I’m confused about how IQ works for different ages. Is the average IQ always 100 regardless of age, or do kids have different average scores than adults?
If a 12-year-old scores 110, does that mean the same thing as an adult scoring 110? And do the averages change as kids get older?
Just trying to understand how age factors into IQ scores.
No if a 12 year old child scores 110 that is pound for pound more of a 120-130 as adult I would guess. the absolute performance is the same obviously but the child would score significantly higher when becoming adult
The core principle of IQ testing is that the average score is always 100, regardless of age. This is achieved because the test score (like 110) is calculated by comparing an individual’s raw performance only against others in their exact age group (or very narrow age band). So, a 12-year-old scoring 100 is perfectly average for a 12-year-old, and an 80-year-old scoring 100 is perfectly average for an 80-year-old.
@Viki412 The only way that 110 score significantly changes to 120 or 130 is if the child experiences a significant change in environment, motivation, or educational opportunity that separates them from their peers more dramatically as they grow. The change wouldn’t be because of the initial 110 score itself, but because their development accelerates faster than the norm group after the initial test.
@juliaB The reason the average doesn’t change with age is entirely down to the meticulous process of standardization. When the test (like the WISC or WAIS) is developed, it’s given to thousands of people, and separate “age norms” are created for every few months or years. This ensures that the performance of a 13-year-old is compared strictly to the expected performance of other 13-year-olds. Hope this helps.
Yes, average is always 100 regardless of age because IQ tests use age-normed scoring. A 12-year-old scoring 110 and an adult scoring 110 both mean the same thing - 75th percentile compared to their age peers. The 12-year-old would obviously fail most adult test items, but they’re only compared to other 12-year-olds. That’s why IQ stays relatively stable as you age - your percentile rank remains similar even as your absolute abilities grow.
This confused me too when my daughter was tested. The psychologist explained that a kid scoring 130 means they’re performing like the top 2% of kids their age, not that they have adult-level intelligence. The score reflects where they rank among age-mates, which is why retesting years later usually gives similar scores - their relative position stays stable even though they’re getting smarter in absolute terms.
It’s because of what IQ actually measures (it’s mostly about pattern recognition, logical reasoning, and processing speed). It’s not measuring accumulated knowledge or wisdom or creativity. So a 12-year-old with 110 IQ might be quicker at solving puzzles than their peers, but they obviously haven’t lived long enough to develop the judgment or expertise an adult has. But good for your daughter since she might be gifted.
Why are we even measuring children’s intelligence? My kid’s school wants to do IQ testing and I’m really uncomfortable with it. It just seems like it creates unnecessary anxiety and pressure on kids who are already dealing with so much. They’re children. They should be learning and exploring, not being reduced to a number.
This is an excellent question, and your confusion makes sense.
The issues arises from the fact that IQs are norm-referenced scores, which means they are calculated in relationship to a norm sample’s performance on the test. For IQs, test creators compare how well a person scores compared to others their age. So, 100 is the average IQ for every age group… but that doesn’t mean that a person at age 5 who scores 100 has the same mental abilities as a person at age 25 with an IQ of 100. Both people are as smart as the average person their own age.
So, IQ says how smart someone is relative to others in their age group… not a person’s absolute level of smartness.