4 ms·

IQ routinely gets destroyed. As an example, I was an undergraduate in the 1990s. My statistics class skewered the use of IQ back then. According to some friends

by hluska 2y ago

IQ routinely gets destroyed. As an example, I was an undergraduate in the 1990s. My statistics class skewered the use of IQ back then. According to some friends with undergraduates, they still use that as an example of statistics being used badly.

hirvi74 2y ago
People say that, but then people like me are administered the tests for clinical diagnostic purposes (right or wrong), and even my state still considers the scores to be a valid measurement of intelligence, and thus a factor in whether someone convicted of murder is eligible for the death penalty. I think the concept is bullshit myself, but regardless the damage is done, and still being done for what it is worth.
- Izkata 2y ago
  My crude understanding is, we don't have a good way to calibrate above-average scores, but it is a good measure for below average (provided there aren't arbitrary barriers like the language it's in).
- hluska 2y ago
  That’s too bad, but I replied to something that claimed there is no criticism of IQ. IQ is criticized and used. Those are not exclusive states.
  - hughesjj 2y ago
    Yup. Polygraphs are still used in the intelligence community and court too. I'm seeing the tide turn (imo), but by no means am I claiming it's no longer used (regardless of merit). I acknowledge I'm starting a personal anecdote which is subject to my own biases such as cohort affects.
Natsu 2y ago
IQ is an interesting one. There are indeed plenty of issues in actually measuring it and deciding what we're even measuring to begin with, but at the same time, I've heard some people try to say it doesn't even exist at all. Which seems odd, because I've yet to see anyone who doesn't believe that stupidity exists and it's the other side of the same coin.
- hirvi74 2y ago
  > I've yet to see anyone who doesn't believe that stupidity exists and it's the other side of the same coin. I do not think that is the argument though. Clearly, there is some sort of distribution of all human attributes. I think the argument is in how (in)accurately something as qualitative and arbitrary as intelligence can be measured. I like the analogy of athleticism. Some people are more athletic than others, but again, such differences are generally highly contextual. I am sure some sort of test composed of factors like the number of push-ups, sit-ups, and time trial of a 100m dash could be used to generate some sort of AQ (athletic quotient). However, scoring high on the 100m dash might positively correlate with performance in sports, but I would not wager that a high AQ is truly indicative of athletic performance as a whole. At least not in any transitive sense when mapped to many sports. For example, Usain Bolt might have a very high AQ because of his running ability, but his AQ might not serve him well in a game of ice hockey or swimming.
  - Natsu 2y ago
    Sure, but in the case of a hypothetical AQ, we could do factor analysis and pull out different things, like the strength of various muscles or muscle groups, like all pure running tests had strong correlation with things like leg muscles. In IQ, this has famously been done and found that a single factor dominates. Or when they saw that knowledge of arcane sport rules interfered, they could look for a more pure test of ability rather than knowledge, which they did with IQ by going from tests of specific factual knowledge to Raven's progressive matrices. And when you do that kind of work, you find that you can develop better measures that have a lot of predictive power for whole populations, even if they do not tell you, say, how many goals they'll score in their next hockey game.

by hluska 2y ago

hirvi74 2y ago

People say that, but then people like me are administered the tests for clinical diagnostic purposes (right or wrong), and even my state still considers the scores to be a valid measurement of intelligence, and thus a factor in whether someone convicted of murder is eligible for the death penalty. I think the concept is bullshit myself, but regardless the damage is done, and still being done for what it is worth.

Izkata 2y ago
My crude understanding is, we don't have a good way to calibrate above-average scores, but it is a good measure for below average (provided there aren't arbitrary barriers like the language it's in).
hluska 2y ago
That’s too bad, but I replied to something that claimed there is no criticism of IQ. IQ is criticized and used. Those are not exclusive states.
- hughesjj 2y ago
  Yup. Polygraphs are still used in the intelligence community and court too. I'm seeing the tide turn (imo), but by no means am I claiming it's no longer used (regardless of merit). I acknowledge I'm starting a personal anecdote which is subject to my own biases such as cohort affects.

Natsu 2y ago

IQ is an interesting one. There are indeed plenty of issues in actually measuring it and deciding what we're even measuring to begin with, but at the same time, I've heard some people try to say it doesn't even exist at all. Which seems odd, because I've yet to see anyone who doesn't believe that stupidity exists and it's the other side of the same coin.

hirvi74 2y ago
> I've yet to see anyone who doesn't believe that stupidity exists and it's the other side of the same coin. I do not think that is the argument though. Clearly, there is some sort of distribution of all human attributes. I think the argument is in how (in)accurately something as qualitative and arbitrary as intelligence can be measured. I like the analogy of athleticism. Some people are more athletic than others, but again, such differences are generally highly contextual. I am sure some sort of test composed of factors like the number of push-ups, sit-ups, and time trial of a 100m dash could be used to generate some sort of AQ (athletic quotient). However, scoring high on the 100m dash might positively correlate with performance in sports, but I would not wager that a high AQ is truly indicative of athletic performance as a whole. At least not in any transitive sense when mapped to many sports. For example, Usain Bolt might have a very high AQ because of his running ability, but his AQ might not serve him well in a game of ice hockey or swimming.
- Natsu 2y ago
  Sure, but in the case of a hypothetical AQ, we could do factor analysis and pull out different things, like the strength of various muscles or muscle groups, like all pure running tests had strong correlation with things like leg muscles. In IQ, this has famously been done and found that a single factor dominates. Or when they saw that knowledge of arcane sport rules interfered, they could look for a more pure test of ability rather than knowledge, which they did with IQ by going from tests of specific factual knowledge to Raven's progressive matrices. And when you do that kind of work, you find that you can develop better measures that have a lot of predictive power for whole populations, even if they do not tell you, say, how many goals they'll score in their next hockey game.