IQ and fade-out effect: Environmental intervention can raise general intelligence (temporarily)

Science Daily ^ | 3/14/2016 | John Protzko

[JimSEA]

Scientists have long agreed that we humans are a complex combination of our inherited traits and the environments in which we are raised. How the scales tip in one direction or the other, however, is still the subject of much debate.

To better understand the nature versus nurture question, UC Santa Barbara psychologist John Protzko analyzed an existing study to determine whether and how environmental interventions impacted the intelligence levels of low birth weight children.

The key finding: Interventions did raise intelligence levels, but not permanently. When the interventions ended, their effects diminished over time in what psychologists describe as "the fadeout effect." The research is highlighted in the journal Intelligence.

"Certain environmental interventions can raise general intelligence," said Protzko, a postdoctoral scholar in the META (Memory, Emotion, Thought, Awareness) Lab in UCSB's Department of Psychological & Brain Sciences. "It's not just pushing scores around on a test; it's deep changes to underlying general intelligence. The fadeout effect, however, applies the same way." Scientists make a distinction between IQ scores, a quantitative measure of intelligence, and general intelligence, which reflects underlying cognitive abilities.

[JimSEA]

One implication of this study is that the IQ gains in head start programs are quickly wiped out when the challenge is gone in our public schools. In other words, our schools aren't teaching, they are just attempting to control disadvantaged students until they graduate into street culture.

It the challenge and interest were to continue, it would have to be both at home and in the school. Kind of a "Ben Carson" environment. I'm sure there are teachers interested and capable enough to do this. The problem is they are far to few and the combination of home and the street will overwhelm their efforts.

[miami33]

The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale was not designed for three year olds. Age related development alone could account for the measurement gains.
“The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale is considered to be one of the best and most widely used intelligence tests available. It is especially useful in providing intellectual assessment in young children, adolescents, and young adults. The test has been criticized for not being comparable for all age ranges. This is because different age ranges are administered different subtests. Additionally, for very young preschoolers, it is not uncommon to receive a score of zero due to test difficulty or the child’s unwillingness to cooperate. Consequently, it is difficult to discriminate abilities in this age group among the lower scorers.”

Read more: http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Stanford-Binet-Intelligence-Scale.html#ixzz43YcglOP3

[corkoman]

retrospective analyses of others datasets is a poor basis to make proclamations. Yes some interesting associations can be made and used to construct prospective studies but thats about it.

[Fido969]

IQ is often measured by the ability to do tasks within a certain amount of time. Near a deadline, my ability to perform tasks increases substantially - under a hard deadline I might have an IQ of 200. In the week before that, I it took me all day to do the simplest tasks, my IQ, measured that way, might have been 45.

[SuzyQue]

Yes, interesting. I wonder if the interventions are helping children learn how to think, and if that is not reinforced as a desired behavior, it fades away.

I’ve long contended that our schools are not only NOT teaching children how to think, but are actively discouraging thinking.

[BfloGuy]

The authors of "The Bell Curve" concluded as much twenty years ago; though they held out hope that we just haven't found the key to increasing it by other means yet.

Nonetheless, data increasingly point to IQ as hereditary.

That, of course, sets minds on the left to exploding.

[JimSEA]

Sounds to me that learning might well be punished in the overall environment as you suggest.

[reed13k]

I interpret this to mean that the brain is like any other muscle. When exercised it “gains” IQ, when the exercise is lifted the advantage obtained reverts back to a “base” level based on genetics.

IQ is mainly about pattern recognition - math/vocab are both pattern based test methods as are images often used in the testing. Exercise of patterns increases likely recognition and leads to a higher test score. Whereas failing to exercise eliminates any gain that could be achieved.