4 ms·
IQ is the most strongly supported thing in the field of social science/psychology. Way more strongly supported than many of the concepts being used to steer gov
by ren_engineer 4y ago
IQ is the most strongly supported thing in the field of social science/psychology. Way more strongly supported than many of the concepts being used to steer government policy
The irony being that tons of social science academics desperately want to prove IQ is bunk and become famous for it, but their failures just keep proving it's legitimacy. If only they tried so hard to disprove their own pet theories
- devmor 4y agoIQ as a measurement of general intelligence has been repeatedly called into question and deligitimized with strong evidence by the fields of psychology and sociology for 30+ years for myriad reasons. In fact, most of the continuing proponents for IQ testing take the stance of "We don't have anything better, so we will use it even if it's deeply flawed." This viewpoint is so prevalent that a majority of studies on the subject in the last 10-15 years are skewed towards evaluating alternative testing methods. Here's a small sample of studies showing the different reasons IQ tests fail to measure intelligence: 1. [Fractionating Human Intelligence](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.022 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.022) 2. [Commentary on the pitfalls of IQ test standardization in multicultural settings](https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1204011 https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1204011) 3. [What IQ tests really measure.](https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.101.2.171) 4. [The Evils of the Use of IQ Tests ... In First and Second Language Learners](https://www.jstor.org/stable/20205010 https://www.jstor.org/stable/20205010)
- washadjeffmad 4y agoIntelligence quotients are relevant to developing infants. Think about it.