Intelligence quotient (IQ) is a measure of intellectual ability. The intelligence quotient was adapted to a mean value of 100 points. For a standard deviation of 15%, an IQ between 85 and 115 should be noted as normal. Depending on the psychological and physical condition of the patient, the results can also vary by up to 10 points.
IQ scores typically reflect the quality of education and resources available to people in their local geographic regions. Areas of the world with lower IQ scores are typically poorer and less developed, particularly in the area of education, compared to countries with higher IQ scores. Many researchers also use IQ to determine the smartest countries in the world.
It can be observed that in western industrialized countries the IQ increases with the years. This effect, first discovered by James R. Flynn in 1984, was further researched in the following years and is observed in more studies today. It is assumed that there is an average annual increase of about 0.3 to 0.5 points. The increase is also faster for women than for men. In many countries, however, there is also a reverse Flynn effect, i.e. a decrease in the intelligence quotient.
The definition states that the intelligence quotient is a measure of intellectual ability. Often IQ is confused with a concrete performance or even education; however, it is the "ability" to perform. In other words, the ability for comprehension, combinations, and learning.
A person isn't less intelligent because of a lower level of education. Instead, the one who can achieve the same education with less effort is classified as more intelligent. For example, some intelligence tests detail questions on the names of current politicians. This determines how well the patient can remember a name and its position only by the influence of the media presence.
Read also: Average Income Statistics: Nigeria
Intelligence is not a learning ability but can be consciously increased. Through regular brain training, individual skills are specifically addressed and achieved through a performance increase. Thus, the general thinking-ability can be influenced by each individual within a certain framework. However, this possibility decreases considerably with increasing age. Additionally, part of the intelligence is inherited by the mother and father.
According to a 2019 study by researchers Richard Lynn and David Becker at the Ulster Institute, the highest average IQ scores in the world belong to the Japanese, with the citizens of Taiwan and Singapore close behind. As the data demonstrates, average IQ scores vary widely across the globe. Some researchers divide the world’s countries into ranked categories based on their average IQ scores.
However, it’s important to remember that IQ isn’t the only way to measure intelligence. There are many different ways to seek out the smartest countries in the world, and many of them have nothing to do with average IQ.
The IQ presented was formed from the results of numerous international studies and compared the average income and government expenditures on education from 2006 to 2024. Please beware: The average income has changed in recent years, especially in small countries. A list with more recent figures can be found here. This page covers the period from 2006 to 2024, which relates to the evaluation time of the studies.
As of 2019, the countries with the highest average IQ scores demonstrate strong educational systems, advanced technological development, and a cultural emphasis on academic achievement. These nations often invest heavily in education, research, and innovation, creating environments that foster intellectual growth.
Read also: Household Income Trends: Kenya
With an average IQ of 106.48, Japan is the highest ranking country in terms of cognitive ability. Japan has a 99% literacy rate, a very good performance in the UNDP Education Index, and ranks in fourth place on PISA scores. The country is a top performer due to the quality of its education system. The system prioritizes a holistic education, nurturing both academic achievement and social growth through the support of skilled teachers and strong community engagement. As of 2024, OECD shows that 98% of children are enrolled in early childhood education one year before primary school in Japan.
Tertiary education attainment among 25-34-year-olds is also high, with 69% of women and 62% of men holding such qualifications. However, due to challenges such as intense competition around university entrance exams, students often turn to private tutoring (juku) for support. While public funding covers mandatory education levels, limited financial aid for early childhood and higher education also creates barriers for low-income families.
According to the OECD, to tackle these challenges, Japan has implemented a number of reforms in its educational system. To reduce reliance on private education resources, the government has enhanced the curriculum by increasing study hours in primary and lower secondary schools. Moreover, Japan is prioritizing teacher support through improved training and hiring practices, while also strengthening school-community partnerships to enhance education and reduce teacher workloads. In terms of research, Japan stands out as a leader in science, technology, and innovation.
Since 2001, the country has consistently invested over three percent of its GDP in research and development (R&D) and has 25 Nobel Prize winners in Physics, Chemistry, and Physiology or Medicine. Japan ranks third worldwide on patents granted, highlighting its innovation output. The country’s research landscape is driven by strong institutions like RIKEN and JST, and supported by organizations such as JSPS, which offer fellowships for both domestic and international researchers. Research is conducted mainly across universities, research institutions, and the business sector.
Japan’s policies reflect a strong commitment to advancing both education and technological innovation. Through initiatives like the Integrated Innovation Strategy 2022 and reforms recommended by the OECD, the government is promoting a human-centered “Society 5.0” by investing in emerging technologies such as AI and quantum computing, while also enhancing research capacity and fostering cross-sector collaboration.
Read also: IQ Levels in Ethiopia
Japan holds the top spot with an average IQ of 106.48, closely followed by Taiwan at 106.47, making them nearly tied for first place. Singapore ranks third with 105.89, and Hong Kong follows in fourth place with 105.37. China secures the fifth position at 104.1. South Korea ranks sixth with 102.35. Belarus, the highest-ranking European country, is seventh at 101.6. Finland, recognized for its progressive education model, is eighth with 101.2. Liechtenstein, a small but prosperous nation, ranks ninth at 101.07.
Factors Influencing Intelligence
Income and Educational Expenditures
As shown in the table above, there seems to be a correlation between IQ and income level. Although high-income countries are among the top performers, much lower-income countries, such as China, Mongolia, and Eastern European, are also among the top performers. On the other hand, countries with high education expenditures almost always have an intelligent population. The reversing circuit is not always accurate because, among the first 30 places, there are also countries with medium-to-low educational expenditures.
The leading countries in this ranking are exclusively the most developed East Asian countries. In these countries, it is usual for families to invest in their children’s education. The educational expenses are no less than elsewhere but are not caused or paid for by any government.
Climate and Intelligence
Since 1991, relentless heat has been presumed to affect IQ over generations. It was initially assumed that living in lower temperatures required higher physical fitness and caused higher social demands. Richard Lynn, a professor at the University of Ulster in Northern Ireland, assumes that colder temperatures increase brain volume. But whether brain size is at all related to intelligence is controversial.
In general, a hot climate is considered detrimental to the development of intelligence. Nowadays, the reason is primarily seen in the high physical energy demand and the resulting stress.
Skin Color and Intelligence
None of the studies here conclude that a particular geographic ancestry influences the intelligence quotient. In some cases, differences within population groups were found (e.g., in Brazil: Blacks 71, Mulatto 81, Whites 95, Japanese 99), but all differences could be attributed to their origin, level of education, or other factors.
In 2006, Donald Templera and Hiroko Arikawab found a connection between increasing skin pigmentation and a decreasing IQ. Even this was not attributable to skin color because pigmentation grade is climatically conditioned. The observations were also made within the same groups of other populationa, e.g., Caucasians.
Criticism and Misinterpretation of IQ
The intelligence quotient is not intelligence. It is the mathematical result of a test developed by Western Europeans, according to Western European standards in a local environment. It is highly controversial that the same standards can also be applied to other cultures. Emotional intelligence, creativity, practical skills, ambition or diligence are not measured in intelligence tests and are hardly included in any interpolation model.
Many countries in Far East Asia are outliers in this result, because the strict, long and success-oriented school systems there promote precisely those characteristics that are considered optimal for Western societies in intelligence tests. In other countries, there are downward outliers because there are other priorities in the respective cultures.
Analyzing Claims About Nigerian Intelligence
Many people believe the following facts:
- The Igbo are an exceptionally intelligent African group, performing on par with or above Whites
- Nigerian Americans are as intelligent as White Americans
- Nigerian Americans have higher incomes than White Americans
- Nigerian Americans are more educated than White Americans
- Nigerian Britons are as intelligent as White Britons
- Nigerian Britons have higher incomes than White Britons
- Nigerian Britons are more educated than White Britons
Let us examine these facts, point-by-point.
The National IQ of Nigeria is 68 per Richard Lynn and David Becker. Assuming I have the correct manual for conversion, the Mill Hill Vocabulary Scale test data for Nigerians suggest a national IQ of 73 relative to British norms in this sample and the Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices Plus test data in this sample suggest a national IQ of about 71. Both of these are not corrected for the Flynn effect, so they’re presumably overestimates relative to the British samples, but they’re also not corrected for bias, so we’ll call it a wash.
The problem with these samples for figuring out the intelligence of the Igbo is that they’re derived from Lagos State and the Abuja Federal Capital Territory. If we want to figure out how the Igbo perform specifically, we need data from places like Abia, Imo, Ebonyi, Enugu, and Anambra-the cultural region known as “Igboland”. Since there is not Igbo-specific test data out there to my knowledge, it’s unclear how we should estimate the intelligence of the Igbo as a whole in a reliable manner.
One suggestion has been to use games performance, like performance in chess, videogames, and-for Nigeria in particular-scrabble. But scrabble is not a particularly attractive game for cognitive elites to play, nor is it very cognitively intensive. In fact, it overwhelmingly relies on memory, one of the least g-loaded abilities, and the one that most often trivializes tests when retesting or preparation for a particular form come into play. Consistent with this, scrabble performance was found to have a weak relationship with measured national ability, unlike CS:GO, chess, poker, and StarCraft II performance.
Socioeconomic Status of Nigerian Americans
For the purposes of these analyses, educational attainment and total personal income adjusted for age, sex, and census region and division will be examined. This will be primarily done among native Whites and Blacks, foreign-born Whites and Blacks, native and foreign-born Nigerians, native and foreign-born Indians, and South Africa-born Whites and Blacks. For educational attainment I believe the most sensible effect size is Hedge’s g. For income, the most sensible statistic is the median, since it is robust to outliers.
This data shows quite a lot.
With respect to education, we can see that immigrants are generally more educated than native Whites. This makes complete sense, as the immigration system selects for education. By the same token, we can see major regression to the mean in terms of education, with American-born Indians coming in below their parents, and American-born Nigerians coming in far beneath their parents.
With respect to income, we can see that, in order, Indians perform incredibly well, South African Whites outperform foreign Whites in general, Nigerians from Nigeria outperform native Whites, native Whites outperform African Blacks and foreign Blacks in general, as well as native-born Nigerians, who beat out South African Blacks, who beat out Native Blacks.
So, what can we say about claims about Nigerian American socioeconomic status?
With respect to education, Nigerian immigrants are, indeed, highly-educated. This is expected from other datasets too. For example, in the IAB Brain Drain dataset, as of 2010, some 0.6% of Nigerians had emigrated to the West, including 12% of highly-educated Nigerians. However, despite their considerable advantages in educational attainment, Nigerians have much lower incomes than other groups they’re more educated than, like South African Whites, native Indians, and foreign Whites.
This makes it very clear that there are exceptions in the link between more meritocratic measures of socioeconomic status like income and more potentially non-cognitive ones like educational attainment. Because socioeconomic status measures can become disconnected like this, they create what looks like an attainment-achievement discrepancy for many groups, including Nigerians.
Regression to the mean for Nigerians is rather extreme. clock in well below Whites, in both education and incomes. This makes sense, however, as it seems their parents were exceptionally educated, so we should expect this sort of regression. It also makes plenty of sense that this regression is greater than the regression for Indians, since it involves regressing to different means.
Nigerians earn more than African Blacks and foreign Blacks in general, but they’re also not the highest-performing African group. That would be South Africans. But that’s misleading, because the South African group is peopled by Whites who command higher incomes than any of the Black African groups, while the Black South Africans perform worse than Nigerians. Nevertheless, Nigerians are not the highest-performing Black African group. Zimbabwean Blacks out-earned them ($48,793), and Cameroonians were plausibly tied with them at $45,352. The rest performed worse than them, which we might predict because Nigeria is the largest Sub-Saharan African nation by far. Due to their size, this suggests Nigerians are pretty much at the top of the pile for America’s Sub-Saharan African Black immigrants.
We have samples of Whites born in a few Sub-Saharan African countries. White South Africans, White Zimbabweans (Rhodesians), and White Nigerians had sample sizes that declined in that order, but they nevertheless all out-earned Black Nigerians, with respective median incomes of $59,578, $98,185, and $75,434. If we compare foreign-born Nigerians to even more groups of foreign-born Whites, we would quickly see that there are very many who out-earn them.
There’s good reason to think about sample selectiveness when it comes to immigrants.
It can be said that the claim that Nigerians are more educated and higher-earning than White Americans is half-true. Nigerians born in Nigeria out-earned and were more educated than native-born Whites, but native-born Nigerians earned less than and were less educated than native-born Whites, indicating major regression to the mean. Moreover, the foreign-born Nigerian advantage was also seen among foreign-born Whites, albeit to a lesser extent. Adjusting for this immigrant advantage across Whites and Blacks, Nigerians earn less than Whites and have less education.
Using ethnic self-identification alone would reduce this apparent regression. This was also documented by Emeka (2019) in a study on ethnic attrition among Nigerian Americans. Emeka noted that the individuals who ceased to identify as Nigerian were disproportionately the downwardly mobile, “leaving us with a positively select Nigerian second generation and, perhaps, unduly optimistic assessments of Nigerian-American socioeconomic advancement.”
Intelligence of Nigerian Americans
We only have one measurement of intelligence among specifically Nigerian Americans, and it’s a proxy measurement based on computing the representation of National Merit semifinalists identified as Nigerian through their surnames. If one believes that Nigerians are very motivated towards education, then this method overestimates. With known patterns of ethnic attrition and incomplete surname identification, it almost certainly provides overestimates of ability, but there’s no obvious correction factor for this method.
When Nigerian Americans’ representation is contrasted with Whites, the gap is -0.03 SDs, or an IQ of 100.5, consistent with no difference. The median gap estimate for Africans in general is 0.39 standard deviations in favor of Whites, or an IQ of 94.2. Because this method should overestimate Nigerian and African IQs, it’s a bit odd.
That estimate generates further confusion because we also have estimates of the IQ of non-English Language Learner (ELL; i.e., likely second-generation) Somali Americans. These have been estimated at 91.32. At the same time, the native Somali income is $21,627 and the foreign-born Somali income is $25,824. A few potential explanations spring to mind. Firstly, the Somalis are likely not as selective as Nigerians on other dimensions, like educational attainment. This seems like it should obviously be true given that Somali Americans are largely refugee descendants. Perhaps the reason for this discrepancy is that the IQ estimate comes from Washington, which ought to be a somewhat more selective destination than the more typical one in Minneapolis.
More likely, however, is that Somalis integrate more poorly, as higher proportions of non-immigrant Somali youths are English language learners than are the non-immigrant members of most other groups. Therefore, the non-ELL estimate for Somali Americans is probably an overestimate of their population average.
For measuring Nigerian American intelligence we’re at a loss. (and Canada), and for those, the results are clear-cut.
From the 1999 National Longitudinal Survey of Freshmen, native Whites had an estimated SAT/ACT-based IQ of 106.8, compared to 108.5 for foreign-born Whites. Blacks from Sub-Saharan Africa had an estimated IQ of 94.2 versus 92.8 for Blacks from the Caribbean and 90.5 for native-born Blacks. In other words, the native-born Black-White gap was typical (16.3 points), and the gaps between native-born Whites and Sub-Saharan and Caribbean Blacks were 12.6 and 14 points.
Richwine (2009) computed immigrant-native gaps for Europeans, northeast Asians, southeast Asians, Indians, Sub-Saharan Africans, Mexicans, Central Americans/Caribbeans, and South Americans. Relative to an American mean of 100, these groups had (culture-fair!) digit span-based IQs of 101.2, 107.8, 106.3, 113.8, 91, 84.4, 84.7, and 88.3. The same dataset also had second-generation scores for all of Asia, Mexico, and Central America/the Caribbean. These were consistent with IQs of 106.9, 84.1, and 91.9.
In the complete General Social Survey, Sub-Saharan Africans and Caribbeans scored 1.20 and 1.10 g below native-born Whites, which compares to a roughly 0.7 g gap between native-born Whites and Blacks. This might reflect bias, since the test is the wordsum. However, the gap for Sub-Saharan Africans was larger in the second generation and for Caribbeans, it was the same, although sample sizes were small in both cases.
Across several surveys, the gap between native Whites and Black immigrants is considerable. For first-generation Black immigrants, it averaged 0.99 SDs, and for the second generation, 0.84 SDs, but for the third, 1.00 SDs, albeit with identification problems afoot.
Popular articles:
tags: #Nigeria
