Doctors: high intelligence vs a strong work ethic?

[mehc012]

From my experience, highly intelligent people don't go into medicine. They get PhDs of some sort. It takes a bit of e.i. acumen, intelligence, work ethic, and ability to handle many projects/cases at once, so multitasking, and ability to make a decision, so maturity or leadership. I've striven to be a well-rounded person, so I believe that reflects.

I'm sorry, but I can't tell what you're trying to say here. Are you describing MDs, or PhDs? What is reflecting on what?

For my 2 cents, I'm damn smart but not very self-motivated. Medicine was perfect; PhD was too much running your own schedule. I can work hard if you set me down and tell me what to work hard at, for how long. 12hr shifts don't bother me; they make everything easier imo. So to me, medicine seemed like the perfect path for someone who had brains and liked talking to people, but didn't like being a self-starter. You don't have to figure out what tasks you need to do, med school is just a giant to-do list to get through and get into residency. No thinking or planning or self-motivating. Does that make me lazy? I dunno. But if you do count that as lazy, then medicine seems exactly suited for intelligent, lazy people.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[justabanana]

 

[W19]

@justabanana

I saw that chart and it was incredible to see that physicians' IQ in general is higher than all other profession... The school i am at is probably at the bottom 20 of US med school and I think my classmates are pretty intelligent... I can't imagine what it's like at WashU--where the average MCAT is ~40...

 

[justabanana]

@justabanana

I saw that chart and it was incredible to see that physicians' IQ in general is higher than all other profession... The school i am at is probably at the bottom 20 of US med school and I think my classmates are pretty intelligent... I can't imagine what it's like at WashU--where the average MCAT is ~40...

Same. As important as work ethic is, I think a lazy person can make it through med school just because the pressure and demands will keep you moving. I've yet to meet a medical student that I actually believe is on the left half of the intelligence bell curve.

 

[pupsnacks]

/

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[Stagg737]

Have you looked into allied health professions? I work with someone who has suffered her whole life and she seems successful. PM me if you want more info, would like to tell you more if you are interested.

From my experience, highly intelligent people don't go into medicine. They get PhDs of some sort. Edit: For medicine, it takes a bit of e.i. acumen, intelligence, work ethic, and ability to handle many projects/cases at once, so multitasking, and ability to make a decision, so maturity or leadership. I've striven to be a well-rounded person, so I believe that reflects. I don't agree that AI would ever substitute for doctors. Maybe it would be useful for primary care physicians in remote places of the world where physician cost is high and the number low, but AI is a long way from doing anything other than diagnosing. This would be a good topic for another thread imo.

I think PhD vs. medicine is less about intelligence and more about what motivates the person. The PhDs I've met are all motivate by a sense of self-learning and finding answers to questions that don't have them or questions that haven't even been asked yet. They're willing to put in the work just to get an answer and that gives them a sense of achievement and satisfaction. Imo that's not enough for physicians, we need to be able to apply what we're learning on a regular basis and are motivated by factors other than "just" learning like patient outcomes, performing procedures/immediate results, and other factors like money and job stability. I know plenty of docs that could have easily gone the PhD route based on intelligence and a few PhDs who wouldn't be able to cut it in med school.

Same. As important as work ethic is, I think a lazy person can make it through med school just because the pressure and demands will keep you moving. I've yet to meet a medical student that I actually believe is on the left half of the intelligence bell curve.

I've met more than I'd care to admit, and I don't just mean people that weren't smart relative to med students, I mean medical students/physicians who are just plain dumb. The worst I can give was a girl I met who didn't know what a football looked like (she kept thinking a baseball was a football). That alone isn't necessarily bad, but the fact that she had spent a good 10 minutes earlier in the night talking about how her older brother was a QB in high school and a star player at his college made every person in the room turn their head when she said that. After meeting her a few more times, it became painfully obvious that it wasn't just an act or her not understanding sports, she was actually just really, really dumb. I was friends with one of her classmates and apparently her group of friends legitimately had no clue how she got through first semester, let alone most of med school. I've met a few others that fall into that category, but she was by far the dumbest (would guess her IQ is legit in the 80's).

Ive edited it. Does it make more sense now? So smarts doesn't equal intelligence. Smarts is like above average intelligence, like this thread notes. There's only one genius I've heard of that practices medicine, and he's a psychiatrist in Switzerland or somewhere. In other words, most highly intelligent people, I've found, enjoy using their brains over anything else at work, and doctors use both brains and brawn (standing long hours, working long hours, etc).

What are you considering genius? Someone who is truly well-rounded, intelligent, social, and capable of learning things incredibly easily or just someone with an IQ over 140? If it's the latter I know quite a few people that fit that definition. If you're talking about the former then yea, it's a lot rarer but I've met a handful of people that fit that description and blew me away when I talked to them.

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[W19]

The MCAT isn't an intelligence exam.

Intelligence:

The ability to acquire and apply knowledge and skills:

I think it's an intelligence exam, but we are not going to argue over semantics here...

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[mehc012]

There are threads on this though. The mcat isn't considered an intelligence test. The old GRE, current GMAT, and old SAT are considered according to one intelligence group. Wechsler Intelligence test is pretty standard for what I'm referring to. No doubt IQ and fluid intelligence helps on the mcat, but the mcat doesn't measure intelligence.

Ehhhh, it kinda does. You'll get a baseline-decent score if you just know the material, but to score well, you need test-taking ability. Unfortunately, since we suck at assessing actual intelligence with all of its variations, that subs for 'intelligence' when we go quantitative about it. The MCAT, like every other standardized exam, is a test-taking ability (aka false intelligence) exam. I improved only 4pts (38 to 42) when I first-pass covered 25% of the content...that wasn't because I was prepared, it's because I'm naturally good at test taking. People who think that the MCAT measures primarily content knowledge are only looking at the mid-range scores, and ignoring those who perform well due to test-taking skill.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

If you made it into medical school and passed boards, you have shown the necessary intelligence. What you have to do now it's be consistently efficient and hard working. It's not like intelligence can be turned off and forgotten

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[mehc012]

Um, yeah. So never will a psychologist administering a test for IQ give the MCAT as a test or consider the MCAT as a qualifying exam to directly measure intelligence. Was it difficult to infer what I meant when I gave the Wechsler test as an example? Noone is arguing that above average intelligence is necessary, see the range of 105-130? that literally is considered above average intelligence, and it literally is not considered genius intelligence.

Perhaps they should; intelligence substitutes for all but the most basic content knowledge on the MCAT

 

[Kurk]

It used to be intelligence and work ethic. Now it's work ethic and compassion. Just look at the Caribbean schools.

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[rafa 22]

definitely, work ethic. The material isn't hard, there is just a ton of it.

 

[mehc012]

Dude, it doesn't really. Its not valid to measure intelligence or reliable, note people who score low then get higher with practice and studying. Its nowhere comprehensive enough to test analytical (math) skills. Its based on speed, accuracy and knowledge content, which is why I noted fluid intelligence earlier (second time having to repeat myself). I think you are trying to defend a side to this argument that has been refuted previously. If you haven't taken any psych courses, perhaps you might enjoy one in a relevant field to intelligence testing. And, if you are a good test taker, go take a real valid IQ test, administered by a psychologist or whoever. Either way, its not necessary to have an extremely high IQ to be a physician. Likeability with EQ and a strong work ethic go far.

I said that intelligence could sub for knowledge on much of the MCAT, not that you couldn't sub them back the other way, too. And you can get higher scores with practice on most purely test-taking based exams as well...look at the SAT. (Note: I'm intentionally not calling it intelligence, because I don't think that even IQ tests actually measure intelligence. They measure test-taking ability, and to a certain extent, the environment and culture you were raised in). I don't know why on earth I would want to go take an IQ test...from what I can tell, they serve little purpose except as ego boosts.

Is it necessary to be intelligent/good at test-taking to make it through med school? No. But if you are, it requires far less work/work ethic than everyone seems to want to admit. That's all I was trying to say.

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[mehc012]

You are missing the point. The SAT isn't used anymore as an IQ test, so there is no comparison. I'm not really interested in this conversation anymore because you don't get the point and clearly have no background knowledge about psychology of intelligence or the purpose of intelligence testing. Yeah, go take an IQ test and put it to rest already. I'm done here.

I have knowledge, I just think the entire field is bunk.
I have no desire to take an IQ test; this has nothing to do with how intelligent *I* am or am not, and again, I've yet to see any purpose to anyone taking an IQ test.

You can do well on the MCAT if you are prepared, or if you are a good test-taker. You can do excellently if you are both.
You can do well in med school if you work hard, or if you are a good test-taker. You can do excellently if you are both.

That's my opinion on this question, and it has nothing to do with my IQ or my work habits.

 

[pupsnacks]

.

 

[Lawpy]

Clearly, one must be decently intelligent and hard working in order to become a medical doctor. That said, I'm wondering what posters here believe is the MORE applicable statement -

A. In order to become a medical doctor, one must be quite intelligent.
Or
B. In order to become a medical doctor, one must be quite hard working.

I'd bet they are both important. Although scoring in the top percentile on class exams/boards/shelf exams probably depends more strongly on intelligence than work ethic. It's the same thing with the MCAT. The people who score in top few percentile are intelligent + have good test taking skills (which depend on intelligence anyways) + work hard.

Anyone can work hard and I think medical students generally work hard to do well in class and exams. But the students who excel have the intelligence to do so, and they can work significantly less than their peers and still score in top percentile. The extra time to do other stuff like research allows them to build strong applications for residency and improve their chances of matching into competitive specialties at academic programs.

 

[SpecializedSurgeon]

Clearly, one must be decently intelligent and hard working in order to become a medical doctor. That said, I'm wondering what posters here believe is the MORE applicable statement -

A. In order to become a medical doctor, one must be quite intelligent.
Or
B. In order to become a medical doctor, one must be quite hard working.

Hard working > Intelligent, but obviously you can't lack either otherwise you just spin your wheels.
a major component of success that most in medicine overlook is the impact of things like your social skills, emotional intelligence, conflict negotiation skills, etc. that actually help you get through most real-world issues. Those intangibles are actually what generate real success

 

[Redpancreas]

Hard working > Intelligent, but obviously you can't lack either otherwise you just spin your wheels.
a major component of success that most in medicine overlook is the impact of things like your social skills, emotional intelligence, conflict negotiation skills, etc. that actually help you get through most real-world issues. Those intangibles are actually what generate real success

This. I agree that to succeed as a student in the first two years hard work is probably more important. However, skills like timing, body language, and a bit of cunning are very important starting clinical year on beyond and I would call them a form of intelligence.

 

[el_duderino]

Ive never understood how med students from the top schools perform below average on step 1. its pretty sad actually. Supposedly they are the top students in the country, did well on the mcat (so theyre good test takers), and have worked extremely hard to get where they are (so they would presumably study hard for step 1), so it doesn't make sense. says a lot about their admissions committees too.

Students at the top schools are often pretty research focused. Also, there are simply a lot of really good test takers to go around.

 

[EasyRider]

Smart enough i.e. Above 70th percentile in intelligence and have above 90 th percentile in work ethic.

Even if one has a IQ of 180+ if one doesn't have any interest in learning 10,000+ random facts they will fail.

Also a high IQ doesn't matter if you can't handle the volume of information you have to memorize.

 

[studentdocftw]

I'm going B.
Medical school isn't rocket science...but it is an endless amount of information. Hard work in the form of repetition trumps intelligence every time.

 

[mehc012]

I think the problem here is that everyone is framing this as "extremely intelligent but puts in zero work" vs "reasonably intelligent but works really hard". Well, then, obviously hard work is going to win; it's the only one you're actually dropping low, so losing it hurts.

If you compare "extremely intelligent and puts in reasonable work" vs "reasonably intelligent but works really hard", I think they come out about the same.

Intelligence helps, not because med school is rocket science, but because it truly does take some people fewer passes to memorize, or they can literally figure it out given other related information, or else they can game the test even when they know less.

 

[Pathdocmd]

If I could reliably measure hard work and grit in the admissions and residency selection process, I would be a happy camper.

 

[buckoh24]

I have a quote that says "hard work beats talent when talent dosnt work hard". I would say there is a degree of innate ability that can help such as being able to critically think quickly and being able to sort and organize info in your head. I do think the majority comes down to work ethic.

 

[WingedOx]

Ive never understood how med students from the top schools perform below average on step 1. its pretty sad actually. Supposedly they are the top students in the country, did well on the mcat (so theyre good test takers), and have worked extremely hard to get where they are (so they would presumably study hard for step 1), so it doesn't make sense. says a lot about their admissions committees too.

Bell curves, how do they work?

 

[WingedOx]

If I could reliably measure hard work and grit in the admissions and residency selection process, I would be a happy camper.

I wish the TED talk bullshiat pseudoacademic discussion of "grit" could go away forever.

 

[Pathdocmd]

I wish the TED talk bullshiat pseudoacademic discussion of "grit" could go away forever.

It is a nice concept, and some people have it and some don't, but it isn't all what Duckworth says it is. The test she uses to measure it is laughable.

 

[Styrene]

I think my personal experience can shed light on this. If I could post it anonymously, I would.

I was forced by school administrators to take an IQ test in high school because I cut so many classes and almost failed math. I never opened a book because I didn't care about school when I was 16. I took an IQ test administered by the school psychologist and scored 140+ on the Stanford-Binet scale, which they call "very advanced or gifted." My memory scores were 99.99%ile, as were my verbal scores. My performance IQ was my weaker area (mental calculations, etc.).

I'm now an MS2 at a good state school. I would reliably estimate that, overall, I will finish preclinical in the top 20-25% of my class but definitely not anywhere near the top 1-2%. It was a shock and huge adjustment for me...going from scoring 40 on the MCAT and getting straight A+s all through undergrad to only once getting the highest score in the class on a final unit exam in med school. I thought I was a very hard worker, but it turns out I am just a hard worker compared to normal people. I am basically average in that area when pooled with other med students.

I know people with high IQs when I meet them (usually). I have several such people in my family and have interacted with high-IQ people more than most. Also, my dad is a genius and was a child prodigy. While in med school, I have not met many people who I think are like this. IQ-by-profession studies support my observation. However, I know some people who did extremely well in certain classes, and it all comes down to their method of studying and the PRODUCTIVE hours that they put in. Some of them treat it like a 9-5 job and actually study with that schedule. I am envious of them. They exercise, eat healthy foods, keep a consistent and balanced scheduled, etc. Meanwhile I stay up until 4-5am reading random forums and watching YouTube videos.

I typically study a few hours per day, but this waxes and wanes. During one stretch, I never opened a book on the weekend for a solid 3-4 weeks and instead just watched Netflix and stuff. If we have a lot of quizzes in succession, then I will be studying more. Sometimes I study all weekend depending on what we have going on. For me, med school was not difficult academically, but it was a huge social and emotional adjustment period in the first 5 months or so. It made me realize that being "really smart" has little to do with being a good student and having practical life skills like time management and organization.

I see many, many people in my class who go all out with annotating first aid, watching videos, using sketchy something (not sure what it is), pathoma, etc. They could all be geniuses, all be average, or be a mix...I have no idea. But the one thing that all the top students at my school have in common is that they ALL study way more than I do and use tried-and-true review books. I have never used a single one of these resources because I hate looking through books and would rather just look stuff up on NCBI/Medscape/UpToDate.

We have a lot of small group cases at my school, and our unit tests are made from retired board questions. I have managed to consistently score in the low-mid 90s on most of these tests just by doing the small group cases in extreme detail and doing practice questions from UWorld and USMLE-Rx. The catch is that if one of the tests by chance happens to have a lot of random facts on it, then I will end up with a score in the low-mid 80s, while people who spent hours with review books will do much better.

So after thinking about all of this over the past year or so, I've realized that having a lot of IQ-type intelligence is helpful to a point in med school. Taking myself as an example, I can easily recognize the important concepts, Google them, read random articles, and remember everything. For physiology classes a la cardio/pulmonary etc., I barely have to study and can still honor.

The downside is the way that the brain of a person with a high IQ works. Taking myself as an example again, when I study more, I don't memorize more facts; instead, I learn the topic in greater detail and depth, which isn't always helpful in med school when it comes to grades. I also have an extremely difficult time with decontextualized rote memorization, like anatomy in which I did very poorly, because if there is no rhyme or reason, my brain discards it.

And if we were left to our own devices and didn't have small group cases and mandatory review sessions and the like to guide us, I would be totally screwed.