.. To think that most things in life are on a bell curve and therefore.......

[seeker]

....... generally most things are perfectly fine.

I thought the 80/20 rule referred to 80% of the desired outcome will be achieved through 20% of the effort? Or was that just the IT version of the rule (because writing the basic program was straightforward, it was all those exception handling modules that took forever to write, and there was always one more that no-one had ever anticipated)?

LD is an IQ below 70. It is statistically as common as having an IQ above 130.

a table here says average IQ's in 7 countries at the bottom of the table as well below 70. It says average in Equitorial Guinea is 59?
How does that work then?

It works because IQ tests are notoriously biased towards the white middle classes! Not intentionally, I don't think. Essentially speaking they require a lot of background knowledge that somebody in Equitorial Guinea is unlikely to have no matter how smart they are.

Which is why IQ tests are rarely used anymore.

sorry here

Its nonsense to say that IQ tests are rarely used.

..they are, and that why we are having this debate

But not for anything, unless I'm very much mistaken. If you wanted to use IQ in an academic paper it would be a right old mess sorting out all the contributing factors.

I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

I was wrong about white people! I forgot, east asian people do best on IQ tests, then white people, then other, then black people.

So you either believe that black people are the least smart, or that the tests are biased.

I really wish this thread had not gone down the IQ road. It is extremely dubious as to what IQ tests do actually measure.

And when they are used to produce claims that one nation of people are less intelligent than another, I find the whole thing deeply disturbing.

The findings quoted in the site linked by JoanOfNark have been the target of a lot of criticism in terms of its methodology, and I am sure that I read that the size of the samples used in some countries was ridiculously low so as to make any meaningful conclusions invalid.

Indeed, the measure for IQ of some countries were based upon a simple average of its neighbouring countries and not upon the indigenous population at all. (I'm sorry, I can't find a link to back that up just now).

You are much mistaken.

Look here a pubmed search on the term 'WAIS' if you want to see some examples of how IQ testing is used.

Some countries or regions may show lower IQs on average because
a) poorer education
b) poorer health
c) worse nutrition

It has been shown that high loads of intestinal parasites leads to decreased school performance in children.

IQ is also a generic measure. Some people may be very talented at a small range of things and score badly at others.

What has all this got to do with the original post?

"What has all this got to do with the original post?" Good point fluff

I think some people may think that IQ scores and the 'Bell Curve' are, sort of, the same thing after a book was published about IQ and was called 'The Bell Curve" back in the 90's.

The 'Bell Curve' is a layman's term for the Normal Distribution Curve and has applications all over the place.

I think that its because the OP was a follow on from another thread about IQ. Not that people dont know about normal distribution of other biological variables.

Whereyouleftit - that's my understanding of the 80/20 rule too. I originally heard it used in IT, but ime it applies to all sorts of areas of life - it's true of practically any task. (Though I'm sure someone will find a counter-example soon!)

About IQ - it's still used in 11+ exams of course and in those CAT tests they give to year 7s. A few years ago my DP had a job interview with a well-known retailer and they gave him some IQ tests. I also did IQ tests several years ago when applying for the civil service. (They don't call them that, but that's what they are.)

But a less controversial way of thinking of the bell curve is in, say, height, or weight. You get a few outliers and a mass of people huddled around the middle.

I think that the Pareto principle is said to apply to many events, not just work related tasks.

And I suppose that you can apply it to any situation and sound vaguely authoratative eg 20% of cats catch 80% of the mice, 20% of bees make 80% of the honey, 80% of the sales in Hobbs come from 20% of the customers and so on

I know what a bell curve is thank you complex :) I've grappled with statistics in my time, though they have generally come off best.
My original reply on this thread was I thought most people were OK most of the time. The thread seems to have degenerated developed into a discussion about the validity of IQ tests.

"I know what a bell curve is thank you complex"

Sorry, my post did come across as very patronising.

complex don't worry about it, I've had far worse things said to me on MN (and in RL for that matter):)

I only used IQ as a way of illustrating what a Bell Curve was because someone asked !

But I think what makes us human (above normal) is what happens to the extremes and how they are treated.

Being normal and having rational responses to the average says nothing ..

Wrt IQ - there was that book with the hypothesis that it is more to do with the how and the emotional response and emotional maturity than some IQ figure on the page. IQ test are very limited and racially and culturally biased.

seeker - maybe you should use height as your example next time.

I certainly will.

But IQ illustrates it so beautifully in normal circumstances. I forgot that mumsnet is populated by outliers!

yanbu, if everything was always amazing how could we appreciate the good times?