Are Young Indonesians Getting Less Intelligent? The Evidence Does Not Say That
Some studies report declines in test scores abroad. They do not establish that Indonesian Gen Z has a lower IQ.
RAHMAT WIBOWO | 28 OCTOBER 2026
A number shared online can turn quickly into a judgment: young people are supposedly less intelligent than the generation before them. Before repeating it, we need to ask who was tested, when, and what the test actually measured.
The report behind this series discusses research from Norway and the United States. Both examine particular populations, not a representative sample of Indonesian Gen Z. Their findings cannot establish a trend for young Indonesians.
What the studies can—and cannot—tell us
Bratsberg and Rogeberg studied Norwegian male conscripts and reported changes in cognitive test scores across birth cohorts. The cohort discussed in the source report was born no later than 1991, earlier than the years usually associated with Gen Z. The researchers found evidence consistent with environmental influences; that does not identify one specific cause.
A separate US study examined an online adult sample. Changes in who takes a test or how it is taken can complicate interpretation. Results from either study should not be repackaged as an Indonesian generational IQ score.
Learning assessments answer a different question
School assessments of reading and mathematics can help identify where students need more support. They are not IQ tests, and a score is not a verdict on an individual's value or potential. A national average also cannot describe every classroom or every child.
Education research gives us reason to take learning opportunities seriously. A meta-analysis by Ritchie and Tucker-Drob found that additional education was associated with improvements in intelligence test scores. Its findings concern education, not proof that any particular app or screen habit raises or lowers IQ.
A more useful conversation
Instead of asking whether a generation is “stupid,” ask whether students can access good teaching, time to read, materials, feedback, and support when they struggle. Those questions direct attention toward conditions that families, schools, communities, and policymakers can work on together.
A young person is more than a score. The careful use of evidence begins by refusing to turn findings about one group into a label for another.
Sources: Bratsberg and Rogeberg, Norway; Ritchie and Tucker-Drob, education and intelligence. The US study and its limitations are discussed in the source report, section 3.