3 ms·
> Weren't IQ tests basically determined to be modern-day phrenology long ago? Nope. (Well, there are people who believe that, but there are also people who bel
by Viliam1234 7y ago
> Weren't IQ tests basically determined to be modern-day phrenology long ago?
Nope. (Well, there are people who believe that, but there are also people who believe that vaccines cause autism.) As a scientific consensus, the concept IQ is well supported by psychometric research.
The individual IQ tests, of course, may contain mistakes. And any online test is most likely completely made up.
> Has there been any progress on measuring intelligence in a less biased fashion?
Of course there was progress in reducing bias in tests. For example, older IQ tests often contained questions about history, which is more an evidence of cultural background than of raw intelligence. Or verbal tasks, which disadvantage people who don't take the test in their first language. Modern tests are more about patterns, see e.g. Raven's Progressive Matrices. Yes, even this can be discriminatory against e.g. blind people. It's not perfect, but there is definitely a progress.
- throwaway6575 7y agoThe idea that a "scientific consensus" exists on IQ makes it sound like stronger than it actually is - the field of psychology is much less rigorous than actual hard sciences and the bar to clear is very low there. That IQ is universally accepted among psychologists despite a number of very obvious glaring flaws is more damning against psychologists than adding to the credibility of the concept.