There is a plethora of misconceptions and myths when it comes to the topic of mental illness. For example, some people believe that disorders like depression and anxiety are dramatic diagnoses for difficult feelings like sadness or mere nerves. But this is certainly not the case—these conditions and those of the like are real and they’re harmful to those who suffer with them. Another common myth is that people with mental illness are less intelligent; but in reality, they’re just as smart as those of us who aren’t diagnosed with a mental disorder.
In fact, they might even be smarter. A new study “High intelligence: A risk factor for psychological and physiological overexcitabilities” published in Intelligence says that extremely intelligent individuals have a much greater risk of suffering from a range of psychological and physiological disorders.
The research team first came up with a “hyper brain/hyper body theory of integration,” which suggests that people with higher cognitive ability react with greater emotional and behavioral response to their environments. And because of their increased awareness, individuals with a high IQ then typically exhibit a hyperreactive central nervous system. For example, “a minor insult such as a clothing tag or an unnatural sound may trigger a low level, chronic stress response which then activates a hyper body response,” Dr. Nicole Tetreault, co-author of the study, explained to NeuroscienceNews.
Then it was time to put their theory to the test. The team surveyed 3,715 members of American Mensa, Ltd., a group of people that share the trait of high intelligence. Each individual reported their experiences with both diagnosed and suspected mental illnesses—such as mood and anxiety disorders (like ADHD)—as well as physiological diseases, like food allergies and asthma. The researchers then took this data and compared it with the statistical national average for each illness.
The results were just as the team expected and in support of their model: those in the Mensa population (or those with exceptional IQs) had significantly higher rates of the varying disorders. For example, over 10% of the US population is diagnosed with some form of anxiety, compared with 20% of Mensans.
While having a higher IQ is generally flaunted and envied, this study shows that there is a big downside, as these individuals possess “unique intensities and overexcitabilities which can be at once both remarkable and disabling on many levels,” lead author of the study Ruth Karpinski explained to NeuroscienceNews. “Our findings are relevant because a significant portion of these individuals are suffering on a daily basis as a result of their unique emotional and physical overexcitabilities. It is important for the scientific community to examine high IQ as being front and center within the system of mechanisms that may be at play in these dysregulations,” she said.
Moving forward, the team hopes that their findings may lead future studies to treat high intelligence as “a potential genetic piece of a psychoneuroimmunological puzzle.” But for now, these findings serve as the perfect debunking means to the common myth that mentally ill individuals aren’t intelligent. They are intelligent—highly intelligent.
Sources
Karpinskik, R. I., Kinase Kolb, A. M., Et al. (2017, October 8). High intelligence: A risk factor for psychological and physiological overexcitabilities. Intelligence. Retrieved on October 12, 2017 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289616303324
Pitzer College (2017, October 11). Hyper Brain, Hyper Body: The Trouble With High IQ. NeuroscienceNews. Retrieved October 12, 2017 from http://neurosciencenews.com/iq-hyper-brain-body-7720/
Let’s keep in touch! Sign up to receive our newsletter:
Taylor Bennett
Start a Relationship with An Exceptional Counselor
- Skilled and caring professional counselors
- Accepting all major and most insurances
- High-touch customer service & premium benefits
- Same- or next-day appointments
- Ultra-flexible 23.5hr cancellations
This study is bogus because of sampling set error. The authors assumed that Mensa members were generally representative of high IQ people, so if they had higher than normal emotional problems, then so must high IQ people who are not Mensa members. However, Mensa members are not representative of high IQ people I can tell you from personal experience. The correct way to run this study is to administer an IQ test to a random sample of people (use people from Silicon Valley to make it easier), and do the emotional evaluation on those people who have a high IQ.
I think this one debate will go unanswered being your comment too old but could not resist myself. I would have accepted your comment but then you said Silicon Valley guys. Why do you think they represent the high-IQ proportion of the USA or the world? I know so many people with extraordinary IQ level still live humble lives but are as healthy in the physical and psychological. In the case of Mensa or Silicon Valley, the work pressure and liabilities may affect those guys so it doesn’t justic to study them and not the other people with less of burdens or liabilities.
Why do you state that members of Mensa are not representative of people with high IQ? You state that’s from personal experience. What does that mean? It appears that your hypothesis is based on a “sampling error”. What percentage of Mensa International members do you know personally? Your claim is completely subjective. To become a member of Mensa, you have to score within the top 2% of IQ when compared to the overall population. I would have more respect for your opinion if you stated that you didn’t believe that standardized IQ tests were an appropriate way to measure intelligence. And, even if you started this, it would be useful if you backed up your sentiment with accompanying research. And, why do you suggest to start in Silicon Valley? Are you claiming that people who work at tech start-ups are smarter than other people? Upon what do you base this correlation? This study is so straight-forward that I cannot understand your problem with it without further elaboration on your part.
Are you sure? Because I’m 11 with IQ 159 and I’m kinda worried
Hi there, did anyone answer you , when you said that you were worried?
As a mum (+ a Nan) + an old nurse, I would say there’s an awful lot of arguing going on here , amongst probably highly intelligent people who to me cannot agree! So I would say please don’t worry, but please talk your concerns through with parents, a teacher or your medical advisor. All the best!
I agree. Smart people who apply to be in Mensa might have other emotional issues (i.e. lack of self-esteem, narcissism, etc.). I’d like to see a study looking at IQ in the general population and also seeing if it correlates with emotional disorders.
It seems like your study does not sample the correct population to support your hypothesis. An intelligent person who is mentally healthy may not feel compelled to join Mensa. The joining of the club itself means the people are looking for something, so your hypothesis and headlines need to be adjusted.
I do not understand your supposition. The fact is that Mensa only has a 2% penetration rate, meaning that only 2% of people who qualify for Mensa, join Mensa. But to assume that people who are mentally healthy do not join seems rather absurd. I am a member of Nensa, and I can say that IMHO joining Mensa has not been as rewarding as I imagine. There aren’t as many activities or chances for engagement with others that would make joining more appealing to qualified people. The most rewarding aspect to being a member of Mensa, for me, is receiving the Nensa bulletin, which is published roughly once a month. There just seems TO ME to be an anti-Mensa attitude by non-members. This is why many Mensa members do not include this achievement on their resumes
I concur. A random sample is a basic requirement for any research. And for a study such as this, the participants should represent a broad range of living situations and SES, as well as measured intelligence.
I agree that members of MENSA do not necessarily represent the average person with high intelligence. They join the group for other reasons besides their intelligence level. But beyond that, the study obviously needs to include people of all IQ levels in order to more or less accurately compare the incidence of mental illness in those with high intelligence to the incidence in those of other levels.
And mental illness can take so many different forms that it can be difficult to identify. Many times even the one afflicted does not realize they have such an illness, making it even more difficult to find a representative sample. And I would wager that many people with high intelligence and mental illness suffer in obscurity and might be less likely to be identified in said study.
That being said, it seems to me that, for whatever a personal opinion is worth, this finding intuitively makes sense. Mental illness is frequently precipitated or exacerbated by stress and anxiety. Those who are significantly more intelligent than the norm can often find themselves a misfit; frustrated, thwarted, misunderstood, and poorly treated. Especially so when the person is not articulate and confident enough to fully and convincingly express themselves.
Consequently, a person in such a position is more likely to experience long-term, unremitting stress and anxiety, perhaps leading to significant adjustment problems and mental health issues.
No research can be perfectly sampled, performed or conclusive. That is what research replication is for, and as close as we can get to proving a hypothesis.
Tbdr the actual research so Im going to ask this here.. 😛 Was their “best” result about anxiety ? Because if that is so then I consider it a not successful prove for their theory. People that want to pay a fee and go to a place where they will be examined by a test in order to become members of a vague society which about self admiration are obviously prone to be the wares of some sort of chronic anxiety or similar syndromes. In other words they chose the wrong testgroup for their cause or the wrong condition to prove their theory.