<p>A few quick points:</p>

<p>There is a massive empirical literature that shows that fairly strong correlations are obtained between IQ and important real world outcomes, perhaps most notably educational and job performance, often in the r = .5 range (see <a href="http://www.iq-tests.eu/iq-test-Practical-validity-800.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">here for a summary</a>).</p>

<p>Correlations with learning are complicated by what we mean by learning. In particular, if we define learning as the improvement in performance between two time points, then we have what is sometimes called a <em>difference score</em> or <em>gain score</em>. While this is an intuitive way to think about learning, gain scores often have slightly counter-intuitive properties. For example, on some tasks, gain may be negatively correlated with initial performance levels. This makes sense when you think that those who perform poorly initially often have more to learn. However, initial performance typically correlates well with final performance after a period of learning.
As such, correlations of gain scores with ability can be a little strange also.</p>

<p>You might want to read some of <a href="http://kanfer-ackerman.gatech.edu/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Philip Ackerman</a>'s work on ability-performance correlations over practice.</p>

<p>There's some further discussion of the change score issue in learning here:</p>

<p>Ackerman, P. L. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An
integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives.
Psychological Bulletin, 102:3-27. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2012-01-20T19:02:22.483Z
Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity of "learning". Performance gains due to practice are probably a relatively relevant metric.
Zelda
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-02-16T10:54:45.290Z
I skimmed the paper, but I'm not sure what you mean by "initial performance typically correlates well with final performance after a period of learning".  I assume you mean performance relative to others taking the pre and post test?  It's pretty well established that absolute performance increases with practice (and it's common sense) - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24986855/
Veita
CC BY-SA 4.0
2012-01-19T05:18:39.717Z
2019-01-17T01:56:55.787Z
2019-01-17T01:56:55.787Z
Jeromy Anglim
<p>Supposedly, people of higher levels of intelligence do learn faster than people of lower levels of it. But this is an awfully coarse observation, and different people can learn at drastically different speeds in different environments. </p>

<learning><intelligence><iq>
Does IQ affect learning speed?
InquilineKea
# Does IQ affect learning speed?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2012-01-19)

Supposedly, people of higher levels of intelligence do learn faster than people of lower levels of it. But this is an awfully coarse observation, and different people can learn at drastically different speeds in different environments.

**Tags:** learning, intelligence, iq


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2012-01-19. Score: 13

A few quick points:

There is a massive empirical literature that shows that fairly strong correlations are obtained between IQ and important real world outcomes, perhaps most notably educational and job performance, often in the r = .5 range (see [here for a summary](http://www.iq-tests.eu/iq-test-Practical-validity-800.html)).

Correlations with learning are complicated by what we mean by learning. In particular, if we define learning as the improvement in performance between two time points, then we have what is sometimes called a *difference score* or *gain score*. While this is an intuitive way to think about learning, gain scores often have slightly counter-intuitive properties. For example, on some tasks, gain may be negatively correlated with initial performance levels. This makes sense when you think that those who perform poorly initially often have more to learn. However, initial performance typically correlates well with final performance after a period of learning.
As such, correlations of gain scores with ability can be a little strange also.

You might want to read some of [Philip Ackerman](http://kanfer-ackerman.gatech.edu/)'s work on ability-performance correlations over practice.

There's some further discussion of the change score issue in learning here:

Ackerman, P. L. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An
integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives.
Psychological Bulletin, 102:3-27.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity of "learning". Performance gains due to practice are probably a relatively relevant metric.  
> **username_3**: I skimmed the paper, but I'm not sure what you mean by "initial performance typically correlates well with final performance after a period of learning".  I assume you mean performance relative to others taking the pre and post test?  It's pretty well established that absolute performance increases with practice (and it's common sense) - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24986855/  

---

