IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/intell/v111y2025ics0160289625000364.html

How accurately does self-reported intelligence reflect psychometrically measured IQ?

Author

Listed:
  • Allik, Jüri
  • Pullmann, Helle

Abstract

Studies have demonstrated that people's self-reported intelligence (SRI) is only weakly correlated with their psychometrically measured IQ, which challenges the idea that asking someone how intelligent they are can serve as a reliable proxy for formal ability testing. Data collected from a large sample of Estonian schoolchildren aged 7 to 18 years (N = 4544) showed that only by around age of 10 do children's cognitive abilities develop to a level that allows them to make reasonably accurate self-assessments, as measured by the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM). We conclude that meaningful comparisons of one's intellectual abilities with those of peers are only possible once general cognitive development has reached a stage of reflective intelligence, capable of using formal operations and aligning mental concepts with reality. One way to improve the agreement between the SRI and IQ test scores is to increase the reliability of subjective ratings, either by using more items or by enhancing inter-item correlations. However, this agreement has an upper limit, as discrepancies remain between psychologists' definitions of intelligence and lay conceptions, which often conflate intelligence with self-esteem and other unrelated constructs.

Suggested Citation

  • Allik, Jüri & Pullmann, Helle, 2025. "How accurately does self-reported intelligence reflect psychometrically measured IQ?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:111:y:2025:i:c:s0160289625000364
    DOI: 10.1016/j.intell.2025.101933
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000364
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.intell.2025.101933?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gignac, Gilles E., 2018. "Socially desirable responding suppresses the association between self-assessed intelligence and task-based intelligence," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 50-58.
    2. Scharfen, Jana & Peters, Judith Marie & Holling, Heinz, 2018. "Retest effects in cognitive ability tests: A meta-analysis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 44-66.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mansukoski, Liina & Bogin, Barry & Galvez-Sobral, J. Andres & Furlán, Luis & Johnson, William, 2020. "Differences and secular trends in childhood IQ trajectories in Guatemala City," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Harrington, Karra D. & Dang, Christa & Lim, Yen Ying & Ames, David & Laws, Simon M. & Pietrzak, Robert H. & Rainey-Smith, Stephanie & Robertson, Joanne & Rowe, Christopher C. & Salvado, Olivier & Vill, 2018. "The effect of preclinical Alzheimer's disease on age-related changes in intelligence in cognitively normal older adults," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 22-29.
    3. Pallentin, Vanessa S. & Rummel, Jan & Danner, Daniel, 2026. "Investigating retest effects in cognitive ability tests: An operation-specific approach," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Gignac, Gilles E. & Zajenkowski, Marcin, 2020. "The Dunning-Kruger effect is (mostly) a statistical artefact: Valid approaches to testing the hypothesis with individual differences data," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    5. Moritz Breit & Vsevolod Scherrer & Joshua Blickle & Franzis Preckel, 2023. "Students’ intelligence test results after six and sixteen months of irregular schooling due to the COVID-19 pandemic," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(3), pages 1-25, March.
    6. Rindermann, Heiner & Becker, David & Coyle, Thomas R., 2020. "Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: Intelligence research, experts' background, controversial issues, and the media," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    7. Weise, Julius J. & Greiff, Samuel & Sparfeldt, Jörn R., 2020. "The moderating effect of prior knowledge on the relationship between intelligence and complex problem solving – Testing the Elshout-Raaheim hypothesis," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    8. Sommer, Markus & Arendasy, Martin E. & Punter, Joachim Fritz & Feldhammer-Kahr, Martina & Rieder, Anita, 2025. "Does test preparation mediate the effect of parents' level of educational attainment on medical school admission test performance?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    9. Schneider, Benedikt & Sparfeldt, Jörn R., 2021. "How to solve number series items: Can watching video tutorials increase test scores?," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    10. Breit, Moritz & Scherrer, Vsevolod & Preckel, Franzis, 2021. "Temporal stability of specific ability scores and intelligence profiles in high ability students," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    11. Schneider, Benedikt & Becker, Nicolas & Krieger, Florian & Spinath, Frank M. & Sparfeldt, Jörn R., 2020. "Teaching the underlying rules of figural matrices in a short video increases test scores," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    12. Arendasy, Martin E. & Sommer, Markus & Tschiesner, Reinhard & Feldhammer-Kahr, Martina & Umdasch, Konstantin, 2024. "Using automatic item generation to construct scheduling problems measuring planning ability," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intell:v:111:y:2025:i:c:s0160289625000364. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/intelligence .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.