Review of 'Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students' intelligence is merely average'

Reviewer: Christopher Ferguson

Inviter role(s): AUTHOR

Publication date of review: 2024-03-07

Bookmark

Christopher Ferguson5

Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students' intelligence is merely averageCrossref ScienceOpen

Average rating:	    Rated 5 of 5.
Level of importance:	    Rated 5 of 5.
Level of validity:	    Rated 5 of 5.
Level of completeness:	    Rated 5 of 5.
Level of comprehensibility:	    Rated 5 of 5.
Competing interests:	None

Reviewed article

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Meta-analysis: On average, undergraduate students' intelligence is merely average

Bob Uttl, Victoria Violo, Lacey Gibson (2024)

Background. According to a widespread belief, the average IQ of university students is 115 to 130 IQ points, that is, substantially higher than the average IQ of the general population ( M = 100, SD =15). We traced the origin of this belief to obsolete intelligence data collected in 1940s and 1950s when university education was the privilege of a few. Examination of more recent IQ data indicate that IQ of university students and university graduates dropped to the average of the general population. The decline in students’ IQ is a necessary consequence of increasing educational attainment over the last 80 years. Today, graduating from university is more common than completing high school in the 1940s. Method. We conducted a meta-analysis of the mean IQ scores of college and university students samples tested with Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale between 1939 and 2022. Results. The results show that the average IQ of undergraduate students today is a mere 102 IQ points and declined by approximately 0.2 IQ points per year. The students’ IQ also varies substantially across universities and is correlated with the selectivity of universities (measured by average SAT scores of admitted students). Discussion. These findings have wide-ranging implications. First, universities and professors need to realize that students are no longer extraordinary but merely average, and have to adjust curricula and academic standards. Second, employers can no longer rely on applicants with university degrees to be more capable or smarter than those without degrees. Third, students need to realize that acceptance into university is no longer an invitation to join an elite group. Fourth, the myth of brilliant undergraduate students in scientific and popular literature needs to be dispelled. Fifth, estimating premorbid IQ based on educational attainment is vastly inaccurate, obsolete, not evidence based, and mere speculations. Sixth, obsolete IQ data or tests ought not to be used to make high-stakes decisions about individuals, for example, by clinical psychologists to opine about intelligence and cognitive abilities of their clients.

1 comments Cited 0 times     Rated -3 of 5. – based on 2 reviews

Preprint version 1

Bookmark

Review information

DOI:: 10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-SOCSCI.AWVLPC.v1.RXMHDS

License:

This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com.

ScienceOpen disciplines: Education,Psychology,General social science

Keywords: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test,intelligence, IQ, undergraduate students, Flynn Effect, high-stakes decisions, demographic adjustments, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Test,high-stakes decisions,IQ,Flynn Effect,demographic adjustments,undergraduate students,intelligence

Review text

I think this is an interesting and important article that fits pretty well with what a lot of us professors have been observing in the classroom. It appears to be a predictable outcome of shifting demographics...proportionally more people going to college, more actual colleges but fewer graduating HS students means more competition for better students and more inevitable acceptances for less talented students. Increased credentialling for jobs is also likely a part of this effect.

The article is a bit long perhaps, although that's not uncommon for meta-analyses. And most of this is due to the tables and appendices at the end.

The report follows PRISMA guidelines. The methodology looks to be well-done.

The paper covers quite a bit in the discussion, addressing a number of complicated issues and ramifications both for universities and employers who can't count on college graduates being geniuses anymore. There are interesting and thorny questions here...should universities water down standards (they are of course)? Economically, it's probably inevitable that they must, as they can't fail huge proportions of their student bodies...however that does not excuse the rampant grade inflation that we see.

The article notes wide public distrust in universities...granted this probably comes from multiple sources...soaring costs and also perceived ideological biases of universities.

Apparently, the findings have generated some controversy, but I'm not sure why they should. The methodology appears solid and the conclusions should hardly be a surprise even if they are apparently taboo to say out loud.