8 ms·

Sure, but I don't see what that has to do with race or gender.

elkond 9y ago
the fact that it operates on learned information, not biological capabilities of the brain. stuff you learn is the stuff you have the ability or you're allowed to learn. society has inherent bias against nonwhites and women (in western world/usa), against women and whites (asia, africa), etc, etc.
- programmarchy 9y ago
  The tests that measure the "g factor" (general intelligence) specifically avoid learned knowledge, and instead measure things like spatial reasoning and memory. You don't even have to be literate to take some IQ tests.
  - h0l0cube 9y ago
    g-factor finds positive correlation against a diverse set of tests. Such correlations can then be used to make predictions of performance on some tests on other unrelated tests, a 'generalized intelligence'. Such correlations can be used to designed a minimal test that map closely to g. But note: "Tests of vocabulary and general information are also typically found to have high g loadings." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) As far as I'm aware, spatial reasoning, attention, memory, and logical inference etc. don't give the complete picture. I'm happy to be corrected on this.
    - programmarchy 9y ago
      I think we pretty much agree... I don't think there's really any one test that can give the complete picture. What I'm trying to get at is that it's possible to design tests that can indirectly measure general intelligence which don't require vocabulary and general information, or other aspects that may rely on social or economic privileges. And that these type of tests would allow us to draw comparisons on a broader scale. I'd imagine if an illiterate person performed well on spatial and memory tasks, then if they had learned to read they would've also scored high on a vocabulary test, too.
      - h0l0cube 9y ago
        > There isn't just one test though. Like you alluded to above, there are 'culture-fair' tests, even though they may be less common. The heart of our disagreement is probably the role we see culture and genetics playing in socioeconomic outcomes. Nope. I disagree that verbal tests can be extricated from an intelligence measure, and by extension, culture. I did mention 'culture-fair' IQ tests, in quotes, and that I don't consider them to be very good. It is even suggested that such tests don't even remove cultural bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell_Culture_Fair_III https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell_Culture_Fair_III > and even though it's a bitter pill to swallow I think we need to soberly assess the genetic component of IQ I can certainly see the moral imperative in avoiding genetic mental disabilities that have profound effects on social outcomes, burden on social services, and maybe even happiness of an individual. Otherwise, what imperative is there to do so?
    - h0l0cube 9y ago
      > I think we pretty much agree... I don't think there's really any one test that can give the complete picture. I don't think we agree. The score is biased if it doesn't test the gamut of competence. Removing language from the picture could give higher scores. Said illiterate person, could try to learn language and find themselves wholly incapable, but awesome at math, logic, spatial reasoning and attention. And as I highlighted, vocabulary and general information are considered to have a large bearing on the score.
    - programmarchy 9y ago
      > And as I highlighted, vocabulary and general information are considered to have a large bearing on the score. There isn't just one test though. Like you alluded to above, there are 'culture-fair' tests, even though they may be less common. The heart of our disagreement is probably the role we see culture and genetics playing in socioeconomic outcomes. To me, the data seems to overwhelmingly discredit the culture-only hypothesis, and even though it's a bitter pill to swallow I think we need to soberly assess the genetic component of IQ. Our current public policy in the West is not sound, and generally a catastrophic failure, because we refuse to address the genetic issue.
h0l0cube 9y ago
Of language testing in particular, it is culturally biased as a testing regime. I've encountered 'culture-fair' IQ tests but they are substantially limited.

the fact that it operates on learned information, not biological capabilities of the brain. stuff you learn is the stuff you have the ability or you're allowed to learn. society has inherent bias against nonwhites and women (in western world/usa), against women and whites (asia, africa), etc, etc.

programmarchy 9y ago
The tests that measure the "g factor" (general intelligence) specifically avoid learned knowledge, and instead measure things like spatial reasoning and memory. You don't even have to be literate to take some IQ tests.
- h0l0cube 9y ago
  g-factor finds positive correlation against a diverse set of tests. Such correlations can then be used to make predictions of performance on some tests on other unrelated tests, a 'generalized intelligence'. Such correlations can be used to designed a minimal test that map closely to g. But note: "Tests of vocabulary and general information are also typically found to have high g loadings." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics) As far as I'm aware, spatial reasoning, attention, memory, and logical inference etc. don't give the complete picture. I'm happy to be corrected on this.
  - programmarchy 9y ago
    I think we pretty much agree... I don't think there's really any one test that can give the complete picture. What I'm trying to get at is that it's possible to design tests that can indirectly measure general intelligence which don't require vocabulary and general information, or other aspects that may rely on social or economic privileges. And that these type of tests would allow us to draw comparisons on a broader scale. I'd imagine if an illiterate person performed well on spatial and memory tasks, then if they had learned to read they would've also scored high on a vocabulary test, too.
    - h0l0cube 9y ago
      > There isn't just one test though. Like you alluded to above, there are 'culture-fair' tests, even though they may be less common. The heart of our disagreement is probably the role we see culture and genetics playing in socioeconomic outcomes. Nope. I disagree that verbal tests can be extricated from an intelligence measure, and by extension, culture. I did mention 'culture-fair' IQ tests, in quotes, and that I don't consider them to be very good. It is even suggested that such tests don't even remove cultural bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell_Culture_Fair_III https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattell_Culture_Fair_III > and even though it's a bitter pill to swallow I think we need to soberly assess the genetic component of IQ I can certainly see the moral imperative in avoiding genetic mental disabilities that have profound effects on social outcomes, burden on social services, and maybe even happiness of an individual. Otherwise, what imperative is there to do so?
  - h0l0cube 9y ago
    > I think we pretty much agree... I don't think there's really any one test that can give the complete picture. I don't think we agree. The score is biased if it doesn't test the gamut of competence. Removing language from the picture could give higher scores. Said illiterate person, could try to learn language and find themselves wholly incapable, but awesome at math, logic, spatial reasoning and attention. And as I highlighted, vocabulary and general information are considered to have a large bearing on the score.
  - programmarchy 9y ago
    > And as I highlighted, vocabulary and general information are considered to have a large bearing on the score. There isn't just one test though. Like you alluded to above, there are 'culture-fair' tests, even though they may be less common. The heart of our disagreement is probably the role we see culture and genetics playing in socioeconomic outcomes. To me, the data seems to overwhelmingly discredit the culture-only hypothesis, and even though it's a bitter pill to swallow I think we need to soberly assess the genetic component of IQ. Our current public policy in the West is not sound, and generally a catastrophic failure, because we refuse to address the genetic issue.

h0l0cube 9y ago

Of language testing in particular, it is culturally biased as a testing regime. I've encountered 'culture-fair' IQ tests but they are substantially limited.