3 ms·

Yeah totally, or like selecting for confident people where you tell people who score well on the test that they're super confident. Tall is an absolute, object

by harry8 8y ago

Yeah totally, or like selecting for confident people where you tell people who score well on the test that they're super confident. Tall is an absolute, objective measure of a real thing that exists. IQ is NOT a measure of a thing that exists. Similar effects can be found throwing dice and ascribing the total to an IQ score, then telling parents, teachers what the poor kid's IQ is as though it were their height. It's insane.

harry8 8y ago
http://homepages.gac.edu/~jwotton2/PSY225/rosenthal66.pdf http://homepages.gac.edu/~jwotton2/PSY225/rosenthal66.pdf https://sites.google.com/site/7arosenthal/ https://sites.google.com/site/7arosenthal/ Per: Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1966 study, which deserves wider appreciation? I want to emphasise 1966 was when this was published so it isn't overlooked as we all read pretty fast with these things. edit: Found a link to the original paper: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488.8077&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488... More recent criticism of the original: https://thenewstatistics.com/itns/2018/04/03/weve-been-here-before-the-replication-crisis-over-the-pygmalion-effect/ https://thenewstatistics.com/itns/2018/04/03/weve-been-here-...
feanaro 8y ago
If it is not a real thing, how does it succeed in having an influence over results on a measurement device? Results on cognitive tests have a relatively high test-retest reliability.
wolfgangK 8y ago
> IQ is NOT a measure of a thing that exists. I don't understand your concept of something "existing" or not. Do you believe that a "speed" exist ? That a "center of gravity" exists ? That a "temperature" exist ? People who say "IQ is what IQ tests measure" sound to me like they could say "temperature is what thermometers measure". temperature does not "exist" it is molecules movements all the way down, yet it is a meaningful/useful concept. Same goes for IQ or "g factor".

by harry8 8y ago

harry8 8y ago

http://homepages.gac.edu/~jwotton2/PSY225/rosenthal66.pdf http://homepages.gac.edu/~jwotton2/PSY225/rosenthal66.pdf https://sites.google.com/site/7arosenthal/ https://sites.google.com/site/7arosenthal/ Per: Rosenthal & Jacobson, 1966 study, which deserves wider appreciation? I want to emphasise 1966 was when this was published so it isn't overlooked as we all read pretty fast with these things. edit: Found a link to the original paper: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488.8077&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.488... More recent criticism of the original: https://thenewstatistics.com/itns/2018/04/03/weve-been-here-before-the-replication-crisis-over-the-pygmalion-effect/ https://thenewstatistics.com/itns/2018/04/03/weve-been-here-...

feanaro 8y ago

If it is not a real thing, how does it succeed in having an influence over results on a measurement device? Results on cognitive tests have a relatively high test-retest reliability.

wolfgangK 8y ago

> IQ is NOT a measure of a thing that exists. I don't understand your concept of something "existing" or not. Do you believe that a "speed" exist ? That a "center of gravity" exists ? That a "temperature" exist ? People who say "IQ is what IQ tests measure" sound to me like they could say "temperature is what thermometers measure". temperature does not "exist" it is molecules movements all the way down, yet it is a meaningful/useful concept. Same goes for IQ or "g factor".