Mon-Sat: 8.00-10.30,Sun: 8.00-4.00
Too Intelligent to be a Cop: The Dilemma of High IQ and Law Enforcement
Home » New London Corruption  »  Too Intelligent to be a Cop: The Dilemma of High IQ and Law Enforcement
0 Shares

Share NL Voice

Too Intelligent to be a Cop: The Dilemma of High IQ and Law Enforcement
Intelligence is often seen as an asset, but for Robert Jordan, it became the reason for his rejection as a police officer in New London..

On IQ, Job Performance And Occupation


Over the past century, numerous studies have documented the link between cognitive assessment scores and employee performance. In a chapter advocating the principle that employers should ‘‘select on [the basis of] intelligence,’’ Schmidt and Hunter state (2000):

Intelligence is the major determinant of job performance, and therefore hiring people based on intelligence leads to marked improvements in job performance – improvements that have high economic value to the firm.

Schmidt and Hunter, (2000)

To Put The Truth about Police IQ in A Nutshell:

But why select candidates such that the average police iq is far below the average or normal IQ? It is simple. If the servant is smarter than the master, the servant will become the master in the end. Police are selected for low IQ so that they remain the servants used for stuffing innocent heads into a justice system guided mainly by prison profiteering efforts. That is, in fact, as truthful as one can get on this topic of selecting police for having lower than average lQ. The police are being used by masters who don't want the prison profiteering game interrupted.
- Jonathan Brand, Researcher for the New London Voice


The industrial psychology literature has reached a consensus on the explanation for the strong IQ–job performance relationship: more intelligent individuals, as measured by IQ scores or IQ equivalency, learn job-relevant skills and knowledge faster and better. Thus, high IQ accurately predicts improved job performance as one might expect, Byington & Felps, (2010).

Why Does New London Ban Intelligent Police?

Intelligence is often seen as an asset, but for Robert Jordan, it became the reason for his rejection as a police officer in New London, Connecticut. Despite scoring 33 points on the 1996 police entrance exam, equivalent to an IQ of 125, Jordan was not offered the job because the New London police department only considered candidates who scored between 20 to 27, on the belief that those who scored too high could potentially get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.

However, Jordan saw his rejection as a form of discrimination, arguing that he was denied equal protection under the law. In a federal lawsuit, Jordan claimed that his civil rights were violated, but both the U.S. District Court and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York ruled against him. The courts found that New London had a rational basis for its policy, as reducing job turnover was a valid concern for the city.

The average IQ score for police officers nationally is between 21 to 22, equivalent to an IQ of 104, which is just slightly above average. However, Jordan's case raises the question: should intelligence be a factor in determining who becomes a police officer?

Is IQ Discrimination More Than Faulty Logic?

On one hand, intelligence is an important attribute for a police officer to have. Police work involves complex decision-making and problem-solving, and a higher IQ can certainly help officers perform their duties more effectively. Furthermore, intelligence is often correlated with other desirable traits such as strong communication skills, critical thinking, and emotional intelligence.

Given the diversity of the city's residents and the nature of police work there are very few reasons in any to believe that more intelligent police officers should be any more prone to boredom or attrition. Conversely, lower IQ officers would be less likely to speak up if they saw fellow officials breaking rules. Low IQ officers stick it out and hold their tongues knowing that the job market outside the Police Department would not afford them anything close to what they earn on the police force.

On the other hand, a low IQ does not guarantee job satisfaction or longevity in any career, let alone police work. The current hiring logic for NL police is indeed faulty because the academic research by Hunter and Felps, (2010) as well as research by Shmidt and Hunter, (2000), finds that the opposite true. Lower IQ individuals appear more likely, according to research, to quit jobs such as those in policing. Therefore, someone who is less intelligent than average should not be presumed any less likely from becoming bored with a police job or from leaving a police job shortly after, 'expensive' training. Furthermore, intelligence should not be the sole determining factor in who becomes a police officer. Character, motivation, and personality also play important roles in an officer's performance, while high IQ is also shown to improve performance in job roles for careers that include police work.

IQ Debate Misses Many Other Factors

The debate over intelligence as a factor in hiring police officers is not new. The issue of high IQ and job performance has been researched extensively, with some studies showing that intelligence is a predictor of job performance, while others argue that intelligence is only one of many factors that contribute to job success.

Ultimately, the decision to include or exclude candidates based on their IQ scores is a complex one that requires careful consideration of both the benefits and drawbacks. The question is not whether intelligence is a desirable trait for police officers, but whether it should be the only determining factor in hiring.

Implications for the Future of Policing

Jordan's case highlights the need for a more nuanced approach to the selection and training of police officers. Instead of focusing solely on IQ scores, police departments should consider a wide range of factors, including character, motivation, emotional intelligence, and communication skills. Implications for future policing practices include a more adopting a comprehensive evaluation process that would result in a more well-rounded and effective police force. An ojp.gov email was sent on Feb 21, 2023 to obtain the government's response to this case and to the policing practice of selecting only low IQ police applicants.

Ongoing Training to Develop New Skills

Additionally, it is important that police departments provide ongoing training and development opportunities for their officers. This will not only keep officers engaged in their work, but also help them develop new skills and stay current with the latest developments in their field.

Conclusion

Robert Jordan's case raises important questions and a specific concern about the role of intelligence in law enforcement hiring. Once more, the practice in place in New London is the opposite of what research shows would work for hiring good cops. Reversing New London's current practice of selecting only applicants with a low IQ would put better cops on the street, reduce civil payouts and would equate to a higher quality of life for New London residents.

And IQ need not be the sole determining factor in New London's overdue hiring strategy revisions for police personnel. Although increased candidate IQ should be interpreted, according to long established research as increasing the quality an applicant's job performance, police departments should consider it along with a wider range of factors. Diversity, references, educational performance and personal history are very important factors to consider along with IQ when New London revisits is police personnel hiring policies.

New London should implement a strategy for ongoing training and development opportunities for its police personnel throughout the span of their careers with the department. Continued training will keep police officers up to date, making them more effective over time as the department adapts to meet the evolving needs of New London's diverse community.


0+

User Questions Answered By Our AI
Try It Below:

[mwai_chat]

After New London officials tried to have this third local website about reform silenced by feigning spam complaints to network authorities, I posted links to IP records and other evidence of their fail on a popular local Facebook group. Within the week, personnel from the NLPD also joined FB's "New London Strong" group. They pressured its admin to delete my these posts along with their links to the evidence. I was then indefinitely banned from the group. When I'd responded to being silenced by the police again, 300 FB users clicked on my public service ad for this site. So, in the spirit of silencing people rather than doing any work, a New London police official sent his complaint to Facebook staff who did this:

FB terminates my ad account for suggesting police reform in this screenshot

0 Shares

Comments (5) on “Too Intelligent to be a Cop: The Dilemma of High IQ and Law Enforcement”

  1. Oi Oi Oi this takes the cake. I knew there was a method for keeping police from eventually speaking out about the fact they’re just filling a quota of bodies for the ga10 court to prosecute for profit. I know that “qualified immunity” protects officials who violate our civil rights but discriminating against the hiring of intelligent police officers sounds more like blatant obstruction of justice, a criminal offense. I have to read more about where the GA-10 court prosecutor stands on selecyin only low iq recruits and who is responsible for maintaining the policy in New London.

  2. Note that Facebook has reactivated and enabled the FB Ads platform and all its services for advertising the same campaigns leading to this site. Thank you for not destroying the author’s public voice and thanks so much for initially responding to his public service message on police reform by censoring and deleting his FB ad platform, Thank you initially for responding to the author’s community service work by destroying his ability to reach local residents in New London who may want to help.In summary you shut down his ability to do community service work. You actually did that without so much as asking for the author’s reasoning behind these community service messages to fellow locals on FB living in his city.

    And when all is said and done, thanks also for reversing your immediate decision to silence my FB ads. Thank you for activating the author’s advertising platform on the Facebook website and app. I personally appreciate the notion that you thought better of a very harmful mistake that was first made.The ad campaigns he will run will be essential in rolling out substantive reforms to policing practices currently in use. The use of Facebook’s ad platform will likely improve the quality of life in my hometown of New London, CT.

    1. Facebook has once again deactivated the pages that used ads to draw traffic to this site including my York CI page, Public NLPD page, neither of which can be posted to by their owner, JB who is a site author here vat nlv. My personal fb account, meaning my original account under my name is no longer permitted to post any ad om FB after previous ads again, led to this police reform website. This is the most direct method that can be used to limit the spread of police reform information by halting its source accountsd from advertising again in the future or from posting to all fb pages where police reform messages have been posted previously. The slippery slope has sent FB cascading down into the lowest possible energy state: it sits in a reveene at the bottom of the “slippery slope” to a police state in a castrated puddle at every government’s disposal. FB will not be getting up or vack on ther road shortly or ever.

      1. 21 // Facebook is trash;
        22: var fb == “trash”;
        23: alert(“This Facebook platform is a whole lot of “, (fb), “.”);
        displays: This Facebook platform is a whole lot of trash.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

0 Shares

Share NL Voice