5 ms·
I think the IQ test has been mythologized in a way that people feel it is a perfect representative of intelligence and is somehow unable to be improved upon and
by etempleton 4y ago
I think the IQ test has been mythologized in a way that people feel it is a perfect representative of intelligence and is somehow unable to be improved upon and therefor a true measure of god-given intelligence.
This is patently rediculous. If you have ever taken an IQ test you would know the types of question are easily practiced and improved upon. The modern IQ test is used to identify potential learning disabilities by psychologists and beyond that is not really considered.
- api 4y agoI have personally scored more than 15 points differently at different times in my life. The weight some people give to IQ is absurd. Psychometrics as a whole suffers a perpetual replication crisis.
- Retric 4y ago+/- 7 on a scale from 50 to 150+ using different tests at different periods is very stable. It’s kind of shocking how little stuff like lack of caffeine alters the results while people really do score widely differently. Not that I think the score actually means much, but consistency isn’t the problem.
- etempleton 4y agoIt would perhaps be a more meaningful test of intelligence if a person took it 100 times over a few years. This, however, is not very realistic.
- littlestymaar 4y agoWith 100 tests, the results would likely be skewed by the training …
- civilized 4y agoIQ is the most solid and well-replicated part of psychometrics and psychology in general. It doesn't belong in the same category as growth mindset and power pose and other pop psychology.
- etempleton 4y agoIt is, it just isn’t what most people think it is, nor was it ever meant to be.
- civilized 4y agoYou might be right, but I'm not quite sure what most people think it is, so I don't know.
- etempleton 4y agoIt is not intended as a measure of giftedness. It is intended to measure proper cognitive functioning. In pop culture it is often talked about as a measure of genius.
- civilized 4y agoI think it is a legitimate measure of giftedness at the top end. Genius, not so much. Having an IQ of, say, 160 means you're extraordinarily capable of a broad range of cognitive tasks. It's more than merely proper cognitive functioning. But it doesn't mean you will be a world-altering genius. There are many stories of people with staggering IQs who ended up doing nothing notable, or producing a lot of interesting and odd ideas that ultimately had no impact on the world.
- ravi-delia 4y agoIQ is great on a population level, when administered by people who know what they are doing. On an individual level, especially when administered by a non-expert (or worse, online), it just doesn't offer as much information as living life does. As in, if I know I'm not an idiot, it's more likely my IQ test is wrong than that I'm wrong.
- ksaj 4y agoI also feel that there would be a likely Time-of-Day difference in test results. For example (although only indirectly related), I can do Sudoku puzzles really well after I've been awake for a while. But for the first few hours of the day, I make lots of mistakes that I simply don't make once I'm fully awake and mobilized for the day.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- daenz 4y agoSince it is such a bad test, what test do you recommend to replace it?
- etempleton 4y agoI think it is an excellent tool for what psychologists use it for.
- daenz 4y agoSo it can identify disabilities, but not abilities?