7 ms·
On the IQ question, from the paper (http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797618768058 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/095679761876805..
by Pete_D 8y ago
On the IQ question, from the paper (http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797618768058 http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/095679761876805...):
> Intelligence was assessed by asking, “If you could choose your level of intelligence, what level would you choose?” and referring participants to an IQ diagram, with labels for “moderate disability” (40), “below average intelligence” (70), “average intelligence” (100), “above average intelligence” (130), and “exceptionally gifted” (160). Participants were told, “We would like you to indicate your desired intelligence level using an IQ score. NOTE: although IQ has no ‘maximum’ score, a score of 100 indicates an average level of intelligence.” Participants were then asked to write their preferred IQ level in an open-ended box.
Later, from the results section:
> In terms of intelligence, the mean ideal IQ score was distorted by the fact that a small group of participants recorded very high ideal IQ scores (> 1,000), creating positive skew. To adjust for this, we placed an artificial ceiling on scores that corresponded to the highest IQ score ever recorded: 228. After winsorizing the 0.3% of participant responses greater than 228, the mean IQ score was 122.52 (SD = 25.23).
- ben_w 8y agoIQ is defined with a standard deviation of either 15 or 16 depending on the test. IQ 1000 is 60σ, or z>1.238e-784. As this is significantly less likely than randomly guessing the correct {plank volume, plank time} pair out of the visible universe from Big Bang to now, much more, I’d agree the such responses didn’t understand the statistics.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoI don't think they're misunderstanding, though they may be ignorant of the stats, what they're saying is they want to be unimaginably intelligent. Perhaps assuming that special powers will go with that, like precognition.
- whatshisface 8y ago>Perhaps assuming that special powers will go with that, like precognition. Across all species and stock market trading firms, this trend can actually be seen to some extent.
- ben_w 8y agoIt’s surprising how little extra skill in some area is required to seem like a wizard to outsiders. For example, I’m still amazing people by demonstrating Google Translate’s AR mode, and I remember when the tech was first demoed as WordLens 7.5 years ago.
- oldcynic 8y agoMaybe they should exclude people who've seen Lucy and other such movie silliness.
- the8472 8y ago> IQ 1000 is 60σ But that is assuming that intelligence is a normal distribution, i.e. arises from a contributions of many independent random variables. Which is a decent approximation for underlying natural processes (human genetic pool and environmental contributions). But it is just an approximation. For starters, there is a lower bound to intelligence (inert matter) so we're not really dealing with a normal dist, the truth would be closer to a skewed, semi-bounded distribution, we just don't see that because we're just measuring humans instead of also including animals on the left and hypothetical superintelligences on the right. Secondly, modelling it as random independent variables breaks down if you start to deliberately engineer all those contributing factors. Natural processes are exceedingly unlikely to hatch ants from fly eggs due to random genetic mutation. But a process like evolution or engineering can bring such things into existence. So asking for an IQ of 1000 is simply saying that you want to be more intelligent than random, natural reproductive processes could give you anytime soon.
- ben_w 8y ago> But that is assuming that intelligence is a normal distribution, No, not intelligence, just IQ. They are not synonymous. Modifying your example, if there is more than one braindead person on life support at any given moment, the minimum IQ for humans is greater than zero. There is a lot wrong with IQ as a metric.
- geezerjay 8y ago> There is a lot wrong with IQ as a metric. This. IIRC, the concept of IQ originated as the ratio between the individual's intelligence, evaluated through some way such as standardized test scores, and the average test score for individuals within a statistically representative group that reflects the individual's profile (for example, people of a certain age). The mere fact that the IQ is calculated as the ratio of two meaningless values used to reflect an intangible and subjective concept is enough to cast serious doubts about the accuracy of this particular test.