Your Visual Skills Are Not Correlated To Your IQ (vanderbilt.edu)

Science_afficionado writes: Psychologists at Vanderbilt University have conducted the first study of individual variation in visual ability. They have discovered that there is a broad range of differences in people's capability for recognizing and remembering novel objects and this ability is not associated with individuals' general intelligence, or IQ.
Or, as the article puts it, "Just because someone is smart and well-motivated doesn't mean he or she can learn the visual skills needed to excel at tasks like matching fingerprints, interpreting medical X-rays, keeping track of aircraft on radar displays or forensic face matching."

Comments

Not mutually exclusive

[rmdingler]

The most important thing to remember is that IQ tests are neither meaningless nor harbingers of all types of intelligence.

There are several 'recognized' intelligences, and arguably many more.

words (linguistic intelligence), numbers or logic (logical-mathematical intelligence), pictures (spatial intelligence), music (musical intelligence), self-reflection (intrapersonal intelligence), physical experience (bodily-kinesthetic intelligence), and social experience (interpersonal intelligence).

Re: IQ is not related to anything relevant

[Anonymous Coward]

I find it really sad that you assume anyone who doesn't drink the coolaid can't do well with IQ tests. Science has debunked them time and time again as being a measure of intelligence, and a lot of the folks doing the debunking get good scores at the tests, they're just not dumb enough to tie their self worth to an irrelevant number.

No, IQ tests have never measured intelligence. The fact that you use a high score to prop up your own ego doesn't make it magically relevant. You're good at IQ tests. Congratulations. That doesn't make you smart though, just another sap who can't get along without a mental crutch.