Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion In the news... children with high IQ scores

Mumbai born Kashmea Wahi tops Mensa test in UK...
ZeeNews
January 11, 2016

Not to take anything away from this child's accomplishment, as achieving the top score possible is rare.

However I'm somewhat wary of this particular test as there appear to be online versions which one can use for training, thereby inflating their score on a subsequent test administration.

Additionally the news reporting could provide more context. For example, IQ scores vary between tests, therefore her 162 on a child-level test does not necessarily exceed the IQ of Stephen Hawking and Albert Einstein, as claimed. It's an apples-and-oranges comparison.

This article announcing a different child achieving the top score seems a bit more balanced, lists other recent test-takers with the same score, and provides a bit more context.

I recently listened to a podcast series called 'decoding genius' that told the stories of some bright young people who are accomplishing cool things. One of the episodes featured Davidson's director. It was a neat listen.

The article said 162 is the top 1% score. I wondered about this too. Davidson requires scores @99.9% (WISC IQ 145+). Nonetheless, 162 is a great score and great accomplishments for these kids.

The MENSA qualifying test is not technically an IQ test, and yes, it is different from a gold-standard individually-administered Wechsler or Stanford-Binet. Mensa's target population is the top 2%. Davidson's target population is the top 0.1%. Anyone who has documentation of cognitive ability that is DYS-eligible also has documentation that supports Mensa.

British Mensa uses the Cattell III B test, with which I am not familiar. It appears that very few are familiar with it, including Google. From what I can piece together, it is based on a 24 standard deviation, which varies from most other IQ test I'm aware of, which are either 16 or 15 (most today are 15).

"162" isn't a de facto great score any more than "36" is a great score, unless put in the context of an ACT exam.

162 on a 24SD test is 2.58SD, or 99.5 percentile. While certainly a good score, and in the "top 1%", it is the equivalent of 138 on the tests used by Davidson and wouldn't qualify.

But if the test ceiling is a 162 score, the IQ is really unknown. In no way can it be logically argued that this is "higher than" Hawking, Einstein, or anyone with an IQ estimated on a 15SD scale which everyone else uses.

A MENSA-type society that targets the top 0.1% is the "Triple-Nine-Society".

They have a list of testing that someone thought met this listing:

http://www.triplenine.org/HowtoJoin/TestScores.aspx

Also, I still want a coffee mug with the Triple-Nine Logo on it.

I currently use a MetLife coffee-mugish thingy with Snoopy on it. It has a funny shape. I should not have put it in the dishwasher because the little pad on the bottom came off. That makes me sad.

I have not had a MetLife case in some time. I seem to be getting UNUM and Hartford cases. This makes me sad, too.

OATH (one in a thousand) was also a 99.9 organization. I still have my card somewhere, but I don't know if they still exist - it's been at least 10 years since I was involved. It was one of several organizations ranging from 99 to 99.9999 that Ron Hoeflin created.

Notably, the individuals with the highest IQs among my acquaintance are not members of any of these societies, nor do they appear to have any interest in joining them. (This includes both those for whom I am aware of documentation, and those who only appear to be of comparable ability, such as through other credentials/accomplishments that are often used as proxies for intelligence.)

Note that the Cattell III B used by British Mensa is truncated at a max score of 161 for adults (though the full version of the test has a much higher ceiling of 174, I believe). Like any test, it has standard error, so there is really no difference between a 162 and a 161 (even assuming we are talking about the same test for Hawking and Einstein).

Jon, I am very sorry to hear of the injury suffered by your Snoopy mug. This is especially unfortunate, as MetLife and Snoopy have parted ways, so I expect this (slightly damaged) item will soon become a prized collector's item, worth even more than a Triple-Nine mug. It would have been worth even more if it were still in its pristine, in-the-box state.