5 ms·

I agree. As highly controversial as IQ is, it does measure something, and is correlated to certain outcomes. I scanned the paper, but I don't recall if this wa

I agree. As highly controversial as IQ is, it does measure something, and is correlated to certain outcomes. I scanned the paper, but I don't recall if this was just K-12, or also higher ed, but I wonder if this result would fall apart in more complex subjects. Also, no matter what the learning rate really is, if a student isn't interested in the subject, good luck getting them to learn much at all!

peterfirefly 4y ago
[flagged]
- TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
  IQ is controversial because it's not obvious: 1. How it relates to g-factor and whether it tests it accurately 2. How it's influenced by parenting and class/cultural factors, including class-specific parenting practices 3. How it relates to academic and professional success 4. How much apparent academic and professional success is influenced by parental cheating and influence - including bequests, donations, "special" deals behind the scenes, in-group networking, and so on It's not controversial that some people are smarter than others in specific ways, just as some people are better athletes than others. But there are a lot of unanswered questions about what "smarter" really means, how broad the definition should be, how much it's defined by covert and contingent expectations, whether "smart" behaviours are innate or acculturated, who defines them, and how/why.
  - peterfirefly 4y ago
    > How it's influenced by parenting and class/cultural factors, including class-specific parenting practices According to adoption studies, there's barely any influence at all. We can measure a little when the kids are young (the better the measurements, the less we can measure). It gradually disappears as they get older.
- bell-cot 4y ago
  IQ is controversial because it is a vague and one-dimensional metric, which all sorts of idiots are both delusional about and obsessed with.
  - scotty79 4y ago
    It's popular because it correlates with incredible number of other measurements. Some pertaining to life's successes and failures. No other measurement is like that.
    - bell-cot 4y ago
      Nationality at birth, parental income, skin color, height, highest degree completed, etc. are also highly correlated. But yes, I recognize the "like a scratch-off lottery ticket which might reveal that you should be a Big Winner In Life" psychological appeal of IQ tests. Especially for people who are not actually experiencing any of that Big Winner in Life stuff, or have other issues. Such as needing humanity to be a Well-Ordered Set ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-order ) with a convenient and easily-rationalized "who gets to look down upon whom" metric.
      - scotty79 4y ago
        Yes. There are few measurements that also correlate with various outcomes. But I don't think anything is as broad as IQ which is just the speed at which you can do logic puzzles. Isn't it interesting? That something so silly correlates so strongly with so many things? The metrics you mention are kind of obvious in comparison and about as interesting as the hypothesis that "it's better to be healthy and rich than sick and poor". As for comparing humans with each other I agree it's totally stupid. Personally I blame religions and their simplistic concept of good and evil for this eagerness of comparing humans and putting them on a spectrum of quality.
        ryan93 4y ago
        Does china strike you as particularly religious? You dont even need IQ tests. Students naturally fall on a distribution if tested. And those students generally test in the same range their whole life.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  You can practice IQ tests and get better at them. Did you become more intelligent because your IQ score got better?
  - scotty79 4y ago
    I think you can improve your result a little bit, but not much.
    - lern_too_spel 4y ago
      This goes against what we have seen with the Flynn effect in multiple East Asian countries.
      - scotty79 4y ago
        I don't think that the cause of the Flynn effect is practicing IQ tests a lot.
        lern_too_spel 4y ago
        The point is that you can improve IQ scores a lot by education, some of which helps you do better on IQ tests. Whether it is by practicing IQ tests specifically is not relevant.
        scotty79 4y ago
        Those effects are not large: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brainstorm/201806/how-much-does-education-really-boost-intelligence https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brainstorm/201806/ho... 1 point per year of education is the lower estimate.
        giardini 4y ago
        I'm no fan of educating people simply to score higher IQs. But the effect of education could be very large: e.g., give an illiterate person an IQ test, educate them and repeat. The change will be ~100 points. To be correct you can improve IQ up to a point (depending on the individual) with education.

peterfirefly 4y ago

[flagged]

TheOtherHobbes 4y ago
IQ is controversial because it's not obvious: 1. How it relates to g-factor and whether it tests it accurately 2. How it's influenced by parenting and class/cultural factors, including class-specific parenting practices 3. How it relates to academic and professional success 4. How much apparent academic and professional success is influenced by parental cheating and influence - including bequests, donations, "special" deals behind the scenes, in-group networking, and so on It's not controversial that some people are smarter than others in specific ways, just as some people are better athletes than others. But there are a lot of unanswered questions about what "smarter" really means, how broad the definition should be, how much it's defined by covert and contingent expectations, whether "smart" behaviours are innate or acculturated, who defines them, and how/why.
- peterfirefly 4y ago
  > How it's influenced by parenting and class/cultural factors, including class-specific parenting practices According to adoption studies, there's barely any influence at all. We can measure a little when the kids are young (the better the measurements, the less we can measure). It gradually disappears as they get older.
bell-cot 4y ago
IQ is controversial because it is a vague and one-dimensional metric, which all sorts of idiots are both delusional about and obsessed with.
- scotty79 4y ago
  It's popular because it correlates with incredible number of other measurements. Some pertaining to life's successes and failures. No other measurement is like that.
  - bell-cot 4y ago
    Nationality at birth, parental income, skin color, height, highest degree completed, etc. are also highly correlated. But yes, I recognize the "like a scratch-off lottery ticket which might reveal that you should be a Big Winner In Life" psychological appeal of IQ tests. Especially for people who are not actually experiencing any of that Big Winner in Life stuff, or have other issues. Such as needing humanity to be a Well-Ordered Set ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-order https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-order ) with a convenient and easily-rationalized "who gets to look down upon whom" metric.
    - scotty79 4y ago
      Yes. There are few measurements that also correlate with various outcomes. But I don't think anything is as broad as IQ which is just the speed at which you can do logic puzzles. Isn't it interesting? That something so silly correlates so strongly with so many things? The metrics you mention are kind of obvious in comparison and about as interesting as the hypothesis that "it's better to be healthy and rich than sick and poor". As for comparing humans with each other I agree it's totally stupid. Personally I blame religions and their simplistic concept of good and evil for this eagerness of comparing humans and putting them on a spectrum of quality.
      - ryan93 4y ago
        Does china strike you as particularly religious? You dont even need IQ tests. Students naturally fall on a distribution if tested. And those students generally test in the same range their whole life.
SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
You can practice IQ tests and get better at them. Did you become more intelligent because your IQ score got better?
- scotty79 4y ago
  I think you can improve your result a little bit, but not much.
  - lern_too_spel 4y ago
    This goes against what we have seen with the Flynn effect in multiple East Asian countries.
    - scotty79 4y ago
      I don't think that the cause of the Flynn effect is practicing IQ tests a lot.
      - lern_too_spel 4y ago
        The point is that you can improve IQ scores a lot by education, some of which helps you do better on IQ tests. Whether it is by practicing IQ tests specifically is not relevant.
        scotty79 4y ago
        Those effects are not large: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brainstorm/201806/how-much-does-education-really-boost-intelligence https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brainstorm/201806/ho... 1 point per year of education is the lower estimate.
        giardini 4y ago
        I'm no fan of educating people simply to score higher IQs. But the effect of education could be very large: e.g., give an illiterate person an IQ test, educate them and repeat. The change will be ~100 points. To be correct you can improve IQ up to a point (depending on the individual) with education.