<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Intelligence</a> refers to a general cognitive capacity, it does not refer to knowledge in specific fields of study.  This means that yes, it is possible to have high intelligence but have low knowledge / performance in a specific academic area.</p>
<p>Having said that, IQ tests are <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_%28statistics%29#Criterion_validity" rel="nofollow noreferrer">validated against academic performance</a> - that is to say, they are adjusted so as to have a high correlation with grades.  Thus, on average, high IQ scores do mean success in school.</p>
<p>There are a variety of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences" rel="nofollow noreferrer">theories of multiple independent intelligences</a> (mostly discredited), where one can be high performing in one area of intelligence but not another.  However, intelligence is never broken down by academic field of study such as &quot;biology&quot; or &quot;calculus&quot;, only by general cognitive capacity, such as &quot;social&quot; or &quot;musical&quot;, so we might say someone is &quot;not knowledgeable&quot; in biology, but never &quot;not intelligent&quot; in it.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2015-06-12T17:18:30.037Z
2022-01-02T07:44:04.520Z
2022-01-02T07:44:04.520Z
Arnon Weinberg
<p>The question combines concepts of motivation, IQ, and effects of study over time.</p>

<p>There is a modest (r=.3) correlation between IQ and openness to experience, which makes brighter people also more interested in a range of topics.</p>

<p>In addition, higher IQ leads to learning about areas that an individual is not much motivated towards: This is why general vocabulary is the single best indicator of IQ: A bright person very interested in pure mathematics will become skilled in matrix algebra. But even if they dislike biology, they will be able to define many biological terms, explain the basics of ideas like the cell, know what DNA stands for etc. Even with little interest in, say, cars, they will be able to tell you what a "header" is.</p>

<p>Finally, Ray Cattell focussed on the topic you are most interested in, with his investment model of IQ. This distinguished fluid ability from the end result of study over a lifetime, which leads to crystallized knowledge (this also maintains value over time, while fluid ability declines with age).</p>

<p>Bob, in your example "invests" his time in studying math, and will develop a strong crystallized store of information compared to their knowledge and skill in biology.</p>

<p>This <a href="http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Timothy_Bates/publication/223883528_Crystallized_Intelligence_as_a_product_of_Speed_and_Drive_for_Experience/links/54f05f150cf2495330e630ae.pdf" rel="nofollow">Bates and Shieles 2003</a> paper covers some of these things in a bit more detail.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-29T19:22:41.487Z
@what thanks. header = exhaust or extractor manifold :-)
tim
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-06-28T23:00:23.270Z
2015-06-28T23:00:23.270Z
tim
<p>Suppose a person is considered intelligent based on his IQ score. For example, suppose Bob has a high IQ score and is very interested in pure mathematics. He would most probably excel in this field. Now suppose Bob hated biology. He can't bring himself to learn anything about this field. Does this mean that Bob is "not intelligent" in the field of biology and only intelligent in the field of pure mathematics?</p>

<p>In other words, does motivation and interest correlate highly with IQ? Somebody can be "smart" but still perform poorly in various fields?</p>

<intelligence><motivation><iq>
Does motivation and interest correlate highly with IQ and can someone be smart but perform poorly in a particular field?
intelligentguy122
# Does motivation and interest correlate highly with IQ and can someone be smart but perform poorly in a particular field?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-06-12)

Suppose a person is considered intelligent based on his IQ score. For example, suppose Bob has a high IQ score and is very interested in pure mathematics. He would most probably excel in this field. Now suppose Bob hated biology. He can't bring himself to learn anything about this field. Does this mean that Bob is "not intelligent" in the field of biology and only intelligent in the field of pure mathematics?

In other words, does motivation and interest correlate highly with IQ? Somebody can be "smart" but still perform poorly in various fields?

**Tags:** intelligence, motivation, iq


---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2015-06-12. Score: 6

[Intelligence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence) refers to a general cognitive capacity, it does not refer to knowledge in specific fields of study. This means that yes, it is possible to have high intelligence but have low knowledge / performance in a specific academic area.

Having said that, IQ tests are [validated against academic performance](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Validity_%28statistics%29#Criterion_validity) - that is to say, they are adjusted so as to have a high correlation with grades. Thus, on average, high IQ scores do mean success in school.

There are a variety of [theories of multiple independent intelligences](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences) (mostly discredited), where one can be high performing in one area of intelligence but not another. However, intelligence is never broken down by academic field of study such as "biology" or "calculus", only by general cognitive capacity, such as "social" or "musical", so we might say someone is "not knowledgeable" in biology, but never "not intelligent" in it.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2015-06-28. Score: 2

The question combines concepts of motivation, IQ, and effects of study over username_2e.

There is a modest (r=.3) correlation between IQ and openness to experience, which makes brighter people also more interested in a range of topics.

In addition, higher IQ leads to learning about areas that an individual is not much motivated towards: This is why general vocabulary is the single best indicator of IQ: A bright person very interested in pure mathematics will become skilled in matrix algebra. But even if they dislike biology, they will be able to define many biological terms, explain the basics of ideas like the cell, know what DNA stands for etc. Even with little interest in, say, cars, they will be able to tell you what a "header" is.

Finally, Ray Cattell focussed on the topic you are most interested in, with his investment model of IQ. This distinguished fluid ability from the end result of study over a lifeusername_2e, which leads to crystallized knowledge (this also maintains value over username_2e, while fluid ability declines with age).

Bob, in your example "invests" his username_2e in studying math, and will develop a strong crystallized store of information compared to their knowledge and skill in biology.

This [Bates and Shieles 2003](http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Timothy_Bates/publication/223883528_Crystallized_Intelligence_as_a_product_of_Speed_and_Drive_for_Experience/links/54f05f150cf2495330e630ae.pdf) paper covers some of these things in a bit more detail.

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: @what thanks. header = exhaust or extractor manifold :-)  

---

