8 ms·

Putting aside the question of the selection effect (which, frankly, seems like it could only realistically go in one direction, unless you want to propose a pla

Putting aside the question of the selection effect (which, frankly, seems like it could only realistically go in one direction, unless you want to propose a plausible mechanism by which people with higher than average IQ are _less_ likely to sit for these standardized exams)... You could also spend 5 seconds Googling the question and find that that this is not exactly an untrod ground in academic literature. The relationship is strong and well-established, far more so than almost any other result from the social sciences. Also, yes, test results, can, in fact, be improved by studying (or other things!). This does not mean that they are not strongly correlated to IQ. Reality is generally not monocausal. I don't see how this contradicts the original claim.

austincheney 6y ago
> This does not mean that they are not strongly correlated to IQ. It does not mean they are related or that they aren’t, which only suggests you are missing the point: selection bias. > You could also spend 5 seconds Googling the question and find that that this is not exactly an untrod ground in academic literature. It has been studied exhaustively. The relation between IQ and academic performance is poor according to research from the APA in addition to the personal opinions of people who perform college selection professionally. That correlation is better than a random guess but isn’t anything close to alignment. People, despite the evidence, need this to be true. After all it is a money making industry. Standardized college selection tests are like tax preparation, an industry that can be easily eliminated by a more simplistic unbiased and more effective tool. With enough effort to the contrary the arguments begin to sound like a self-sustaining fraud built around a fictional necessity and a bunch of bandwagon fallacies.
- comp_throw7 6y ago
  We aren't talking about the relation between IQ and academic performance (although that is also clearly established to be significant). We're talking about the relationship between IQ and ACT/SAT scores. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/ https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf I certainly don't "need" it to be true - things are either true or they aren't, and needing or wanting differently doesn't change that. "That correlation is better than a random guess but isn’t anything close to alignment." Do you want to make a more specific claim? Again, the original claim you're attempting to rebut is "Many test scores (e.g. ACT) are heavily IQ/g-predictive." How strong does the effect need to be? Since, again, nobody is claiming that it's 100% predictive, merely a significant factor. Do you want to give me an effect size? Keep in mind the typical social psychology effect size comes out to r usually between 0.15 and 0.3: https://psyarxiv.com/2epc4/ https://psyarxiv.com/2epc4/ https://jenni.uchicago.edu/Spencer_Conference/Representative%20Papers/Richard%20et%20al,%202003.pdf https://jenni.uchicago.edu/Spencer_Conference/Representative...
  - austincheney 6y ago
    > We aren't talking about the relation between IQ and academic performance (although that is also clearly established to be significant). We're talking about the relationship between IQ and ACT/SAT scores. What is the practical difference? > I certainly don't "need" it to be true - things are either true or they aren't, and needing or wanting differently doesn't change that. You are confusing truth for fact. Truth is where you hang your belief. To be clear this is the basis of the APA's opinion on the matter: http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/pdfFiles/IQ_Neisser2.pdf http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/pdfFiles/IQ_Neisser2.pdf and the APA suggests there is only about a 81% alignment between IQ and academic/test performance. A 50% alignment, when there are only 2 items to compare, is random guess. All opinions that test results correlate with performance are, either directly or indirectly, rooted in Lewis Terman's famous work on IQ which has been disqualified many times. His research wasn't even good and failed in his own assessment over a longitudinal study. Yet, people still follow this garbage. EDIT: May this serve as some food for thought: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/200909/the-truth-about-the-termites https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/2009...

austincheney 6y ago

> This does not mean that they are not strongly correlated to IQ. It does not mean they are related or that they aren’t, which only suggests you are missing the point: selection bias. > You could also spend 5 seconds Googling the question and find that that this is not exactly an untrod ground in academic literature. It has been studied exhaustively. The relation between IQ and academic performance is poor according to research from the APA in addition to the personal opinions of people who perform college selection professionally. That correlation is better than a random guess but isn’t anything close to alignment. People, despite the evidence, need this to be true. After all it is a money making industry. Standardized college selection tests are like tax preparation, an industry that can be easily eliminated by a more simplistic unbiased and more effective tool. With enough effort to the contrary the arguments begin to sound like a self-sustaining fraud built around a fictional necessity and a bunch of bandwagon fallacies.

comp_throw7 6y ago
We aren't talking about the relation between IQ and academic performance (although that is also clearly established to be significant). We're talking about the relationship between IQ and ACT/SAT scores. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6963451/ https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf I certainly don't "need" it to be true - things are either true or they aren't, and needing or wanting differently doesn't change that. "That correlation is better than a random guess but isn’t anything close to alignment." Do you want to make a more specific claim? Again, the original claim you're attempting to rebut is "Many test scores (e.g. ACT) are heavily IQ/g-predictive." How strong does the effect need to be? Since, again, nobody is claiming that it's 100% predictive, merely a significant factor. Do you want to give me an effect size? Keep in mind the typical social psychology effect size comes out to r usually between 0.15 and 0.3: https://psyarxiv.com/2epc4/ https://psyarxiv.com/2epc4/ https://jenni.uchicago.edu/Spencer_Conference/Representative%20Papers/Richard%20et%20al,%202003.pdf https://jenni.uchicago.edu/Spencer_Conference/Representative...
- austincheney 6y ago
  > We aren't talking about the relation between IQ and academic performance (although that is also clearly established to be significant). We're talking about the relationship between IQ and ACT/SAT scores. What is the practical difference? > I certainly don't "need" it to be true - things are either true or they aren't, and needing or wanting differently doesn't change that. You are confusing truth for fact. Truth is where you hang your belief. To be clear this is the basis of the APA's opinion on the matter: http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/pdfFiles/IQ_Neisser2.pdf http://psych.colorado.edu/~carey/pdfFiles/IQ_Neisser2.pdf and the APA suggests there is only about a 81% alignment between IQ and academic/test performance. A 50% alignment, when there are only 2 items to compare, is random guess. All opinions that test results correlate with performance are, either directly or indirectly, rooted in Lewis Terman's famous work on IQ which has been disqualified many times. His research wasn't even good and failed in his own assessment over a longitudinal study. Yet, people still follow this garbage. EDIT: May this serve as some food for thought: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/200909/the-truth-about-the-termites https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/2009...