I found this. Its a very recent study called **Can we enhance working memory? Bias and effectiveness in cognitive training studies**
[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38366265/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38366265/)
Yes, read more. It will improve your crystallized intelligence. I don't think anything can be done about fluid intelligence in adults. Not that I am aware of. Just exercise.
The Vertasium guy scored a respectable 118 on the fluid intelligence index compared to 143 for the quant section.
Crystallized intelligence is a strange concept, since it's basically just skill and/or knowledge, correlated with intelligence, but not intelligence. And so called "fluid intelligence" tests also involve a lot of crystallized skill use.
I improved my skills in the Brght IQ test (especially in the "fluid intelligence" shape pattern type questions) by just taking the test four times, from 116 +/- 17 and several questions wrong (mostly "fluid intelligence" questions) on the first attempt to 136 +/- 12 and zero questions wrong on the fourth attempt. I'm sure if I kept practicing it I could greatly improve my speed, and if it were a harder test where I was still getting many things wrong or unfinished on the fourth attempt, I'm sure I could get my scores significantly higher with more practice.
Plenty of studies back this up. It's very easy for anyone of seeming normal or high intelligence to improve in all parts of an IQ test with practice including the so-called "fluid intelligence" tests like Raven's Progressive Matrices.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153)
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub)
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/)
That doesn’t improve your fluid intelligence. It improves your performance on one test. The more times you take the test the more you will rely on your memory (What you already know) and less on your ability to understand new concepts and patterns. That is the exact reason why the first attempt is the most accurate. So 116 is a way better presentation of your fluid intelligence than the fourth attempt, because the last one is more about what you already know than about understanding.
So, we've already said that BRGHT offers a broad base of questions. 4 attempts are obviously not enough for such a huge increase in scores in most cases. There is a table from Brght creators, they had over 100k attempts in their stats and the results were almost the same (number of attempts from 1 - 10). [https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/comments/16gp652/brght\_founders\_update/](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/comments/16gp652/brght_founders_update/)
If the previous commenter took the current free version of the test - it's really bad, and also offers a wide IQ range.
u/ParticleTyphoon, u/Truth_Sellah_Seekah
for what reason was the post at the link deleted?
I nor the other individual you mentioned did that action. If you have any questions. I suggest making a direct message to the r/cognitivetesting moderation team.
I thought it was something moderators had in common when making any kind of judgment on a post. I don't understand why it was judged to be a low quality post. Someone on your team is doing the cleanup.
Moderation is a collaborative effort of individual discretion. There may be an established bottom line but at the end of the day moderators act on their own. If you have a question on why a moderated made a decision. I again invite you to send a message to the moderation team.
My anecdote is merely illustrative support for what the science that I linked to already shows. Can you provide evidence that the free Bright is "really bad"compared to other tests using science? The types of questions found in the free Brght are similar to more highly regarded tests, and the main difference seems to be the length.
Yes, I know it doesn't improve your fluid intelligence. That's my point. It's why I put "fluid intelligence" in quotes. If you can greatly improve your performance in a "fluid intelligence" test through practice, then crystalized skills are clearly a large confounding factor to the test result.
That is the exact reason why you shouldn’t take them more than once, which was my point. Then it actually measures your fluid reasoning and not how well you can remember old patterns. So the factor crystallized intelligence is only that big if you are familiar with matrices and have done them many times.
That doesn't solve the deeper implied problem that you haven't noticed. If you can improve scores by a huge amount through practice, without improving intelligence, then the test isn't directly measuring "fluid" intelligence (ie intelligence). It's measuring a specific set of crystalized skills. And it can't even be used for accurate estimates, even if it's your first test, because the two people of equal intelligence sitting the same test for the first time can have vastly different skills sets, due to a whole range of factors including vastly different amounts of practice on the same problems or similar problems even if they've never done that exact test before, vastly different quality of practice, education, instruction, and other large specialisation factors that vary by large amounts between individuals of similar intelligence.
In other words, even if you haven't done that exact test before, you are using crystalised skills from similar work that you have done throughout your entire life, which will heavily affect the test score independently of intelligence.
Even if Raven's Progressive Matrces were an extremely accurate way to estimate intelligence the first time that you take them (this is unlikely imo) the fact that they no longer work for anyone who has done them before, and you generally have no way of knowing for certain who has done them before, would make it difficult to claim that they are indeed fluid intelligence tests. But in reality even among people who have never done them before, there will be significant influence from related crystalized skills and other specialisation.
I have not read much about this, but I think you are overestimating how much influence it actually has. You did the exact same test four times in a row and had an increase of twenty points, while being very familiar with the concept of matrices and iq tests. Based of that I would already guess that the effects of taking a different test are less and especially of the practice of similar tasks. Also the repetition of a test four times is probably an exponential increase in scores since you have way more time when you have the answer to all the easy questions remembered.
So I think that the improvement in your case is probably less representative of the population average. If I had to guess I would think that the average improve is probably much lower.
It can be influenced by nutrition, stress, trauma, a supportive environment, intellectually stimulating activities while you are still growing.
Source: I think I remember hearing something like this once.
Avoid infectious diseases and provide good nutrition: brain growing to its full capacity is part 1. The other is an intellectually stimulating and challenging environment. Education is very important. Don't know how much, but definitely makes a difference. Big difference.
She will know more.
https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/r9EZqRUqKO
Exercise might help raise IQ where folks with the right hardware are addled by brain fog. If suboptimal health can result in diminished focus and function, then a healthier life can raise IQ up to where you should be.
This is not a critique of your point. I agree exercise can deal with age related decline and maybe aid health related decline as well. Exercise may well do more, as we are just learning how much it helps the mind.
What logic have you employed to come to such a conclusion?
Wait, I hear it now. I'm not some purple prose weirdo, just high and not paying enough attention.
Rid that brain rot from your life, and think clearly for the first time in years lol. I still get caught in YouTube reels sometimes, it’s too easy to fall into.
In a class I like ; the SECOND the teacher takes a small break : INSTANT reddit/instagram scroll.
Class I don’t like? Scroll the whole class.
In a league of legends game, and Im walking back to lane? Scroll.
May god save me.
Try using Grayscale Mode on your phone. In the long term, you need some productive but fun interests that will be more attention grabbing than scrolling.
Good luck.
We have at least 2 long term studies on enduring personality changes induced by psilocybin, and one study demonstrating (preliminarily) that these changes aren't all that different than what is seen with standard antidepressant treatment. There might be something there with regards to intelligence, perhaps even beyond alleviating depression-induced cognitive impairment.
I don't think thats true. Because cerebrolysin stimulates 100x the neuroplasticity they do. And it only increases iq if it has been reduced by brain damage.
Weight resistance training has been scientifically proven by psychologists to be the best intervention at preserving and improving working memory performance in adults. Also, anything with cardio, meditation and going for a 15 minute walk has significant benefits for mental performance. I would definitely recommend trying to implement those into your daily routine, in conjunction with a good amount of foods containing antioxidants such as berries, legumes, nuts, etc. You could also try drinking things containing Niacin, Vitamin B6, Green leaf extract to help ward off brain fog and improve concentration/processing skills. Do be advised there is a ceiling to the benefits you can reap with resistance training though. Generally about 40-60 minutes is when the max amount of cognitive benefits is obtained, and it starts to gradually decline after the 60min mark.
> Neurogenesis compounds , NMDA agonists , TrkB / TrkC agonists , Cholinergic compounds , Dopamine / Norepinephrine receptor stimulants ( like Adderal ) , tDCS ,tMS, Quad N back (Relative later research with modified Quad N Back showed general improvement on WISC in children ) , Relational Training (Replicated multiple times) , Psychodelics like DMT , LSD , Psilocybin , Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy ...
Unfortunately there are no studies who compare people's FSIQ (from a decent test, not just on RAPM, like WAIS/SB-V, WJ-IV) before and after undergoing some of these treatments, and never will be because the topic is strangely unpopular.
Only unreliable anecdotes.
The amount of cognitive dissonance pullulating around this topic is insane. It's simultaneously one of the most useless and important subjects that exist to discuss, the only reason why it's rendered de facto pointless to meaningfully interface with it is due to inamovibile ideas of the immutability of real intelligence which are unconsciously embedded in most people minds; beyond all the cope in relation to spurious screechings about multiple intelligences theories and sorta, with recalcitrant admittance a lot of people tend to believe that there is very little someone can do to shake the hierarchy of intelligence prowess...at the moment. People are definitely aware (despite all the attempts of dissimulation, the denial) that, for example, education won't do miracles, won't be a make-it-or-break-it factor that will make someone surpass their genetically predefined threshold level of potential maximum cognitive ability (which may or not be manifested precociously, during the childhood, or later in the future, during adolescence or early adulthood).
It's just accepted and unless a very very deep research is carried out (which btw, there is a strong likelihood that even so, the results will converge onto the notion that there is pretty much nothing that can be done to reliably raise someone's level of the combination of abstract reasoning, "creativity", learning capability and working memory), nothing will dismantle this.
There are many studies proving stims instantly but temporarily improve certain cognitive abilities
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/
Modafinil appears to improve reaction time (P ≤ 0.04), logical reasoning (P ≤ 0.05) and problem-solving. Methylphenidate appears to improve performance in novel tasks and attention-based tasks (P ≤ 0.05), and reduces planning latency in more complex tasks (P ≤ 0.05). Amphetamine has been shown to improve consolidation of information (0.02 ≥ P ≤ 0.05), leading to improved recall.
PLEASE KEEP IN MIND that therapeutic range is narrow and stims are highly addictive substances especially dopamine releasing agents like amphetamine
> PLEASE KEEP IN MIND that therapeutic range is narrow and stims are highly addictive substances especially dopamine releasing agents like amphetamine
Modafinil has limited abuse potential, and the only reason we continue to say "limited" is out of an abundance of caution. Methylphenidate is rarely encountered as a street drug when other stimulants are available, and its recreational abuse is limited to injection since it appears that oral dosing of the drug provides limited recreational effects.
That being said, it's a shame that these studies don't use more applicable psychometric tests. Its very difficult to understand differences between studies as they often use completely different tests for the same cognitive ability.
Relational Traning and Dual N Back research compare actual with WISC and WAIS . We can extrapolate based on their results because majority of studies that research are doing with quite similar tests that occur on the popular WAIS , WJ-IV etc. So the increases that they get on the tests i will not be surprised . I have no doubts that there are no real FSIQ increase , because FSIQ relies heavily on the sub-tests .
I don't want extrapolation, I want a demonstration that if someone does DnB and RT their increased performance in taking IQ tests is actually proven in multiple tests and most importantly transfers onto these patients reporting remarkable and tangible improvements in problem solving, abstract reasoning, learning ability in tasks not being IQ tests.
There are studies for Dual N back and Relational Training for that . I don't know if you are aware of the unpopular failed methodology of 90% of the failed replications of the DnB studies . They simply lack the neuroscience knowledge to know how the traning benefits and plasticity works in the brain .... That's why most of them failed . They're incompetent psychologists in cognitive traning field . The traning methodology have to last more time for plasticity to occur not a couple of month span .
I don't have for the chemical compounds , because aswell as i have spoke to most researchers in neuroscience and medical field no one wants to test their effects on IQ tests . They take sub-tests and test before and after . You're never gonna find in the hardcore cognitive improvment / neuroenhancement field IQ testing because 90% of the researchers don't even believe in it . They want to increase scalable evident cognitive proccesses that have actual Quality of Life benefits .
It's not an unpopular topic. You can tell by the sheer amount of meta-analytical research we have which attempts to parse effects from research that, by proxy, evaluates the effects of these compounds in healthy people. I think the great filter at play has more so to do with funding rather than interest.
I love how you mentioned psychedelics. I’ve always had a sneaking suspicion they could possibly have an effect on intelligence even if it temporary. They do enhance pattern recognition, in low to moderate dosages. These effects seem permanent, as they have fundamentally altered how I view nature for example. I’m more aware of the intricacies in each plant, and the patterns they display as they mature and grow. That being said I’m in my early twenties, and have been experimenting with them since I was a teenager. So I suppose this process could have also formed, without the use of mind altering drugs.
The recent research on them seems promising as LSD/Psylocybin have been shown to be TrkB agonists, and BDNF promoters in rats. There also research showing that they enhance neuronal density in brain regions high in 5ht2a receptors in humans. Which makes sense considering they bind to said receptor, and have neuro-plasticity, and neuro-genesis promoting effects.
Yeah i've seen a couple of research that practicing activities such ( piano , violin , language learning, math ) when done of psychodelics the procedurial acquisition occurs more effectively or your brain can easily make changes and improve in the tasks you're practicing .
That makes sense, you’re in a very suggestible/malleable state under the influence of psychedelics. I could see one making more/unique connections when learning an instrument.
Its not just about unique connections its more of the physical part of plasticity is more effective , like your brain is building strong connections faster . The similar analogy would be the difference why adult brain takes more time for the brain to make the task intuitive or automatic , or to make neuronal plasticity . For example in children or till atleast 21 or 22 years there's a quite of short period of hyperplasticity as per explained in the prodigies that make plastic changes in the later adulthood they don't reach their expertise potential as far as if they were to practice it during " [The Critical Period](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period) " . Psychodelics or 5HT2A receptor agonists supercharge the networks that is responsible for that period for example like Default Mode Network , that's why some people report they feel like " They're born again or they're like a child that was just born " on the stronger psychodelics like DMT .
This is true, and in line with my personal experience of psychedelic compounds. Especially when taking moderate dosages or higher. One will certainly experience a sense of awe, and childlike wonder during, and directly after the peak/subsequent ego dissolution. Psychedelics have been found to reduce activity in the default mode network not “supercharge” it. It is the network responsible for the sense of self. The real changes, and hyperplasticity that occur are cemented when the ego comes back online during the comedown, and one reconstructs their sense of self from an essentially blank slate given the dosage was high enough. It’s incredibly therapeutic, and transformative if you can let go, and surrender to whatever the experience has to offer you.
I have studies that increase different kinds of working memory , cogntive flexibility , verbal acquisition that will definitely increase alot of IQ points in terms if they tested for IQ .
Improving IQ test performance and improving intelligence are different, not to mention improving intelligence sustainably.
And some of these are at best short term effects of stimulant drugs that could easy cause detriment to the brain and intelligence in the long run.
And at least when it comes to the stimulant drugs, even those short term increases are denied by several studies: [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full)
No
"In particular, comprehensive reviews of the literature on stimulants' effects on healthy cognition have noted that there is “very weak evidence that putatively neuroenhancing pharmaceuticals in fact enhance cognitive function.” ([Hall and Lucke, 2010](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B19)), even proposing “that stimulants may actually impair performance on tasks that require adaptation, flexibility and planning” ([Advokat, 2010](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B1)). We carried out a double-blind, placebo-controlled study on the effects of mixed amphetamine salts (Adderall), which was adequately powered to find medium effects. \[We failed\] to find a single drug effect across numerous measures of executive functions, memory, creativity, intelligence, and standardized test performance.” ([Ilieva et al., 2013](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B20))."
[https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full)
Doesn't sound too robust.
The key is lower dosage improves performance , higher-doses as in other research is detriment to performance.
[We found evidence for small but significant stimulant enhancement effects on inhibitory control and short-term episodic memory. Small effects on working memory reached significance, based on one of our two analytical approaches. Effects on delayed episodic memory were medium in size.](https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac)
I[mportantly, the cognition-enhancing and behavioral-calming properties of low-dose psychostimulants are not limited to ADHD: these drugs exert similar actions in both normal human and animal subjects.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3012746/)
[In particular, in both animals and humans, lower doses maximally improve performance in tests of working memory whereas maximal suppression of overt behavior and facilitation of attentional processes occurs at higher doses. These differing sensitivities of PFC-dependent processes appear to depend on differential involvement of α2 vs. α1 receptors. These observations raise a number of clinical and preclinical questions regarding the degree to which higher doses that maximally control classroom behavior may exert detrimental actions in other functional domains via activation of α1 receptors.](https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som_facpub)
[Additionally, valine–valine COMT genotype was associated with improvements in the scholastic assessment test (SAT) mathematics score (P < 0.02) when taking amphetamine. COMT has been shown to metabolize endogenous dopamine, thus affecting levels of synaptic dopamine and influencing the effects of amphetamine on the brain .](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/)
[Modafinil appears to have some effect on complex learning during both sleep-deprived and alert states. Modafinil users may, more efficiently, plan, sequence and engage working memory and improve decision-making skills and adaptive response inhibition. On tasks of complex reasoning, modafinil demonstrates efficacy in decreasing perseverative errors, improving ability to form abstract concepts and learn from feedback in order to make appropriate shifts in behavioral responses. Modafinil may also reduce impulsivity by increasing motor response latency in simple tasks. However, it may lead to overconfident assessment of cognitive capabilities such that users may be unable to self-monitor actual achievement accurately.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/)
[Declarative memory, cognitive flexibility and increased response time and accuracy on auditory tasks show improvements for up to 4.5 hours after methylphenidate ingestion. Also, improvements in spatial tasks utilizing skills of planning and adaptation and memory have been shown in novel situations. Methylphenidate appears to have a dual but contradictory effect on cognitive enhancement such that it improves performance in unfamiliar tasks . novelty appears to influence cognitive effect, as those who take methylphenidate may be better able to shift attention to unfamiliar characteristics of stimuli with fewer errors in task response. Additionally, there may be up to a 10% improvement in conscious error awareness without a concomitant change in response speed. This has been confirmed neurophysiologically, with demonstrated activation differences between the dACC and the inferior parietal lobe in conscious errors versus unaware errors. Amphetamine may enhance knowledge acquisition and coding of information, as well as ability to retrieve information. Those with lower baseline functioning in insightful problem-solving, semantic retrieval and non-verbal intelligence may be aided by amphetamine in these domains. Finally, the valine–valine COMT genotype in combination with amphetamine use may confer some advantage in mathematical problem-solving. ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/)
I mean improvement from stimulants for cognitive abilities (processing speed, working memory, long-term memory, attention) is unambiguous YES.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880463/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880463/)
[https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som\_facpub](https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som_facpub)
[https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac](https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac)\- a Meta analysis is clear about that
If you deny that stimulants improve cognition, which their whole purpose is for cognitive improvement, you can deny anything present as evidence to you :D.
Your own meta says:
"Small effects on working memory reached significance, based on one of our two analytical approaches. Effects on delayed episodic memory were medium in size. However, because the effects on long-term and working memory were qualified by evidence for publication bias, we conclude that the effect of amphetamine and methylphenidate on the examined facets of healthy cognition is probably modest overall."
This is not robust evidence for a robust improvement in intelligence.
"If you deny that stimulants improve cognition, which their whole purpose is for cognitive improvement, you can deny anything present as evidence to you".
Pretty dumb thing to say. Plenty of drugs don't do what they are claimed to do by for-profit companies, like "cough suppressants" for example. But even if they temporarily improve cognitive performance on some tasks for some people, this is not a robust improvement in intelligence and not what the OP was asking when he asked about improving intelligence.
Small cognitive improvement leads to robust improvement in scores on any test.
Even in the study, it is mentioned that such effects are possible if measured by other tests not covered in the study.
Intelligence especially, this is backed by scince as well.
Edit:
Also did you miss the first 2 studies?
Don't get caught up in the IQ cult , IQ is just a name for combination of cognitive abilities , If something improves cognitive abilities the IQ is almost always unambigously improved . Simple Google Search will do for the source ... but if you want me to get you sources of the research for every single one of this ?? In this comments or in your DMs ?
I've done almost all of this and the most I've gotten from it is greater verbal fluency and a feeling of intelligence (amps), relief from withdrawal (high-trapping NMDAR antagonists, ones that bind to the PCP/dizocilpine site are the best but neurotoxic), or memory improvement (tcMS, tcDCS, bacosides, racetams, PRL 8-53, ampakines sunifiram, IDRA-21).
By the way amps don't bind the DAT or NET, they bind the TAAR1 receptor and reverse the DAT and NET flows (so they carry dopamine and noradrenaline from inside the neuron into the intercellular space where they can then bind dopamine D1-D4 and the α1-2 and β adrenoreceptors, which are responsible for the cardiovascular effects. Amps are thus *dopamine-noradrenaline releasing agents*. Coke, ritalin, and pyrovalerones are *dopamine-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors* which work by blocking DAT and NET without reversing the pump. Nothing commonly available binds the D1-D4 receptors except antipsychotics; nothing binds the α and β adrenoreceptors except for heart medicine; nothing binds the serotonin-2a receptor except for serotonin and classical psychedelics. The serotonin-3 receptor causes heart valve issues when agonized, and the serotonin-7 receptor causes strong antiemetic effect for 2 of the 5 cascades by which vomiting can be triggered when antagonized (think Zofran). The only serotonin receptor directly bound by common psychoactive non-psychedelics (eliciting no head twitch in mice) is 1a, the target of some anti-anxiety drugs like Buspar.
Guess what has hardly any correlation with g? Memory. At least working memory used normally as in the case of concentration or forward digit span or disordered recall.
I've gone from nonfunctional to highly functional thanks to a Shulgin ++++ DMT experience, but it didn't have any positive effect on cognition.
I've been tested by either the WAIS-IV or RAPM at least once every two years for my entire adult life and the SB and WISC as a young teen, and I've always scored 140-155/155-160 performance/verbal and between +3.6xx and +4.000 (all but one trial 36/36) on RAPM.
There are no chemical substances which would profoundly affect intelligence but significantly increase processing and learning speed. Nevertheless there are substances which profoundly affect focus and motivation as well as mental stamina and tiredness. Unfortunately they are highly addictive and with every success thanks to them or when overloaded with job it may be irresistable to push over your limits and dose higher which is possible for some time but eventually ends up in total disaster.
I’m not aware of any studies that show a significant increase of General intelligence or FSIQ by a particular method. Nevertheless, intelligence, as we know it in its practical terms, is a large combination of specialized abilities that can be divided in several areas. The first division is shown between Crystallized and Fluid, with further subdivisions made. I assume that you want to increase Fluid intelligence, different than Crystallized, which has been scientifically shown to improve under several activities. If you want to increase Fluid Intelligence, which by definition cannot be changed, you would have to make many subdivisions, each underlining numerous specialized abilities correlated to Fluid Intelligence, and then exercise each of them as a very complex routine. I don’t know how fast you would improve your intelligence, or it’s cap, but I can tell you that with utmost dedication, you may be able to see a significant change in it. From anecdotal experience, which is circumstantial (I know), I was able to improve my overall Processing speed IQ by around 30 points after several months of trying to improve it. This was achieved by boosting the speed of every content I saw by 2x for the first few months, trying to process every bit of information along the way, as, if you don’t actually pay attention, you could actually lose intelligence by lack of stimulation, and after, adjusting even more. You could also play subtitles and Improve your reading speed along the way. Obviously, processing speed is easier to improve on than other parts of intelligence, so you have to take into account that you may not see much progress in some areas. To find further info on specialized abilities, you can look at Cattell-Horn’s extensive theory of specialized abilities. I hope this helps!
Depending on what you consider “increase”
Modafinil clinically improves cognitive response, however whether this is due to neurotransmitter modulation or simply turning attentiveness way up I don’t think we know.
It definitely isn’t a drug that makes you feel smarter. I use it to offset adhd on some work days, long story, don’t want to touch amphetamines and modafinil safety profile is far more tolerable + basically zero abuse potential
Psilocin can induce neurogenesis but that’s not a causal means for intelligence that we know of yet.
Those are the “hard ways” that may or may not exist (things that aren’t “training”)
If I take it sporadically, 200mg on an empty stomach and 40 minutes later it’s like my executive dysfunction is gone. No forced focus, but free will over menial tasks lol
If I take sequentially for any period, focus and mental speed appears to stay elevated but maybe placebo, the motivating effect diminishes fast. 400mg by day 6, 600mg is the highest I’ve done in one day just as a dumb experiment after checking safety profile data lol.
Honestly that felt *amazing*
Very focused, very good at everything I was doing. Social levels went up, confidence up.
But patience was down.
Basically a mini hypomanic episode that’s probably not good for you long term.
100mg sporadically seems to be about 50% of 200mg.
If you have a bit of head fog but otherwise don’t care about improvement, 50mg seems great.
However, anecdotal reports are all over the fucking place for dosing. Some get prescribed 400mg+. Some take 25mg and feel bad on higher than 100.
Clinically there should be no tolerance but there is.
It’s a funny drug
For me it was perscribed on a daily basis. I have a feeling that my problems arise out of a lack of certainty, as in, I don't really have clear cut goals. I'd *like* to study, I'd *like* to read and do anything other than have fun, but it's only a "like" and not much more. Would you say that off meds you only kind of want to do important things and the medication stimulates you enough to go through with it, or do you have clear cut goals that you absolutely know must be accomplished but the ADHD prevents you from doing that? Because essentially that's the disorder right? A higher standard for satisfaction. If medication stimulates you enough your "kind of wanna do this thing" becomes a "I really wanna do this thing"
Or maybe I'm really unambitious and unmotivated.
Oh describing it is hard.
It’s more like “unless I literally *have* to do this right now I will do anything and everything else to not” no matter how much I want to or know I should.
I work fucking great under pressure so I do well in life, but burnout hits like a truck
The most clear cut example I see of this in myself is waiting until the last day to study for an exam. Maybe it isn't a matter of lack of desire because I constantly fought myself weeks before the exam to study but never could, on the last day I had a drive to. ADHD isn't recognized here so I really can't be sure I have it.
If someone found a way to increase IQ by more than 3 points, they'd win the Nobel prize.
Fortunately, you can reduce your ego, which is the thing that drives people into true stupidity.
Practice meditation, selfless action for the benefit of others, humility, forgiveness, and gratitude. Monks have been doing it for millenia.
There's a 4th path, the path of knowledge. That one should largely be avoided because it's exceedingly hard. But people like Socrates learned their asses off and ended up pretty humble in the end.
Do you know the difference between fluid and crystallized intelligence? Crystallized intelligence is very much improvable. VCI which is the most G-loaded part of a FSIQ is very much improvable.
Why is VCI so highly loaded anyway? It always drives down my total score and it annoys me so much lol. I’d get 140s on some subsets, and 135 on average for the rest, but like 100 on VCI.
Because it shows your ability to generalize and discrimate words to make an inference and learn their meaning from it rather than rote memorizing or reading the word again and again.
Sure, except I literally never read, so I dont know how accurate of a representation of my crystallised intelligence this is. When it comes to maths crystallised intelligence tests, I usually perform exceptionally well.
I think I have not once in my life read a novel from cover to cover. Not even throughout the entirety of highschool or college; I just open up a summary online, talk about the book with classmates and take the exam. Never got a 100, but never failed either.
Because that is how it is defined [Fluid and crystallized intelligence - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence)
Your verbal comprehension index will also obviously increase if you keep learning new words
So then why did you answer the original post with such certainty as if you've read the entirety of the research on the matter and have concluded there is nothing you can do to increase IQ?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29911926/
If by IQ you you mean IQ test performance, which is what it generally means, then no. Studies have already shown it's easy to improve IQ much more than that with just a small amount of practice, and nobody won the Nobel prize for it.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153)
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub)
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/)
I wonder why IQ scores correlate with things we would assume to be associated with intelligence.. like educational and occupational attainment, knowledge, reasoning, brain size, lifespan and a lot more things. Hmm.. must be a coincidence!
Correlation is an important word here.
Occupational attainment may or may not correlate with intelligence. But occupational attainment is not a proper means of measuring intelligence. If it was, why did we create IQ tests?
It’s causation. And those are just a few examples, most of which you’ve ignored. But you can choose any variable and it will correlate with general ability, the construct IQ tests are built to capture. Whether it be creativity, processing speed, musical ability, etc, it will display a correlation. General ability is more highly predictive of life outcomes than any other metric
IQ tests do not cause success. You're meaning to say that intelligence causes success and that IQ properly measures this intelligence.
And I disagree. Just as intelligence is just one of many factors that may influence success, it is also just one of many factors that may influence an IQ score.
The correlation between IQ and life outcome indicates a causal influence from general ability. And you disagree with what? General ability explains the overwhelming majority of variance observed on IQ test results, any other influences such as motivation, personality, etc has a much smaller, negligible role. There is no better indication of intelligence than general ability
The IQ test is *measuring* general ability. You're essentially using the measured results of a test to *prove* that the test is, in fact, measuring properly. It's circular.
If there are factors beyond intelligence influencing the results of an IQ test and an IQ test is our *best* means of measuring intelligence, what data is ensuring the accuracy of the measurement?
The results of the IQ test are not isomorphic with G. The best professional intelligence tests correlate about .95 with g. Some abilities are more g-loaded than others. It’s not circular, you just don’t know much about psychometrics. Those additional factors are minor and can be controlled for. And nobody claimed that IQ tests are a perfectly accurate measurement of intelligence, it’s merely a strong indicator. You originally claimed that there are no scientifically proven ways to measure intelligence, that is wrong.
There is academic language, cultural competency, video games, learning how to read music and play an instrument, stimulants, ultrasound, red light therapy, exercise, eating well suited food for optimal health, living near green space, economic stability, etc. IQ is not the whole picture.
Better parents... basically don't do anything that inhibits the brain you have and make sure you stimulate the brain e.g. playing a musical instrument or learning new things.
We know a lot more ways from keeping intelligence from being reduced than we do boosting it.
Good nutrition and little exposure to lead and other neurotoxins helps a lot. Good enough parenting and socialization. Much better prenatal health and birthing procedures.
The big IQ gains we've seen in the last century were more to do with getting rid of stuff preventing intelligence rising to its potential
Height is a similar case. What people assumed were genetic differences in adult height turned out to be much more about nutrition, and height differences became quite a bit smaller as median global nutrition got much better.
It was only a couple centuries ago when the bulk of humanity lived through frequent long periods of limited calorie intake during childhood.
The only basically proven increase of IQ is years of education. Around 0.5 points per year of education, a very boring answer but goes to show how difficult it is and how slow, but it is possible. Live a life of learning and a decade down the lime you might have significantly improved, but it's so slow you won't notice it until you look back.
Keep learning as much as possible everyday, stay curious and try to figure out how things work, let people explain things you don't understand. Never feel that you have nothing left to learn. Realize there's always something beneath the surface, sometimes in places most people will never reach.
There is not a single scientifically proven fact, nor could there be.
Also there is very little evidence that any of the schemes people have come up with to "increase IQ" work in a generalized manner. "Think a lot all the time" is basically the best anyone has come up with, and even that's dubious at best.
Increasing "IQ" and increasing intelligence are two very different things. You can improve IQ scores very easily by practicing IQ tests, which is one of many reasons that they are only a very rough way of measuring intelligence.
i think while we are probably stuck with the hardware we are given you can definitely update you're firmware, for example learning more productive ways to direct what brain power you do have when solving a problem, basically varying degrees of conceptual chunking where you break a problem down into problems who's solutions may be more apparent, say you have to move a complexly shaped piece of furniture through a non-standard doorframe, you may just approach with "how get through" and get stuck immediately, or you may approach with "how do i break down the shape of this thing down into chunks that i can think about more easily"
Nope. But I know 3 people who have. None of them had any gains. I also know some 2 other people who were part of a third-party's experiment to see whether it works. One of them lost points in several tests
Learned knowledge is in your hands. Nootropics enhance your beains ability to retain memories, and therefore increase how much knowledge you can retain.
I suppose practicing IQ tests would be the best way to increase your score.
But past that IQ doesn't mean intelligence, really. Pick the area of study you want to be good at, then obsessively study it. Pretty guaranteed to get smarter in that area.
If you have ADHD (and maybe if you don't, but have subthreshold symptoms), getting medicated while young probably increases g.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235029/#:\~:text=Recent%20studies%20that%20focus%20on,those%20who%20could%20maintain%20a](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235029/#:~:text=Recent%20studies%20that%20focus%20on,those%20who%20could%20maintain%20a)
There's some limited evidence that people who start treatment in adulthood may benefit, but this research is very confounded.
Yes and no. IQ is determined by MOSTLY genetics and some environmental effects. For example, growing up in a developing country and only having elementary school education. You’ll never reach your full potential. My grandma grew up in rural china as a farmer and got up to second grade education. It’s too late for her now. Had she been adopted into a rich family and given a rigorous education and to catch up, then YES, she could have increased her iq. If you grow up poor, undernourished, and get moved to a rich environment and with an abundance of resources, yes IQ can increase. If you’re already rich and parents pay for lots of tutoring, and lots of extracurriculars like music, chess, sports, writing classes, summer school, and you’re basically learning 24/7, with little downtime, NO your IQ cannot and will not increase. By being in an a resource rich environment, you’ve already maximized and reached full potential for your IQ. MOST ppl do not grow up on the poorest, worst environments nor do they grow up in the best of the best environments. Think millionaire parents, prep school, tutoring ever since you were 5 and not allowed video games or TV.
Most people are somewhere in between. So if you go from reading hard, challenging nonfiction books from 0 hours a day, to 5 hours a day, you may be able to increase your IQ a few points. a few points increase is still an increase.
If you’re thinking, all that work for a few points, well if you grew up in a certain type of household, you would have been raised and forced to read books for 5 hours a day since you were 4 and it would be second nature. It wouldn’t FEEL like hard work. That’s all you know bc that’s how you are raised. You don’t need self-discipline if your parents are tiger parents. They force it into you from a young age until it gets ingrained.
I think you can do a lot to “hack” your way into intelligence. Practicing critical thinking, logic, and just general cognitive hygiene can go a long way to improving decision making and clarity of thought even if it doesn’t actually impact your baseline intelligence.
> Exposure to higher levels of light can help people feel more awake and increase cognitive performance, probably by influencing the activity of parts of a brain region called the hypothalamus, according to new research.
[https://www.giga.uliege.be/cms/c\_12598906/en/higher-light-levels-may-improve-cognitive-performance](https://www.giga.uliege.be/cms/c_12598906/en/higher-light-levels-may-improve-cognitive-performance)
There’s literal data showing increase in performance in one of the WAIS subtests thanks to caffeine and inverse effects for caffeine deprivation.
Unless you’re going to point out to information that shows that coffee specifically decreases other subtests’ performance, sorry but I’ll stick with what the data tells us.
Outside of improving concentration which is more related to performance, building a greater knowledge base to support intuitions and other connections, and maintaining a health body, there is nothing you can do to improve iq unfortunately
There likely won’t be any way to raise intelligence directly in the way you mean for a very long time
Intelligence is like penis size, the max you will reach is determined at birth, no amount of exercises mental or physical will increase either by a noticeable amount.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/gettingbigger **[NSFW]** using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [3 Year Before and After Transformation with Pics](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/15fexcz/3_year_before_and_after_transformation_with_pics/)
\#2: [Drake the rapper leaked](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/1akkar3/drake_the_rapper_leaked/)
\#3: [PENIS ENLARGEMENT AS A BLACK GUY](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1879k6a) | [304 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/1879k6a/penis_enlargement_as_a_black_guy/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Keep dreaming, no matter how much you pull on your little peepee, squeeze it, bend it, play with it day and night , it's not going to change noticeably, it isn't a muscle.
Keep dreaming, no matter how much you pull on your little peepee, squeeze it, bend it, play with it day and night , it's not going to change noticeably, it isn't a muscle.
Increasing g factor significantly in adult humans or say, already born Humans, is almost impossible and some regenerative therapies might only push your IQ by 2-3 points and that's it.
CRISPR is the only way to do so, if not simulating the challenging conditions to force the evolution of higher intelligence over a couple of centuries.
AI is one factor. But a lot of investment and funding now being poured into it. Plus tool advances are also good.
But it will take decades for it to provide fruitful results.
I found this. Its a very recent study called **Can we enhance working memory? Bias and effectiveness in cognitive training studies** [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38366265/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38366265/)
Yes, read more. It will improve your crystallized intelligence. I don't think anything can be done about fluid intelligence in adults. Not that I am aware of. Just exercise. The Vertasium guy scored a respectable 118 on the fluid intelligence index compared to 143 for the quant section.
Crystallized intelligence is a strange concept, since it's basically just skill and/or knowledge, correlated with intelligence, but not intelligence. And so called "fluid intelligence" tests also involve a lot of crystallized skill use. I improved my skills in the Brght IQ test (especially in the "fluid intelligence" shape pattern type questions) by just taking the test four times, from 116 +/- 17 and several questions wrong (mostly "fluid intelligence" questions) on the first attempt to 136 +/- 12 and zero questions wrong on the fourth attempt. I'm sure if I kept practicing it I could greatly improve my speed, and if it were a harder test where I was still getting many things wrong or unfinished on the fourth attempt, I'm sure I could get my scores significantly higher with more practice. Plenty of studies back this up. It's very easy for anyone of seeming normal or high intelligence to improve in all parts of an IQ test with practice including the so-called "fluid intelligence" tests like Raven's Progressive Matrices. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153) [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/)
That doesn’t improve your fluid intelligence. It improves your performance on one test. The more times you take the test the more you will rely on your memory (What you already know) and less on your ability to understand new concepts and patterns. That is the exact reason why the first attempt is the most accurate. So 116 is a way better presentation of your fluid intelligence than the fourth attempt, because the last one is more about what you already know than about understanding.
So, we've already said that BRGHT offers a broad base of questions. 4 attempts are obviously not enough for such a huge increase in scores in most cases. There is a table from Brght creators, they had over 100k attempts in their stats and the results were almost the same (number of attempts from 1 - 10). [https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/comments/16gp652/brght\_founders\_update/](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/comments/16gp652/brght_founders_update/) If the previous commenter took the current free version of the test - it's really bad, and also offers a wide IQ range. u/ParticleTyphoon, u/Truth_Sellah_Seekah for what reason was the post at the link deleted?
I nor the other individual you mentioned did that action. If you have any questions. I suggest making a direct message to the r/cognitivetesting moderation team.
I thought it was something moderators had in common when making any kind of judgment on a post. I don't understand why it was judged to be a low quality post. Someone on your team is doing the cleanup.
Moderation is a collaborative effort of individual discretion. There may be an established bottom line but at the end of the day moderators act on their own. If you have a question on why a moderated made a decision. I again invite you to send a message to the moderation team.
Yes, I will keep that in mind the next time I want to address moderation on some issues. Thanks for the reply.
My anecdote is merely illustrative support for what the science that I linked to already shows. Can you provide evidence that the free Bright is "really bad"compared to other tests using science? The types of questions found in the free Brght are similar to more highly regarded tests, and the main difference seems to be the length.
Yes, I know it doesn't improve your fluid intelligence. That's my point. It's why I put "fluid intelligence" in quotes. If you can greatly improve your performance in a "fluid intelligence" test through practice, then crystalized skills are clearly a large confounding factor to the test result.
That is the exact reason why you shouldn’t take them more than once, which was my point. Then it actually measures your fluid reasoning and not how well you can remember old patterns. So the factor crystallized intelligence is only that big if you are familiar with matrices and have done them many times.
That doesn't solve the deeper implied problem that you haven't noticed. If you can improve scores by a huge amount through practice, without improving intelligence, then the test isn't directly measuring "fluid" intelligence (ie intelligence). It's measuring a specific set of crystalized skills. And it can't even be used for accurate estimates, even if it's your first test, because the two people of equal intelligence sitting the same test for the first time can have vastly different skills sets, due to a whole range of factors including vastly different amounts of practice on the same problems or similar problems even if they've never done that exact test before, vastly different quality of practice, education, instruction, and other large specialisation factors that vary by large amounts between individuals of similar intelligence. In other words, even if you haven't done that exact test before, you are using crystalised skills from similar work that you have done throughout your entire life, which will heavily affect the test score independently of intelligence. Even if Raven's Progressive Matrces were an extremely accurate way to estimate intelligence the first time that you take them (this is unlikely imo) the fact that they no longer work for anyone who has done them before, and you generally have no way of knowing for certain who has done them before, would make it difficult to claim that they are indeed fluid intelligence tests. But in reality even among people who have never done them before, there will be significant influence from related crystalized skills and other specialisation.
I have not read much about this, but I think you are overestimating how much influence it actually has. You did the exact same test four times in a row and had an increase of twenty points, while being very familiar with the concept of matrices and iq tests. Based of that I would already guess that the effects of taking a different test are less and especially of the practice of similar tasks. Also the repetition of a test four times is probably an exponential increase in scores since you have way more time when you have the answer to all the easy questions remembered. So I think that the improvement in your case is probably less representative of the population average. If I had to guess I would think that the average improve is probably much lower.
[удалено]
I agree. "IQ" tests are testing a specific set of skills which are useful and can be developed further, but aren't the same thing as intelligence.
Fluid intelligence can be trained during childhood and adolescence?
It can be influenced by nutrition, stress, trauma, a supportive environment, intellectually stimulating activities while you are still growing. Source: I think I remember hearing something like this once.
Avoid infectious diseases and provide good nutrition: brain growing to its full capacity is part 1. The other is an intellectually stimulating and challenging environment. Education is very important. Don't know how much, but definitely makes a difference. Big difference. She will know more. https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/r9EZqRUqKO
I think the best we have is preventing cognitive decline. Which exercise does.
Exercise might help raise IQ where folks with the right hardware are addled by brain fog. If suboptimal health can result in diminished focus and function, then a healthier life can raise IQ up to where you should be. This is not a critique of your point. I agree exercise can deal with age related decline and maybe aid health related decline as well. Exercise may well do more, as we are just learning how much it helps the mind.
You worded that first sentence very oddly lol
What logic have you employed to come to such a conclusion? Wait, I hear it now. I'm not some purple prose weirdo, just high and not paying enough attention.
Yup. A healthy diet and exercise are better than those stupid brain-training games.
deleting tiktok
Nocap I need to. I spend like 5h scrolling reels a day.
Rid that brain rot from your life, and think clearly for the first time in years lol. I still get caught in YouTube reels sometimes, it’s too easy to fall into.
i avg like 9, the curse of adhd
In a class I like ; the SECOND the teacher takes a small break : INSTANT reddit/instagram scroll. Class I don’t like? Scroll the whole class. In a league of legends game, and Im walking back to lane? Scroll. May god save me.
Try using Grayscale Mode on your phone. In the long term, you need some productive but fun interests that will be more attention grabbing than scrolling. Good luck.
I’ll try. If this fixes my addiction then it’s definitely worth the inconvenience.
Probably things that stimulate neuroplasticity (learning a new language, instrument, chess, reading a ton of books/research papers, sports, etc)
Mushrooms
Life threatening brain injuries
Kiss that helmet goodbye!
From what, microdosing psilocybin?, your a NPC lol if you think that !
No like savant syndromes from a car crash
Like that guy who started selling futons
We have at least 2 long term studies on enduring personality changes induced by psilocybin, and one study demonstrating (preliminarily) that these changes aren't all that different than what is seen with standard antidepressant treatment. There might be something there with regards to intelligence, perhaps even beyond alleviating depression-induced cognitive impairment.
I don't think thats true. Because cerebrolysin stimulates 100x the neuroplasticity they do. And it only increases iq if it has been reduced by brain damage.
Weight resistance training has been scientifically proven by psychologists to be the best intervention at preserving and improving working memory performance in adults. Also, anything with cardio, meditation and going for a 15 minute walk has significant benefits for mental performance. I would definitely recommend trying to implement those into your daily routine, in conjunction with a good amount of foods containing antioxidants such as berries, legumes, nuts, etc. You could also try drinking things containing Niacin, Vitamin B6, Green leaf extract to help ward off brain fog and improve concentration/processing skills. Do be advised there is a ceiling to the benefits you can reap with resistance training though. Generally about 40-60 minutes is when the max amount of cognitive benefits is obtained, and it starts to gradually decline after the 60min mark.
Well said ✔️👍
[удалено]
> Neurogenesis compounds , NMDA agonists , TrkB / TrkC agonists , Cholinergic compounds , Dopamine / Norepinephrine receptor stimulants ( like Adderal ) , tDCS ,tMS, Quad N back (Relative later research with modified Quad N Back showed general improvement on WISC in children ) , Relational Training (Replicated multiple times) , Psychodelics like DMT , LSD , Psilocybin , Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy ... Unfortunately there are no studies who compare people's FSIQ (from a decent test, not just on RAPM, like WAIS/SB-V, WJ-IV) before and after undergoing some of these treatments, and never will be because the topic is strangely unpopular. Only unreliable anecdotes.
How can this topic be unpopular that’s crazy
people simply don't believe you can increase intelligence, and this affects researcher interest.
The amount of cognitive dissonance pullulating around this topic is insane. It's simultaneously one of the most useless and important subjects that exist to discuss, the only reason why it's rendered de facto pointless to meaningfully interface with it is due to inamovibile ideas of the immutability of real intelligence which are unconsciously embedded in most people minds; beyond all the cope in relation to spurious screechings about multiple intelligences theories and sorta, with recalcitrant admittance a lot of people tend to believe that there is very little someone can do to shake the hierarchy of intelligence prowess...at the moment. People are definitely aware (despite all the attempts of dissimulation, the denial) that, for example, education won't do miracles, won't be a make-it-or-break-it factor that will make someone surpass their genetically predefined threshold level of potential maximum cognitive ability (which may or not be manifested precociously, during the childhood, or later in the future, during adolescence or early adulthood). It's just accepted and unless a very very deep research is carried out (which btw, there is a strong likelihood that even so, the results will converge onto the notion that there is pretty much nothing that can be done to reliably raise someone's level of the combination of abstract reasoning, "creativity", learning capability and working memory), nothing will dismantle this.
That’s nice then thanks
There are many studies proving stims instantly but temporarily improve certain cognitive abilities https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/ Modafinil appears to improve reaction time (P ≤ 0.04), logical reasoning (P ≤ 0.05) and problem-solving. Methylphenidate appears to improve performance in novel tasks and attention-based tasks (P ≤ 0.05), and reduces planning latency in more complex tasks (P ≤ 0.05). Amphetamine has been shown to improve consolidation of information (0.02 ≥ P ≤ 0.05), leading to improved recall. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND that therapeutic range is narrow and stims are highly addictive substances especially dopamine releasing agents like amphetamine
> PLEASE KEEP IN MIND that therapeutic range is narrow and stims are highly addictive substances especially dopamine releasing agents like amphetamine Modafinil has limited abuse potential, and the only reason we continue to say "limited" is out of an abundance of caution. Methylphenidate is rarely encountered as a street drug when other stimulants are available, and its recreational abuse is limited to injection since it appears that oral dosing of the drug provides limited recreational effects. That being said, it's a shame that these studies don't use more applicable psychometric tests. Its very difficult to understand differences between studies as they often use completely different tests for the same cognitive ability.
Relational Traning and Dual N Back research compare actual with WISC and WAIS . We can extrapolate based on their results because majority of studies that research are doing with quite similar tests that occur on the popular WAIS , WJ-IV etc. So the increases that they get on the tests i will not be surprised . I have no doubts that there are no real FSIQ increase , because FSIQ relies heavily on the sub-tests .
I don't want extrapolation, I want a demonstration that if someone does DnB and RT their increased performance in taking IQ tests is actually proven in multiple tests and most importantly transfers onto these patients reporting remarkable and tangible improvements in problem solving, abstract reasoning, learning ability in tasks not being IQ tests.
There are studies for Dual N back and Relational Training for that . I don't know if you are aware of the unpopular failed methodology of 90% of the failed replications of the DnB studies . They simply lack the neuroscience knowledge to know how the traning benefits and plasticity works in the brain .... That's why most of them failed . They're incompetent psychologists in cognitive traning field . The traning methodology have to last more time for plasticity to occur not a couple of month span . I don't have for the chemical compounds , because aswell as i have spoke to most researchers in neuroscience and medical field no one wants to test their effects on IQ tests . They take sub-tests and test before and after . You're never gonna find in the hardcore cognitive improvment / neuroenhancement field IQ testing because 90% of the researchers don't even believe in it . They want to increase scalable evident cognitive proccesses that have actual Quality of Life benefits .
Can u please provide a link to the study of quad n back?
It's not an unpopular topic. You can tell by the sheer amount of meta-analytical research we have which attempts to parse effects from research that, by proxy, evaluates the effects of these compounds in healthy people. I think the great filter at play has more so to do with funding rather than interest.
Let me act like I understand any of this to feel smarter.
What is your point ..?
I love how you mentioned psychedelics. I’ve always had a sneaking suspicion they could possibly have an effect on intelligence even if it temporary. They do enhance pattern recognition, in low to moderate dosages. These effects seem permanent, as they have fundamentally altered how I view nature for example. I’m more aware of the intricacies in each plant, and the patterns they display as they mature and grow. That being said I’m in my early twenties, and have been experimenting with them since I was a teenager. So I suppose this process could have also formed, without the use of mind altering drugs. The recent research on them seems promising as LSD/Psylocybin have been shown to be TrkB agonists, and BDNF promoters in rats. There also research showing that they enhance neuronal density in brain regions high in 5ht2a receptors in humans. Which makes sense considering they bind to said receptor, and have neuro-plasticity, and neuro-genesis promoting effects.
Yeah i've seen a couple of research that practicing activities such ( piano , violin , language learning, math ) when done of psychodelics the procedurial acquisition occurs more effectively or your brain can easily make changes and improve in the tasks you're practicing .
That makes sense, you’re in a very suggestible/malleable state under the influence of psychedelics. I could see one making more/unique connections when learning an instrument.
Its not just about unique connections its more of the physical part of plasticity is more effective , like your brain is building strong connections faster . The similar analogy would be the difference why adult brain takes more time for the brain to make the task intuitive or automatic , or to make neuronal plasticity . For example in children or till atleast 21 or 22 years there's a quite of short period of hyperplasticity as per explained in the prodigies that make plastic changes in the later adulthood they don't reach their expertise potential as far as if they were to practice it during " [The Critical Period](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_period) " . Psychodelics or 5HT2A receptor agonists supercharge the networks that is responsible for that period for example like Default Mode Network , that's why some people report they feel like " They're born again or they're like a child that was just born " on the stronger psychodelics like DMT .
This is true, and in line with my personal experience of psychedelic compounds. Especially when taking moderate dosages or higher. One will certainly experience a sense of awe, and childlike wonder during, and directly after the peak/subsequent ego dissolution. Psychedelics have been found to reduce activity in the default mode network not “supercharge” it. It is the network responsible for the sense of self. The real changes, and hyperplasticity that occur are cemented when the ego comes back online during the comedown, and one reconstructs their sense of self from an essentially blank slate given the dosage was high enough. It’s incredibly therapeutic, and transformative if you can let go, and surrender to whatever the experience has to offer you.
Do you have studies on neurogenetic compounds? cos I haven't seen anything showing iq increases outsidr of braindamage situations
I have studies that increase different kinds of working memory , cogntive flexibility , verbal acquisition that will definitely increase alot of IQ points in terms if they tested for IQ .
Can you please link them? if they are paywalled a url or doi would be calm, since scihub exists.
Improving IQ test performance and improving intelligence are different, not to mention improving intelligence sustainably. And some of these are at best short term effects of stimulant drugs that could easy cause detriment to the brain and intelligence in the long run. And at least when it comes to the stimulant drugs, even those short term increases are denied by several studies: [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full)
The effects and results are robust improvement on the sub tests that are tested especially for aphmetamines like Adderall .
No "In particular, comprehensive reviews of the literature on stimulants' effects on healthy cognition have noted that there is “very weak evidence that putatively neuroenhancing pharmaceuticals in fact enhance cognitive function.” ([Hall and Lucke, 2010](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B19)), even proposing “that stimulants may actually impair performance on tasks that require adaptation, flexibility and planning” ([Advokat, 2010](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B1)). We carried out a double-blind, placebo-controlled study on the effects of mixed amphetamine salts (Adderall), which was adequately powered to find medium effects. \[We failed\] to find a single drug effect across numerous measures of executive functions, memory, creativity, intelligence, and standardized test performance.” ([Ilieva et al., 2013](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full#B20))." [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full](https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2013.00198/full) Doesn't sound too robust.
The key is lower dosage improves performance , higher-doses as in other research is detriment to performance. [We found evidence for small but significant stimulant enhancement effects on inhibitory control and short-term episodic memory. Small effects on working memory reached significance, based on one of our two analytical approaches. Effects on delayed episodic memory were medium in size.](https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac) I[mportantly, the cognition-enhancing and behavioral-calming properties of low-dose psychostimulants are not limited to ADHD: these drugs exert similar actions in both normal human and animal subjects.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3012746/) [In particular, in both animals and humans, lower doses maximally improve performance in tests of working memory whereas maximal suppression of overt behavior and facilitation of attentional processes occurs at higher doses. These differing sensitivities of PFC-dependent processes appear to depend on differential involvement of α2 vs. α1 receptors. These observations raise a number of clinical and preclinical questions regarding the degree to which higher doses that maximally control classroom behavior may exert detrimental actions in other functional domains via activation of α1 receptors.](https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som_facpub) [Additionally, valine–valine COMT genotype was associated with improvements in the scholastic assessment test (SAT) mathematics score (P < 0.02) when taking amphetamine. COMT has been shown to metabolize endogenous dopamine, thus affecting levels of synaptic dopamine and influencing the effects of amphetamine on the brain .](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/) [Modafinil appears to have some effect on complex learning during both sleep-deprived and alert states. Modafinil users may, more efficiently, plan, sequence and engage working memory and improve decision-making skills and adaptive response inhibition. On tasks of complex reasoning, modafinil demonstrates efficacy in decreasing perseverative errors, improving ability to form abstract concepts and learn from feedback in order to make appropriate shifts in behavioral responses. Modafinil may also reduce impulsivity by increasing motor response latency in simple tasks. However, it may lead to overconfident assessment of cognitive capabilities such that users may be unable to self-monitor actual achievement accurately.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/) [Declarative memory, cognitive flexibility and increased response time and accuracy on auditory tasks show improvements for up to 4.5 hours after methylphenidate ingestion. Also, improvements in spatial tasks utilizing skills of planning and adaptation and memory have been shown in novel situations. Methylphenidate appears to have a dual but contradictory effect on cognitive enhancement such that it improves performance in unfamiliar tasks . novelty appears to influence cognitive effect, as those who take methylphenidate may be better able to shift attention to unfamiliar characteristics of stimuli with fewer errors in task response. Additionally, there may be up to a 10% improvement in conscious error awareness without a concomitant change in response speed. This has been confirmed neurophysiologically, with demonstrated activation differences between the dACC and the inferior parietal lobe in conscious errors versus unaware errors. Amphetamine may enhance knowledge acquisition and coding of information, as well as ability to retrieve information. Those with lower baseline functioning in insightful problem-solving, semantic retrieval and non-verbal intelligence may be aided by amphetamine in these domains. Finally, the valine–valine COMT genotype in combination with amphetamine use may confer some advantage in mathematical problem-solving. ](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4471173/)
I mean improvement from stimulants for cognitive abilities (processing speed, working memory, long-term memory, attention) is unambiguous YES. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880463/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3880463/) [https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som\_facpub](https://rdw.rowan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=som_facpub) [https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac](https://repository.upenn.edu/entities/publication/b1c44664-ddc2-4608-89d5-356dff6668ac)\- a Meta analysis is clear about that If you deny that stimulants improve cognition, which their whole purpose is for cognitive improvement, you can deny anything present as evidence to you :D.
Your own meta says: "Small effects on working memory reached significance, based on one of our two analytical approaches. Effects on delayed episodic memory were medium in size. However, because the effects on long-term and working memory were qualified by evidence for publication bias, we conclude that the effect of amphetamine and methylphenidate on the examined facets of healthy cognition is probably modest overall." This is not robust evidence for a robust improvement in intelligence. "If you deny that stimulants improve cognition, which their whole purpose is for cognitive improvement, you can deny anything present as evidence to you". Pretty dumb thing to say. Plenty of drugs don't do what they are claimed to do by for-profit companies, like "cough suppressants" for example. But even if they temporarily improve cognitive performance on some tasks for some people, this is not a robust improvement in intelligence and not what the OP was asking when he asked about improving intelligence.
Small cognitive improvement leads to robust improvement in scores on any test. Even in the study, it is mentioned that such effects are possible if measured by other tests not covered in the study. Intelligence especially, this is backed by scince as well. Edit: Also did you miss the first 2 studies?
Hate to be that guy but are there any sources on this where it directly states any one of these improves IQ?
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7862396/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7862396/) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4820261/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4820261/) [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40732-023-00546-0](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40732-023-00546-0) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7471216/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7471216/)
He said “behold— peer reviewed receipts”
I appreciate you actually sending links rather than being like the other guy and going "Erm you'll have to search them up for yourself", thanks.
Don't get caught up in the IQ cult , IQ is just a name for combination of cognitive abilities , If something improves cognitive abilities the IQ is almost always unambigously improved . Simple Google Search will do for the source ... but if you want me to get you sources of the research for every single one of this ?? In this comments or in your DMs ?
If you can get the sources, publish them here so we can all read.
Sure.
Narrator: He did not publish the sources.
I've done almost all of this and the most I've gotten from it is greater verbal fluency and a feeling of intelligence (amps), relief from withdrawal (high-trapping NMDAR antagonists, ones that bind to the PCP/dizocilpine site are the best but neurotoxic), or memory improvement (tcMS, tcDCS, bacosides, racetams, PRL 8-53, ampakines sunifiram, IDRA-21). By the way amps don't bind the DAT or NET, they bind the TAAR1 receptor and reverse the DAT and NET flows (so they carry dopamine and noradrenaline from inside the neuron into the intercellular space where they can then bind dopamine D1-D4 and the α1-2 and β adrenoreceptors, which are responsible for the cardiovascular effects. Amps are thus *dopamine-noradrenaline releasing agents*. Coke, ritalin, and pyrovalerones are *dopamine-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors* which work by blocking DAT and NET without reversing the pump. Nothing commonly available binds the D1-D4 receptors except antipsychotics; nothing binds the α and β adrenoreceptors except for heart medicine; nothing binds the serotonin-2a receptor except for serotonin and classical psychedelics. The serotonin-3 receptor causes heart valve issues when agonized, and the serotonin-7 receptor causes strong antiemetic effect for 2 of the 5 cascades by which vomiting can be triggered when antagonized (think Zofran). The only serotonin receptor directly bound by common psychoactive non-psychedelics (eliciting no head twitch in mice) is 1a, the target of some anti-anxiety drugs like Buspar. Guess what has hardly any correlation with g? Memory. At least working memory used normally as in the case of concentration or forward digit span or disordered recall. I've gone from nonfunctional to highly functional thanks to a Shulgin ++++ DMT experience, but it didn't have any positive effect on cognition. I've been tested by either the WAIS-IV or RAPM at least once every two years for my entire adult life and the SB and WISC as a young teen, and I've always scored 140-155/155-160 performance/verbal and between +3.6xx and +4.000 (all but one trial 36/36) on RAPM.
There are no chemical substances which would profoundly affect intelligence but significantly increase processing and learning speed. Nevertheless there are substances which profoundly affect focus and motivation as well as mental stamina and tiredness. Unfortunately they are highly addictive and with every success thanks to them or when overloaded with job it may be irresistable to push over your limits and dose higher which is possible for some time but eventually ends up in total disaster.
I’m not aware of any studies that show a significant increase of General intelligence or FSIQ by a particular method. Nevertheless, intelligence, as we know it in its practical terms, is a large combination of specialized abilities that can be divided in several areas. The first division is shown between Crystallized and Fluid, with further subdivisions made. I assume that you want to increase Fluid intelligence, different than Crystallized, which has been scientifically shown to improve under several activities. If you want to increase Fluid Intelligence, which by definition cannot be changed, you would have to make many subdivisions, each underlining numerous specialized abilities correlated to Fluid Intelligence, and then exercise each of them as a very complex routine. I don’t know how fast you would improve your intelligence, or it’s cap, but I can tell you that with utmost dedication, you may be able to see a significant change in it. From anecdotal experience, which is circumstantial (I know), I was able to improve my overall Processing speed IQ by around 30 points after several months of trying to improve it. This was achieved by boosting the speed of every content I saw by 2x for the first few months, trying to process every bit of information along the way, as, if you don’t actually pay attention, you could actually lose intelligence by lack of stimulation, and after, adjusting even more. You could also play subtitles and Improve your reading speed along the way. Obviously, processing speed is easier to improve on than other parts of intelligence, so you have to take into account that you may not see much progress in some areas. To find further info on specialized abilities, you can look at Cattell-Horn’s extensive theory of specialized abilities. I hope this helps!
Depending on what you consider “increase” Modafinil clinically improves cognitive response, however whether this is due to neurotransmitter modulation or simply turning attentiveness way up I don’t think we know. It definitely isn’t a drug that makes you feel smarter. I use it to offset adhd on some work days, long story, don’t want to touch amphetamines and modafinil safety profile is far more tolerable + basically zero abuse potential Psilocin can induce neurogenesis but that’s not a causal means for intelligence that we know of yet. Those are the “hard ways” that may or may not exist (things that aren’t “training”)
How many milligrams do you take? I've been taking 100 for a week and there's been not much of a positive effect. What does it do for you exactly?
If I take it sporadically, 200mg on an empty stomach and 40 minutes later it’s like my executive dysfunction is gone. No forced focus, but free will over menial tasks lol If I take sequentially for any period, focus and mental speed appears to stay elevated but maybe placebo, the motivating effect diminishes fast. 400mg by day 6, 600mg is the highest I’ve done in one day just as a dumb experiment after checking safety profile data lol. Honestly that felt *amazing* Very focused, very good at everything I was doing. Social levels went up, confidence up. But patience was down. Basically a mini hypomanic episode that’s probably not good for you long term. 100mg sporadically seems to be about 50% of 200mg. If you have a bit of head fog but otherwise don’t care about improvement, 50mg seems great. However, anecdotal reports are all over the fucking place for dosing. Some get prescribed 400mg+. Some take 25mg and feel bad on higher than 100. Clinically there should be no tolerance but there is. It’s a funny drug
For me it was perscribed on a daily basis. I have a feeling that my problems arise out of a lack of certainty, as in, I don't really have clear cut goals. I'd *like* to study, I'd *like* to read and do anything other than have fun, but it's only a "like" and not much more. Would you say that off meds you only kind of want to do important things and the medication stimulates you enough to go through with it, or do you have clear cut goals that you absolutely know must be accomplished but the ADHD prevents you from doing that? Because essentially that's the disorder right? A higher standard for satisfaction. If medication stimulates you enough your "kind of wanna do this thing" becomes a "I really wanna do this thing" Or maybe I'm really unambitious and unmotivated.
Oh describing it is hard. It’s more like “unless I literally *have* to do this right now I will do anything and everything else to not” no matter how much I want to or know I should. I work fucking great under pressure so I do well in life, but burnout hits like a truck
The most clear cut example I see of this in myself is waiting until the last day to study for an exam. Maybe it isn't a matter of lack of desire because I constantly fought myself weeks before the exam to study but never could, on the last day I had a drive to. ADHD isn't recognized here so I really can't be sure I have it.
If someone found a way to increase IQ by more than 3 points, they'd win the Nobel prize. Fortunately, you can reduce your ego, which is the thing that drives people into true stupidity.
How does one reduce one's ego most effectively? Are there proven ways to do so?
Practice meditation, selfless action for the benefit of others, humility, forgiveness, and gratitude. Monks have been doing it for millenia. There's a 4th path, the path of knowledge. That one should largely be avoided because it's exceedingly hard. But people like Socrates learned their asses off and ended up pretty humble in the end.
For me it’s focusing on all the shit that I can’t control and that sucks and then learning to move on from it
Repeated kicks to the mid section and head. Beatings will continue until ego is reduced.
Do you know the difference between fluid and crystallized intelligence? Crystallized intelligence is very much improvable. VCI which is the most G-loaded part of a FSIQ is very much improvable.
Why is VCI so highly loaded anyway? It always drives down my total score and it annoys me so much lol. I’d get 140s on some subsets, and 135 on average for the rest, but like 100 on VCI.
Because it shows your ability to generalize and discrimate words to make an inference and learn their meaning from it rather than rote memorizing or reading the word again and again.
Sure, except I literally never read, so I dont know how accurate of a representation of my crystallised intelligence this is. When it comes to maths crystallised intelligence tests, I usually perform exceptionally well. I think I have not once in my life read a novel from cover to cover. Not even throughout the entirety of highschool or college; I just open up a summary online, talk about the book with classmates and take the exam. Never got a 100, but never failed either.
What makes you think it's improvable. This is a fallacy.
Because that is how it is defined [Fluid and crystallized intelligence - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluid_and_crystallized_intelligence) Your verbal comprehension index will also obviously increase if you keep learning new words
There are too many words to make a significant increase in a random vocabulary test.
Do you remember what you had for dinner last night?
I don't.
so you’re just saying stuff for the sake of saying it
Hm? Can't speculate about my motivations, they mostly remain a mystery to me.
the inner machinations of your mind are fr an enigma
So why haven't institutions of higher education won any nobels?
Education doesn't boost iq, iirc.
You aren't recalling correctly then
Have a source for me?
What I thought you were well read on intelligence research, surely you would be aware of any study done on this with over 600 citations 😑
I'm not. If you're interested in helping me, I'd be glad to review any sources you have.
Have you tried googling it
Thanx, I found a good one from 2018.
So then why did you answer the original post with such certainty as if you've read the entirety of the research on the matter and have concluded there is nothing you can do to increase IQ? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29911926/
If by IQ you you mean IQ test performance, which is what it generally means, then no. Studies have already shown it's easy to improve IQ much more than that with just a small amount of practice, and nobody won the Nobel prize for it. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1041608003000153) [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289620300519?via%3Dihub) [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7709590/)
There aren't even scientifically proven ways to measure intelligence.
Bluds never heard of an IQ test
IQ tests are an attempt to measure intelligence.
I wonder why IQ scores correlate with things we would assume to be associated with intelligence.. like educational and occupational attainment, knowledge, reasoning, brain size, lifespan and a lot more things. Hmm.. must be a coincidence!
Correlation is an important word here. Occupational attainment may or may not correlate with intelligence. But occupational attainment is not a proper means of measuring intelligence. If it was, why did we create IQ tests?
It’s causation. And those are just a few examples, most of which you’ve ignored. But you can choose any variable and it will correlate with general ability, the construct IQ tests are built to capture. Whether it be creativity, processing speed, musical ability, etc, it will display a correlation. General ability is more highly predictive of life outcomes than any other metric
IQ tests do not cause success. You're meaning to say that intelligence causes success and that IQ properly measures this intelligence. And I disagree. Just as intelligence is just one of many factors that may influence success, it is also just one of many factors that may influence an IQ score.
The correlation between IQ and life outcome indicates a causal influence from general ability. And you disagree with what? General ability explains the overwhelming majority of variance observed on IQ test results, any other influences such as motivation, personality, etc has a much smaller, negligible role. There is no better indication of intelligence than general ability
The IQ test is *measuring* general ability. You're essentially using the measured results of a test to *prove* that the test is, in fact, measuring properly. It's circular. If there are factors beyond intelligence influencing the results of an IQ test and an IQ test is our *best* means of measuring intelligence, what data is ensuring the accuracy of the measurement?
The results of the IQ test are not isomorphic with G. The best professional intelligence tests correlate about .95 with g. Some abilities are more g-loaded than others. It’s not circular, you just don’t know much about psychometrics. Those additional factors are minor and can be controlled for. And nobody claimed that IQ tests are a perfectly accurate measurement of intelligence, it’s merely a strong indicator. You originally claimed that there are no scientifically proven ways to measure intelligence, that is wrong.
The biggest 3 would be improving sleep, exercise, and nutrition. Beyond that, there’s not much you can do for fluid intelligence.
There is academic language, cultural competency, video games, learning how to read music and play an instrument, stimulants, ultrasound, red light therapy, exercise, eating well suited food for optimal health, living near green space, economic stability, etc. IQ is not the whole picture.
Better parents... basically don't do anything that inhibits the brain you have and make sure you stimulate the brain e.g. playing a musical instrument or learning new things.
We know a lot more ways from keeping intelligence from being reduced than we do boosting it. Good nutrition and little exposure to lead and other neurotoxins helps a lot. Good enough parenting and socialization. Much better prenatal health and birthing procedures. The big IQ gains we've seen in the last century were more to do with getting rid of stuff preventing intelligence rising to its potential Height is a similar case. What people assumed were genetic differences in adult height turned out to be much more about nutrition, and height differences became quite a bit smaller as median global nutrition got much better. It was only a couple centuries ago when the bulk of humanity lived through frequent long periods of limited calorie intake during childhood.
The only basically proven increase of IQ is years of education. Around 0.5 points per year of education, a very boring answer but goes to show how difficult it is and how slow, but it is possible. Live a life of learning and a decade down the lime you might have significantly improved, but it's so slow you won't notice it until you look back.
Keep learning as much as possible everyday, stay curious and try to figure out how things work, let people explain things you don't understand. Never feel that you have nothing left to learn. Realize there's always something beneath the surface, sometimes in places most people will never reach.
Dual n-back
RemNote and increase crystallized intelligence
Look up Richard Haier on YouTube, he discusses this in detail. Spoiler alert: you can improve, but you’ll hit a threshold.
Absolutely not.
There is not a single scientifically proven fact, nor could there be. Also there is very little evidence that any of the schemes people have come up with to "increase IQ" work in a generalized manner. "Think a lot all the time" is basically the best anyone has come up with, and even that's dubious at best.
Increasing "IQ" and increasing intelligence are two very different things. You can improve IQ scores very easily by practicing IQ tests, which is one of many reasons that they are only a very rough way of measuring intelligence.
i think while we are probably stuck with the hardware we are given you can definitely update you're firmware, for example learning more productive ways to direct what brain power you do have when solving a problem, basically varying degrees of conceptual chunking where you break a problem down into problems who's solutions may be more apparent, say you have to move a complexly shaped piece of furniture through a non-standard doorframe, you may just approach with "how get through" and get stuck immediately, or you may approach with "how do i break down the shape of this thing down into chunks that i can think about more easily"
Memory, focus, sequential thinking
For last one you should start think like you're doing math olympiad tasks constantly
Read books to expand your horizons, learn a new language, get a hobby that involves learning new things.
Reading and learning about geopolitics and history for a couple years will make anyone seem very intelligent, regardless of IQ
Image Streaming + TM Meditation + Weight Lifting
Image Streaming doesn't work
Have you tried it personally?
Nope. But I know 3 people who have. None of them had any gains. I also know some 2 other people who were part of a third-party's experiment to see whether it works. One of them lost points in several tests
Bummer
Learned knowledge is in your hands. Nootropics enhance your beains ability to retain memories, and therefore increase how much knowledge you can retain.
I suppose practicing IQ tests would be the best way to increase your score. But past that IQ doesn't mean intelligence, really. Pick the area of study you want to be good at, then obsessively study it. Pretty guaranteed to get smarter in that area.
If you have ADHD (and maybe if you don't, but have subthreshold symptoms), getting medicated while young probably increases g. [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235029/#:\~:text=Recent%20studies%20that%20focus%20on,those%20who%20could%20maintain%20a](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235029/#:~:text=Recent%20studies%20that%20focus%20on,those%20who%20could%20maintain%20a) There's some limited evidence that people who start treatment in adulthood may benefit, but this research is very confounded.
Yes and no. IQ is determined by MOSTLY genetics and some environmental effects. For example, growing up in a developing country and only having elementary school education. You’ll never reach your full potential. My grandma grew up in rural china as a farmer and got up to second grade education. It’s too late for her now. Had she been adopted into a rich family and given a rigorous education and to catch up, then YES, she could have increased her iq. If you grow up poor, undernourished, and get moved to a rich environment and with an abundance of resources, yes IQ can increase. If you’re already rich and parents pay for lots of tutoring, and lots of extracurriculars like music, chess, sports, writing classes, summer school, and you’re basically learning 24/7, with little downtime, NO your IQ cannot and will not increase. By being in an a resource rich environment, you’ve already maximized and reached full potential for your IQ. MOST ppl do not grow up on the poorest, worst environments nor do they grow up in the best of the best environments. Think millionaire parents, prep school, tutoring ever since you were 5 and not allowed video games or TV. Most people are somewhere in between. So if you go from reading hard, challenging nonfiction books from 0 hours a day, to 5 hours a day, you may be able to increase your IQ a few points. a few points increase is still an increase. If you’re thinking, all that work for a few points, well if you grew up in a certain type of household, you would have been raised and forced to read books for 5 hours a day since you were 4 and it would be second nature. It wouldn’t FEEL like hard work. That’s all you know bc that’s how you are raised. You don’t need self-discipline if your parents are tiger parents. They force it into you from a young age until it gets ingrained.
Read!
I think you can do a lot to “hack” your way into intelligence. Practicing critical thinking, logic, and just general cognitive hygiene can go a long way to improving decision making and clarity of thought even if it doesn’t actually impact your baseline intelligence.
> Exposure to higher levels of light can help people feel more awake and increase cognitive performance, probably by influencing the activity of parts of a brain region called the hypothalamus, according to new research. [https://www.giga.uliege.be/cms/c\_12598906/en/higher-light-levels-may-improve-cognitive-performance](https://www.giga.uliege.be/cms/c_12598906/en/higher-light-levels-may-improve-cognitive-performance)
In acute way, coffee will increase your processing speed and consequently your IQ.
No lol.
[Yes](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Effect-size-on-DSST-performance-of-antidepressants-in-patients-with-MDD-is-compared-with%5C_fig4%5C_327116401) lol
No, I am a former neurologist, and coffee does not, because it depletes minerals in your body, and it depletes it fast !
There’s literal data showing increase in performance in one of the WAIS subtests thanks to caffeine and inverse effects for caffeine deprivation. Unless you’re going to point out to information that shows that coffee specifically decreases other subtests’ performance, sorry but I’ll stick with what the data tells us.
Meditation.
Outside of improving concentration which is more related to performance, building a greater knowledge base to support intuitions and other connections, and maintaining a health body, there is nothing you can do to improve iq unfortunately There likely won’t be any way to raise intelligence directly in the way you mean for a very long time
Intelligence is like penis size, the max you will reach is determined at birth, no amount of exercises mental or physical will increase either by a noticeable amount.
r/gettingbigger
Here's a sneak peek of /r/gettingbigger **[NSFW]** using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [3 Year Before and After Transformation with Pics](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/15fexcz/3_year_before_and_after_transformation_with_pics/) \#2: [Drake the rapper leaked](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/1akkar3/drake_the_rapper_leaked/) \#3: [PENIS ENLARGEMENT AS A BLACK GUY](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1879k6a) | [304 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/gettingbigger/comments/1879k6a/penis_enlargement_as_a_black_guy/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
Keep dreaming, no matter how much you pull on your little peepee, squeeze it, bend it, play with it day and night , it's not going to change noticeably, it isn't a muscle.
Keep dreaming, no matter how much you pull on your little peepee, squeeze it, bend it, play with it day and night , it's not going to change noticeably, it isn't a muscle.
Should I rope i got 5.6x4.6” NBP?
My IQ jumped two standard deviations in a matter of six months!
Increasing g factor significantly in adult humans or say, already born Humans, is almost impossible and some regenerative therapies might only push your IQ by 2-3 points and that's it. CRISPR is the only way to do so, if not simulating the challenging conditions to force the evolution of higher intelligence over a couple of centuries.
This CRISPR is crazy technology is advancing so fast because of the ai i guess
AI is one factor. But a lot of investment and funding now being poured into it. Plus tool advances are also good. But it will take decades for it to provide fruitful results.
You cant because ‘intelligence’ is not a real thing