The results of intelligence tests follow the bell curve, a graph in the general shape of a bell. When the bell curve is used in psychological testing, the graph demonstrates a normal distribution of a trait, in this case, intelligence, in the human population. Many human traits naturally follow the bell curve. For example, if you lined up all your female schoolmates according to height, it is likely that a large cluster of them would be the average height for an American woman: 5’4”–5’6”. This cluster would fall in the center of the bell curve, representing the average height for American women (Figure 7.14). There would be fewer women who stand closer to 4’11”. The same would be true for women of above-average height: those who stand closer to 5’11”. The trick to finding a bell curve in nature is to use a large sample size. Without a large sample size, it is less likely that the bell curve will represent the wider population. A representative sample is a subset of the population that accurately represents the general population. If, for example, you measured the height of the women in your classroom only, you might not actually have a representative sample. Perhaps the women’s basketball team wanted to take this course together, and they are all in your class. Because basketball players tend to be taller than average, the women in your class may not be a good representative sample of the population of American women. But if your sample included all the women at your school, it is likely that their heights would form a natural bell curve. Figure 7.14 Are you of below-average, average, or above-average height? The same principles apply to intelligence tests scores. Individuals earn a score called an intelligence quotient (IQ). Over the years, different types of IQ tests have evolved, but the way scores are interpreted remains the same. On most IQ tests, the average (or mean) IQ score is 100. Standard deviations describe how data are dispersed in a population and give context to large data sets. The bell curve uses the standard deviation to show how all scores are dispersed from the average score (Figure 7.15). In modern IQ testing, one standard deviation is 15 points. So a score of 85 would be described as “one standard deviation below the mean.” How would you describe a score of 115 and a score of 70? Any IQ score that falls within one standard deviation above and below the mean (between 85 and 115) is considered average, and 68% of the population has IQ scores in this range. An IQ score of 130 or above is considered a superior level. Figure 7.15 The majority of people have an IQ score between 85 and 115. Only 2.2% of the population has an IQ score below 70 (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). If a person earns a score approximately two standard deviations below the mean on an intelligence test, (about 70 on a test with a mean of 100), has major deficits in adaptive functioning, and these cognitive and adaptive deficits were present before the age of 18, they could be diagnosed as having an intellectual disability (ID). Formerly known as mental retardation, the accepted term now is intellectual disability, and it has four subtypes: mild, moderate, severe, and profound (Table 7.4). The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychological Disorders lists criteria for each subgroup (APA, 2013). Intellectual Disability Subtype Percentage of Population with Intellectual Disabilities Description Mild 85% 3rd- to 6th-grade skill level in reading, writing, and math; may be employed and live independently Moderate 10% Basic reading and writing skills; functional self-care skills; requires some oversight Severe 5% Functional self-care skills; requires oversight of daily environment and activities Profound <1% May be able to communicate verbally or nonverbally; requires intensive oversight Table 7.4 Characteristics of Cognitive Disorders On the other end of the intelligence spectrum are those individuals whose IQs fall into the highest ranges. Consistent with the bell curve, about 2% of the population falls into this category. People are considered to have a higher aptitude for learning (and may be classified as "gifted" within educational systems) if they have an IQ score of 130 or higher, or superior intelligence in a particular area. Long ago, popular belief suggested that people of high intelligence were maladjusted. This idea was disproven through a groundbreaking study of these children. In 1921, Lewis Terman began a longitudinal study of over 1500 children with IQs over 135 (Terman, 1925). His findings showed that these children became well-educated, successful adults who were, in fact, well-adjusted (Terman & Oden, 1947). Additionally, Terman’s study showed that the subjects were above average in physical build and attractiveness, dispelling an earlier popular notion that highly intelligent people were “weaklings.” Some people with very high IQs elect to join Mensa, an organization dedicated to identifying, researching, and fostering intelligence. Members must have an IQ score in the top 2% of the population, and they may be required to pass other exams in their application to join the group. Dig Deeper What’s in a Name? Intellectual Disabilities In the past, individuals with IQ scores below 70 and significant adaptive and social functioning delays were diagnosed with mental retardation. When this diagnosis was first named, it was replacing more negative and insensitive terms, and the title held no social stigma; several prominent research and support organizations even used the word in their names and mission statements. However, members of those populations as well as their families and supporting professionals found that the term was not only inaccurate, but demeaning and insulting. As such, the DSM-5 now labels this diagnosis as “intellectual disability.” Many states once had a Department of Mental Retardation to serve those diagnosed with such cognitive delays, but most have changed their name to Department of Developmental Disabilities or something similar in language. Due to the passage of "Rosa's Law" in 2010 and to the growing support for changing the terminology, most U.S. federal agencies formally adopted the words "intellectual disability." While the change was widely supported, you can view in the Federal Register several counterpoints from parents of people with intellectual disabilities, who felt that the new term was imprecise and less applicable to their children. Earlier in the chapter, we discussed how language affects how we think. Do you think changing the title of this department has any impact on how people regard those with developmental disabilities? Does a different name give people more dignity, and if so, how? Do you think the terminology is likely to change again? Why or why not?