Test Prep Doesn't Help Raise Intelligence Scores

Scores on standardized tests may go up but a student's ability for abstract and logical thinking may not improve. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Young American students take a variety of standardized tests. But the ways that students are educated so that they’ll do well on such tests presents a problem. The preparation increases what’s called crystallized knowledge: that’s factual information, such as ‘the capital of Texas is Austin.’ But the tests do not enhance what is referred to as fluid intelligence: the ability to think logically or theoretically. That’s according to a study in the journal Psychological Science.

Scientists analyzed test scores and IQs of almost 1,400 eighth-graders. They found that schoolwork could significantly raise students’ test scores, while having no effect on the ratings of their fluid intelligence scores…which are better indicators of memory capacity, thinking speed and the ability to solve abstract problems.

It’s been shown that high scores on standardized tests predict success on future exams like the SAT and Advanced Placement tests. But little is known about the effect of improving fluid intelligence. Still, the researchers note that crystallized intelligence is clearly important, since, for example, mathematics and comprehension are critical for later academic and employment success. Systems that increase fluid intelligence would therefore seem to be a good development—logically and theoretically.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


—Christie Nicholson

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe