4 ms·
I'm not an expert in the field, but my casual understanding is that the research shows basically the opposite to be true. That is to say that IQ is generally pr
by dionidium 8y ago
I'm not an expert in the field, but my casual understanding is that the research shows basically the opposite to be true. That is to say that IQ is generally predictive of success and/or ability across just about any dimension you want to choose.
Said another way, if you had to hire somebody sight-unseen and you were only allowed to know one piece of information about them, IQ would be the strongest predictor of performance.
(I want to be very clear: that's not to say that the person with the highest IQ will always be the best performer; it's just to say that if you had no other information, and you had to hire based on just one piece of information, IQ would be your best bet.)
- Scea91 8y agoYou would have to define more formally what you mean by one piece of information and even then I think there are counterexamples to your argument. For example, If I wanted to hire a doctor I would prefer to know if the applicant had medical degree over their IQ.
- ben509 8y agoYou don't need a formal definition, you just need to read more carefully: > it's just to say that if you had no other information, and you had to hire based on just one piece of information, IQ would be your best bet. You might prefer to know if they have a medical degree, but that knowledge is already excluded.
- dionidium 8y agoRight, and if the job is "forward in the NBA," then maybe you'd rather know height. Fair enough, but it's not really responsive to my point about the general case. Perhaps to help clarify your thoughts on this, imagine the case where you don't even know the job requirements.