt in a certain way, or everything that is not "known" according to the accepted knowledge at the time...
Correct me if I'm wrong in the definitions...
Haim Mazar?
I haven't seen you here in a while, where have you been? I have an important question for you about something whose last name is Dvir, how can I contact you?
IQ tests are culturally dependent and say very little about abstract thinking ability. Any new technology requires adaptation to its results and the ability to use it, what to do with existing equipment and instruments. What is really needed is to test the ability to invent new devices or find an unconventional use of an existing theory or a new device. The differential calculus was developed by Newton a little over 300 years ago. She was a revolutionary discovery in mathematics. It was only in the 20th century that they began to use it in rocket propulsion or airplanes. In Newton's day, his invention had no practical use. From the moment they began to develop airplanes, it was necessary, for example, to check how a change in the amount of fuel affects changes in the center of gravity of the airplane as a result of the amount of fuel getting smaller as you continue the flight. In ballistic movement, one must check how the amount of fuel and the extent of its use affect the direction of the flight.
In ancient Rome, monumental buildings such as the Colosseum or aqueducts were built to transport water from one place to another. The blasters required very high engineering skills.. these are plants that no modern engineer or architect would be ashamed to design and build.
Babbage, a 19th-century English mathematician, designed the first computer entirely made of gears. Several years ago, this computer was built with materials from that period and the computer worked flawlessly. This calculator is capable of calculating up to 15 places after the point.
In Alexandria in the 1st century AD, a mathematician named Haron lived and worked. He took two parts of a ball, installed a tube in each of them in the shape of the letter "R", connected the two parts of the ball side by side and attached the ball to the plate using a tube. Water was heated under the plate. in a closed facility. The steam entered the ball and exited through the tubes and the ball began to rotate and we have the first steam engine in the world. In this design, Haron anticipated Newton's first law according to which every action has an opposite reaction. Haron would find his place today in any engineering company.
Conclusion: The IQ tests only linear thinking. Even if someone successfully passes psychometric exams in preparation for integration into a pilot course. It says nothing about being able to use the plane wisely. These tests examine some of the traits and ways of thinking. You also need to know their limitations.
The children born today are exposed to more information, more languages, more games, more food, so the brain is more flexible.
They also have test preparation booklets, so they can practice.
But there is a neglect of the social field, which is not included in the tests, and this is because of computers and television.
In the mind, everything comes at the expense of something else, this means a genius in one field, a laggard in another.
And there is apogenetics, which explains the constant increase of autistics in the population.
And also gives a partial explanation for the increase in IQ
And also the birth at increasingly older ages, creates more apogenetic changes.
ok friend Let's check if the research is correct. Here is a question from an IQ test:
At five o'clock a hunter got up, walked one kilometer to the south, then one kilometer to the west, then one kilometer to the north, and found himself at the starting point, where he hunted an animal that fell in front of him.
What color is that lucky creature?
1. Black.
2. White.
3. Black - white.
4. Spotted orange.
Hint: a Russian farmer solves the riddle in five minutes. A Georgian farmer - at three.
I don't appreciate social science research at all. Their definitions are vague, imprecise, etc. I don't think there is any improvement in intelligence, test results can improve for reasons not related to intelligence but from improvement in practice, improvement in the test takers' boundaries, improvement in the boundaries of the people who send the good test takers and eliminate the weak test takers, use of energy pills such as Ritalin to get better test results, And more schticks in this style.
Regarding the article,
When the technology is close to our brain - is it also considered that we are smarter?
I mean, if I can jump to Wikipedia, and quote an item of information, is that considered knowledge that I have?
There is no doubt that there are interesting things in the world...
Well... (I assumed it was the same story as with penguins - and if I'm wrong here too, then anyway...)
But the principle of what I said still applies.
Let's rephrase that:
The Russian peasants who approached the question as hypothetical - more sophisticated than it seems...
The simple answer is indeed "white bears",
But the "smart" answer is to say that there are no bears in the North Pole! (It's a sea... only in the arctic circle...)
Lalon:
Polar bears are found in the North Pole, not the South Pole.
More true in the arctic circle
The Russian peasants who approached the question as hypothetical - more sophisticated than it seems...
The simple answer is indeed "white bears",
But the "smart" answer is to say that there are no bears in the North Pole! (It's a sea... only in the South Pole...)
Perhaps the study shows the wish of fools.
Interesting claim: IQ scores do not predict the intelligent ability of any entity,
Rather, they describe the cultural exposure of the individual to the society in which he is found.
In some cases it will probably lead to a true prediction for high intelligence, and in some cases there will be no correlation.
The Raven tests are still controversial as they praise one talent over others quite arbitrarily and without any real scientific basis.
Interesting article, thanks
There is no reason to think that we will not become smarter, except for the unfortunate fact that stupid people have more children .... (without exaggeration).
Teaching methods are improving and we are exposed to more gruesome.
If the first are the sons of angels - we are the sons of men. And if the first are human beings - we are like donkeys.
They will say what they will say, we will no longer be wiser...
I admit that I've only read the beginning so far, but - will we check if the tests themselves have changed?
Maybe they became easier?
IQ is a numerical result obtained in a series of fixed tests, developed with the aim of measuring the degree of intelligence (mental ability, intelligence) of the subject, according to the age group in relation to the rest of the population.
The origin of the IQ in the population should be 100 because that is how it is defined even if we measure it in 1000 years