You're absolutely right about the Wechsler tests. You seem quite well versed on IQ testing.
I posted about this on a thread several months ago that has since expired. I'm a retired School Psychologist and my primary job was administering IQ tests, primarily the WISC and occasionally the WAIS or WPPSI. Actually, the Wechsler scale only goes up to 155, and the current Stanford-Binet (which has a standard deviation of 16 rather than 15 points) goes up to 160. It is appropriate to state, if someone had total raw scores that add up to more than needed to reach the top of the scale (which happens sometimes because the full IQ scores are based on the sums of several subtest scores) that the person has "an IQ of over 155" on the Wechsler scale or "over 160" on the Stanford-Binet scale. But it is not appropriate to extrapolate an IQ above those numbers, because the scores are normed against (or compared to) a statistical sampling of the general population of the USA based on census data. (Older editions of the Stanford-Binet went as high as 170 but are considered obsolete.)
Any tests claiming to yield scores above 160 are at best a crude estimation. More likely, theoretically any narcissist can make up a test to which only he or she knows all the answers, and thus being the only one who can answer those specific questions correctly can claim to be the smartest person in the world, but can't prove it because it's quite impossible to test all seven or so billion people in the world with the same test.
As a practical matter, anyone claiming a specific IQ number above 160 is just plain full of $h!t! And that includes Walter O'Brien.
reply
share