Child prodigy: A novel cognitive profile places elevated general intelligence, exceptional working memory and attention to detail at the root of prodigiousness

[XFMQ902SF]

Superior working memory is what makes a child prodigy.


Abstract
Child prodigies are unusual for their early and exceptional adoption
of what are traditionally thought of as adult abilities. As part of an
effort to better understand the underpinnings of these extraordinary
individuals' talent, the researcher examined the cognitive and
developmental profiles of eight child prodigies by taking their
developmental histories and administering the Stanford-Binet 5th ed.
full scale intelligence test and the Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ).
The collected data reveals a startling picture. While each of the
prodigies demonstrated an at least moderately elevated level of
intelligence, the prodigies' full scale IQ scores were not
consistently on the extreme end of the spectrum. What was consistently
extraordinary, however, was the child prodigies' working memory scores—
a category in which every prodigy tested in the 99th percentile.
Additional results suggest a previously unknown connection between
child prodigies and autism. The prodigies' family histories yielded an
unlikely number of autistic relatives. And the child prodigies
received elevated AQ scores with respect to attention to detail, a
trait associated with autism. The prodigies did not, however, display
many of the other traits typically associated with autism. This result
raises the possibility of a moderated autism that actually enables the
prodigies' extraordinary talent.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289612000761

[NRQ]

Steven Hsu's work on the genetic basis of high intelligence may yet provide therapeutic attack vectors to that end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62jZENi1ed8

[Gwern Branwen]

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/85192141/2012-ruthsatz.pdf

Very interesting. I've mentioned Liebig's barrel before:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebig%27s_barrel

So, if prodigies are defined solely by having far more WM than their
peers, and this is not true of adults as we know from the less than
unitary correlation with intelligence, what does this imply? To me,
this suggests that WM may be a trait that develops 'slower' in some
sense in children than their other traits, and so in children WM
becomes the limiting factor - the lowest stave in the barrel. The
prodigies are not *much* smarter than the other kids, but they are
simply able to make better use of all the faculties they have.

A sample of 8 is very far from great, given the existence of ongoing
studies like SMPY using hundreds or thousands of gifted children, so
on this one study, we should not place too much weight or faith. (I'm
also a little troubled that 2 of the 8 were no longer children.)

--
gwern
http://www.gwern.net

[Mercel]

Isn't this group also too homogeneous? Wouldn't possible the mean IQ
have risen significantly if the study included more science oriented
prodigies?

[otto9otto]

Or maybe a bit of autism:  http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/are-prodigies-autistic 

[The.Fourth.Deviation.]

I've been theorizing that prodigies, and a good portion of our greatest scientists, are autistic/have aspergers for some time now. Glad to see that research is catching on

[Działo, Christopher]

I'm the world's youngest and most certified Google Adwords Professional and Internet Marketer. I have autism, and have recently begun to dose with Oxytocin. High working memory and attention to detail are among the most valued traits of 'prodigies.' Practice is always a positive trait, and a lacking of primitive traits in cognition and personality are comments that I would add. I would be apt to even state that more intelligent humans may possibly be genetic anomalies, having genes that encode for the general deviation in overall capacity. I'd also comment that some geniuses may even have poor memory and working memory, and otherwise processes or experience more out of daily life, gathering more data than others and otherwise tuning away from normalcy. Another comment would be increases neurotransmitter levels promoting additional excitability within the brain linked with general increases in cognition that allow them to complete tasks and becoming more conscious. Perhaps a link into the mind's eye.

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 6:08 PM, The.Fourth.Deviation. <david...@gmail.com> wrote:

I've been theorizing that prodigies, and a good portion of our greatest scientists, are autistic/have aspergers for some time now. Glad to see that research is catching on

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/brain-training/-/TodS848ZyhgJ.

To post to this group, send email to brain-t...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-trainin...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.

[jttoto2]

Perhaps the article is misleading or the abstract is referencing more severe forms of autism, but I found this in the article:   "Interestingly, while the prodigies as a group showed higher levels of autistic traits compared to a control group who weren't prodigies, they scored only slightly higher than those with high functioning autism (Asperger's syndrome) "

If this is true, then all the prodigies would meet a criteria for Asperger's based on AQ.  I don't think this proves that Asperger's = talent however.  For one, Asperger's is noted for poorer WM, while these prodigies have exceptional WM.  Perhaps Asperger's plus high WM = talent, but you need both, and that is rare.

I also agree that it is difficult to draw conclusions based on a handpicked sample, but it seems more than a coincidence that all displayed phenomenal WM despite widely varied IQ.  Of course, the lack of proper randomization leaves room for tampering, and I have to agree with Gwern's conclusions if the IQ scores were adjusted based on age, as opposed to being compared with an adult population.  

[The.Fourth.Deviation.]

Chris

My wm is certainly low, and I am not great at many forms of visual pattern recognition, however I excel in many other domains. I agree on your comment that "geniuses may have poor memory and [or] working memory".

Also, I  have aspergers; how would oxytocin affect me?

 

On Saturday, July 7, 2012 6:42:28 PM UTC-5, Działo, Christopher wrote:

I'm the world's youngest and most certified Google Adwords Professional and Internet Marketer. I have autism, and have recently begun to dose with Oxytocin. High working memory and attention to detail are among the most valued traits of 'prodigies.' Practice is always a positive trait, and a lacking of primitive traits in cognition and personality are comments that I would add. I would be apt to even state that more intelligent humans may possibly be genetic anomalies, having genes that encode for the general deviation in overall capacity. I'd also comment that some geniuses may even have poor memory and working memory, and otherwise processes or experience more out of daily life, gathering more data than others and otherwise tuning away from normalcy. Another comment would be increases neurotransmitter levels promoting additional excitability within the brain linked with general increases in cognition that allow them to complete tasks and becoming more conscious. Perhaps a link into the mind's eye.

On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 6:08 PM, The.Fourth.Deviation. <wrote:

I've been theorizing that prodigies, and a good portion of our greatest scientists, are autistic/have aspergers for some time now. Glad to see that research is catching on

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/brain-training/-/TodS848ZyhgJ.

To post to this group, send email to brain-training@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-training+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[☉]

I reposted this by mistake (since I hadn't seen this thread at the time).

I have a remark or two: autism as a factor helps the individual work independently. The increased attention to detail, offered by aspergoid characteristics, enables the individual to acquire a firm grasp of the rules within a specific domain. High WM allows that individual to perform exceptionally, even to acquire and further refine the skills within their domain. Certain genetic predispositions allow the individual to express their talents through ability-fostering behaviors (i.e., dedicated practice). That their field is rule-governed allows them to have free range without an exceptional I.Q. which is generally useful in unsupervised, non-rule-based learning environments. (This is definitely not the whole story, but I think it provides an indication of what the whole story would have to look like -- as a synopsis.)

In sum, it is a constellation of mutually reinforcing characteristics and circumstances that enable a prodigy to flourish, given the appropriate environment. WM xor autism simply isn't enough. The mutualism is truly what enables them. Similar examples of non-child exceptional, elite performance can be seen all across the board in which mutualism plays a decisive role.

The Liebig's barrel is, assuredly, an oversimplification -- useful pedagogically in only very limited respects.

argumzio

[Mercel]

Suppose this pattern is equally true for other disciplines, then
perhaps this could make sense out of all the anecdotes floating around
on the Internett about prominent scientists and others, who supposedly
achieved modest scores on psychometric tests, i.e. Feynman, Shockley
or Kennedy.