Average IQ by profession

These figures are based on GRE scores for prospective PhD candidates:
http://www.econphd.net/guide.htm
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/12...s-them-in.html

* 130.0 Physics
* 129.0 Mathematics
* 128.5 Computer science
* 128.0 Economics
* 127.5 Chemical engineering
* 127.0 Material science
* 126.0 Electrical engineering
* 125.5 Mechanical engineering
* 125.0 Philosophy
* 124.0 Chemistry
* 123.0 Earth sciences
* 122.0 industrial engineering
* 121.5 civil engineering
* 120.1 Biology / medicina
* 120.0 English / literatura
* 119.8 Religion / theology
* 119.7 Political science
* 119.7 Academic disciplines
* 118.0 Art history
* 117.7 Anthropology
* 116.5 Architecture
* 116.0 Business
* 115.0 Sociology
* 114.0 Psychology
* 114.0 Nursing
* 112.0 Communication
* 109.0 Communication and Education
* 106.0 Public administration

The average undergraduate IQ sits at 115—which implies your typical Psychology TA is actually less intelligent than their own students. Makes you think, doesn't it? 🙂

Of course Psychology majors aren't as bright—I mean, aren't they the ones who just hand out circle-the-answer tests for everything?

* 120.1 English/literature

Heh... I mean, what about all the other languages? They’re probably going to land way lower... maybe around an 85 or 90... honestly, who cares about English anyway? 🙂

Well, it looks like the whole IQ debate is a rabbit hole that never ends.
In my honest opinion,
I don't think we can really hold all career paths to the same standard as PhD candidates.
Plus, there’s the obvious issue that these data sets aren't even truly comparable,
because what they're presenting as a "silver bullet" is actually just a numbers game regarding the volume of applicants.
It feels like they're just playing fast and loose with statistics; if you apply even a tiny bit of common sense, the logic falls apart.

But hey, I'm sure it's "factually correct" according to their metrics.
At the end of the day, does it even matter?
Cheers😉

Ronald Morales51 said:Well, it looks like the whole IQ debate is a rabbit hole that never ends.
In my honest opinion,
I don't think we can really hold all career paths to the same standard as PhD candidates.
Plus, there’s the obvious issue that these data sets aren't even truly comparable,
because what they're presenting as a "silver bullet" is actually just a numbers game regarding the volume of applicants.
It feels like they're just playing fast and loose with statistics; if you apply even a tiny bit of common sense, the logic falls apart.

But hey, I'm sure it's "factually correct" according to their metrics.
At the end of the day, does it even matter?
Cheers😉

It’s the only thing Psychology has actually produced that holds any statistical weight. 😉

IMHO
I don't think you can compare standard jobs to PhD applicants.

Why not? PhD students make up most of the "workforce" in any given field—they're just TAs and researchers on their way up.

And obviously, that data isn't even fully comparable; basically,
the supply curve provided is more about the raw number of applicants.

Um, no. We're talking averages. Ever heard of them? The fact that there are way more applicants in Psychology than in Mathematics is just a direct result of IQ being a statistical variable with a Gauss distribution in the general population.
There are fewer people with an IQ of 129+ than those at 114+.
But you're right that IQ itself is a bit of a mathematical construct—what actually matters are percentiles (as psychologists call them), which essentially show what percentage of the population someone is smarter than.

That's just playing with statistics, and with a little logic, you can see it makes no sense.

How? Where's the error? What's arbitrary? What logic?

Jesse Adams said:These figures are based on GRE scores for prospective PhD candidates:
http://www.econphd.net/guide.htm
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/12...s-them-in.html

* 130.0 Physics
* 129.0 Mathematics
* 128.5 Computer science
* 128.0 Economics
* 127.5 Chemical engineering
* 127.0 Material science
* 126.0 Electrical engineering
* 125.5 Mechanical engineering
* 125.0 Philosophy
* 124.0 Chemistry
* 123.0 Earth sciences
* 122.0 industrial engineering
* 121.5 civil engineering
* 120.1 Biology / medicina
* 120.0 English / literatura
* 119.8 Religion / theology
* 119.7 Political science
* 119.7 Academic disciplines
* 118.0 Art history
* 117.7 Anthropology
* 116.5 Architecture
* 116.0 Business
* 115.0 Sociology
* 114.0 Psychology
* 114.0 Nursing
* 112.0 Communication
* 109.0 Communication and Education
* 106.0 Public administration

The average undergraduate IQ sits at 115—which implies your typical Psychology TA is actually less intelligent than their own students. Makes you think, doesn't it? 🙂

Transparent ☕

feraltrucker5 said:Transparent ☕

What’s your point?

I’m largely in agreement regarding PhD students, but we shouldn't view them as a profession in their own right—there are countless successful careers out there that don't require a doctorate.

In my honest opinion, while the list might be technically accurate, it doesn't carry much weight. It just doesn't provide any real value when you look at it closely.
It’s essentially unhelpful to try and draw a direct comparison between one single Physics PhD student and one out of a thousand Psychology PhD students.

Jesse Adams said:What’s your point?

The whole point of starting this thread is actually pretty simple, though I have a feeling most of you skipped right over the main idea while scrolling through. ☕ I honestly find myself wondering who’s actually going to bite on that blatant flame bait... I mean, come on. If a psychologist actually falls for something that transparently obnoxious, they probably don't have nearly enough IQ to be practicing their profession in the first place. 😁

Ronald Morales51 said:I’m largely in agreement regarding PhD students, but we shouldn't view them as a profession in their own right—there are countless successful careers out there that don't require a doctorate.

In my honest opinion, while the list might be technically accurate, it doesn't carry much weight. It just doesn't provide any real value when you look at it closely.
It’s essentially unhelpful to try and draw a direct comparison between one single Physics PhD student and one out of a thousand Psychology PhD students.

Fine, whatever. Here’s the breakdown of average IQ by profession for those holding a PhD.

IMHO; I was just trying to say the list might be technically accurate, but it's pretty meaningless. It doesn't really represent any actual value.

Why exactly?

It’s just uninformative to compare one single physics PhD student against one single psychology PhD student out of a pool of 1,000.

This isn't cherry-picked data—it's based on the entire population of PhD students within their respective fields in the USA. I already explained why the numbers vary between groups.

Jesse Adams said:These figures are based on GRE scores for prospective PhD candidates:
http://www.econphd.net/guide.htm
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/12...s-them-in.html

* 130.0 Physics
* 129.0 Mathematics
* 128.5 Computer science
* 128.0 Economics
* 127.5 Chemical engineering
* 127.0 Material science
* 126.0 Electrical engineering
* 125.5 Mechanical engineering
* 125.0 Philosophy
* 124.0 Chemistry
* 123.0 Earth sciences
* 122.0 industrial engineering
* 121.5 civil engineering
* 120.1 Biology / medicina
* 120.0 English / literatura
* 119.8 Religion / theology
* 119.7 Political science
* 119.7 Academic disciplines
* 118.0 Art history
* 117.7 Anthropology
* 116.5 Architecture
* 116.0 Business
* 115.0 Sociology
* 114.0 Psychology
* 114.0 Nursing
* 112.0 Communication
* 109.0 Communication and Education
* 106.0 Public administration

The average undergraduate IQ sits at 115—which implies your typical Psychology TA is actually less intelligent than their own students. Makes you think, doesn't it? 🙂

Fluffy is a physics major who can't stand psychologists—actually, he can't even stand female psychologists because they smell bad, or so I've gathered from lurking around his posts.
But the one thing he’ll actually admit to a psychologist is this intelligence ranking that—get this—puts physicists at the top.
Since he's gonna be a physicist one day—which, hey, I truly hope he does—
he's hoping that makes him the smartest guy around, which I also wish for him.
My advice? You don't really need to wait until you're a physicist to find out if your IQ is 130—you could just go take a test right now.

😁

So you're actually obsessed with IQ? 😁

What really trips me out about this is how theologians—and political scientists too—aren't sitting at the bottom of the list; they're right in the middle. Honestly, I figured medical professionals would be a few spots higher, maybe just under chemists. It seems like Economics works a bit differently here in the States than it does elsewhere, which probably explains why that score is so high. Everything else is pretty self-explanatory, if you ask me.

Keith Lee2, 🙏 🤣

Keith Lee2 said:Fluffy is a physics major who can't stand psychologists—actually, he can't even stand female psychologists because they smell bad, or so I've gathered from lurking around his posts.
But the one thing he’ll actually admit to a psychologist is this intelligence ranking that—get this—puts physicists at the top.
Since he's gonna be a physicist one day—which, hey, I truly hope he does—
he's hoping that makes him the smartest guy around, which I also wish for him.
My advice? You don't really need to wait until you're a physicist to find out if your IQ is 130—you could just go take a test right now.

😁

You're just trolling.

Moderators, please look into this. Doxing other users is a direct violation of the rules!

Jesse Adams said:You're just trolling.

Moderators, please look into this. Doxing other users is a direct violation of the rules!

The "personal info" you're complaining about was actually posted by you—and honestly, everyone on this board already knows you think you're God's gift to the internet.
😁Just being real.

Jesse Adams said:These figures are based on GRE scores for prospective PhD candidates:
http://www.econphd.net/guide.htm
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/12...s-them-in.html

* 130.0 Physics
* 129.0 Mathematics
* 128.5 Computer science
* 128.0 Economics
* 127.5 Chemical engineering
* 127.0 Material science
* 126.0 Electrical engineering
* 125.5 Mechanical engineering
* 125.0 Philosophy
* 124.0 Chemistry
* 123.0 Earth sciences
* 122.0 industrial engineering
* 121.5 civil engineering
* 120.1 Biology / medicina
* 120.0 English / literatura
* 119.8 Religion / theology
* 119.7 Political science
* 119.7 Academic disciplines
* 118.0 Art history
* 117.7 Anthropology
* 116.5 Architecture
* 116.0 Business
* 115.0 Sociology
* 114.0 Psychology
* 114.0 Nursing
* 112.0 Communication
* 109.0 Communication and Education
* 106.0 Public administration

The average undergraduate IQ sits at 115—which implies your typical Psychology TA is actually less intelligent than their own students. Makes you think, doesn't it? 🙂

So, yeah... I mean, does Psychology really demand 100% of my mental capacity? Not necessarily. 😬>

Keith Lee2 said:Fluffy is a physics major who can't stand psychologists—actually, he can't even stand female psychologists because they smell bad, or so I've gathered from lurking around his posts.
But the one thing he’ll actually admit to a psychologist is this intelligence ranking that—get this—puts physicists at the top.
Since he's gonna be a physicist one day—which, hey, I truly hope he does—
he's hoping that makes him the smartest guy around, which I also wish for him.
My advice? You don't really need to wait until you're a physicist to find out if your IQ is 130—you could just go take a test right now.

😁

So, if I’m reading this right, you’re basically saying IQ isn't some fixed number set in stone, but something that can actually shift? Honestly, that makes a ton of sense to me. It feels logical that those top five disciplines are all heavy on math and the hard sciences—especially if the IQ tests being used are visual-based or rely heavily on pattern recognition. In those kinds of fields, you're constantly swimming in numbers and logic anyway. For example, when I look at my own results, I hit the 96th percentile on the visual and numerical stuff, but when it shifts over to verbal reasoning and things like that, I drop down to the 90th percentile. It’s like having different strengths for different arenas. 🤷

quieteagle16 said:So, if I’m reading this right, you’re basically saying IQ isn't some fixed number set in stone, but something that can actually shift? Honestly, that makes a ton of sense to me. It feels logical that those top five disciplines are all heavy on math and the hard sciences—especially if the IQ tests being used are visual-based or rely heavily on pattern recognition. In those kinds of fields, you're constantly swimming in numbers and logic anyway. For example, when I look at my own results, I hit the 96th percentile on the visual and numerical stuff, but when it shifts over to verbal reasoning and things like that, I drop down to the 90th percentile. It’s like having different strengths for different arenas. 🤷

You missed the point.

It makes sense to me then why those first five fields are all math or science-heavy—especially if the IQ tests used were visual or number-based, which is standard for those careers. For instance, I hit the top 4% on those types of tests, but drop to the 10% range when it comes to verbal stuff.🤷

The test being used was the GRE (as mentioned in the first post), which covers both verbal and math sections.

Carl Ruiz4 said:So, yeah... I mean, does Psychology really demand 100% of my mental capacity? Not necessarily. 😬>

That’s a completely flawed conclusion. 👎

Plus, the GRE is normalized against the US population.

Interesting point—I just clicked the link you sent. Any particular reason why you left out the Competitiveness Indicators when you were making that comparison?

quieteagle16 said:Interesting point—I just clicked the link you sent. Any particular reason why you left out the Competitiveness Indicators when you were making that comparison?

Because they don't affect the average. 🙄