Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

IQ tests are “meaningless and too simplistic”, claim researchers
Daily Mail (UK) ^ | 13:29 EST, 19 December 2012 | Nicholas McDermott

Posted on 12/19/2012 9:22:47 PM PST by Olog-hai

It will come as a relief to those who failed to shine when taking an IQ test.

After conducting the largest ever study of intelligence, researchers have found that far from indicating how clever you are, IQ testing is actually rather “meaningless”.

In a bid to investigate the value of IQ, scientists asked more than 100,000 participants to complete 12 tests that required planning, reasoning, memory and attention. They also filled in a survey on their background. They (the scientists) discovered that far from being down to one single factor, what is commonly regarded as intelligence is influenced by three different elements—short-term memory, reasoning, and verbal ability. …

Traditional IQ tests are “too simplistic”, according to the research, which found that what makes someone intelligent is too complex to boil down to a single exam. …

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Education; Science; Society
KEYWORDS: iq; iqtest

1 posted on 12/19/2012 9:22:58 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Liberals are proof of this. Most of them who claim to be certified geniuses are blithering idiots.


2 posted on 12/19/2012 9:26:09 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (U.S. elections have become nothing but another cheap ripoff of American Idol.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Back to this again. Rerun of the '70s.

Call me when Mensa lets the Hollywood star of the week that's in rehab join.

/johnny

3 posted on 12/19/2012 9:27:26 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Another lively thread it is going to be.

I’ll make my provocations early then.

(1) IQ tests measure the ability to perform on IQ tests.
(2) IQ tests measure the ability to solve puzzles.


4 posted on 12/19/2012 9:29:00 PM PST by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong! Ice cream is delicious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

I’d guess that the “researchers” scored well below 100.


5 posted on 12/19/2012 9:40:30 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
Test taking ability is a legitimate ability.

Most 'rats would fail and would therefore need to have their firearms confiscated.

6 posted on 12/19/2012 9:45:14 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

IQ tests measure abstract reasoning ability. That’s not nothing, but it ain’t everything either.

The traditional SAT test measures abstract reasoning ability AND reading comprehension. The weights assigned to the two parts were chosen so that the average scores of boys equals the average scores of girls. For a relatively cheap, standardized exam, this is a pretty good.


7 posted on 12/19/2012 10:00:25 PM PST by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redmen4ever
The weights assigned to the two parts were chosen so that the average scores of boys equals the average scores of girls

That's dumb. How can a test be predictive if it's weighted to support a particular outcome?

/johnny

8 posted on 12/19/2012 10:18:54 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
The author is absolutely wrong. There is a very high correlation between I.Q. and income. The causation is more difficult to establish, but who can doubt it?

That being established, I.Q. is a simple dipstick that measures quantity. It doesn't indicate if or how much is used or how it is applied.

9 posted on 12/19/2012 10:28:12 PM PST by Buffalo Head (Illigitimi non carborundum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Sour grapes. Only people who do not have high IQs think they are not distinguishing. Only people with high IQs know there is a difference.

One reason it is believed that IQ doesn’t matter is that so few people have truly high ones. I have several relatives with S. B. scores over 180. If I didn’t know them, and have the opportunity to learn from them, I wouldn’t think they were any more useful than a unicorn. If I were not related to them, I would never have met them. They are just so rare.

I would gladly pay salaries proportional to IQ. That would be a really good bet, all things being equal.


10 posted on 12/20/2012 12:45:08 AM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

‘IQ tests are “meaningless and too simplistic”, claim researchers’

All of them, surprisingly, with extremely low IQs.


11 posted on 12/20/2012 1:45:29 AM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

It’s remarkable that people here are still putting such strong stock in IQ tests when they were devised by such people as psychologists and eugenicists, and the tests thereof are still associated rather strongly with eugenics in particular. Just an observation.


12 posted on 12/20/2012 1:49:04 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Buffalo Head
There is a very high correlation between I.Q. and income.

That assumes an equal amount of work. For those with high IQs who do not apply themselves, the results are not so stellar, and those with low IQ (often willing to take risks, perhaps because they do not understand the downside), hard work pays off, more often than not.

I must also note that those of us who have performed well on the tests are more likely to defend them.

13 posted on 12/20/2012 1:59:50 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

IN OTHER WORDS YOU SHUD GET INTA PRINCETON O HARVARD BECAUSE YOU VOLUNTEERED AFTER (government) SKOOL TO CHANGE THE BEDPANS ON AIDS PATIENTS

***not joking here. These days your bllsht liberal life experiences (such as my brother was a drug attic ||***correct pronunciation|| and my mother was whore while I brought drinks to the piano player downstairs) will give you a leg up on many college admissions


14 posted on 12/20/2012 2:00:14 AM PST by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

IQ provides potential, not results.

A person of below-average IQ, no matter how hard he works, will never be a stellar performer in occupations requiring high IQ.

OTOH, a great many high-IQ people spend a lot of their time and energy bitching about the fact that people they work with who aren’t as smart are doing better than they are. Don’t believe me? Attend a Mensa meeting.

Think of it as height. A very occasional person under 6’ might succeed in the NBA, but in general those who succeed are above 6-6. The taller they are, the more likely to succeed. That’s because you can teach the skills, but you can’t teach someone to be 7-2.

Again, a 7-2 person unwilling to work hard would not succeed.


15 posted on 12/20/2012 2:33:35 AM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

You’re right. High IQ people are more likely to drop out of high school than average students. Unfortunately, being able to learn things quickly sometimes keeps individuals from gaining the character that is also required to succeed.


16 posted on 12/20/2012 3:42:16 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

In the sixties many leftists tried to spread the lie of the tabula rasa or blank slate. You were only what society had stuffed into your head. That myth has been thoroughly debunked. Humans are hardwired for many things including intelligence. If there is no such thing as IQ or meaningful intelligence tests, I could then examine the IQs of scientists, doctors, lawyers, mathematicians, engineers, architects, etal and find a lot of average or sub-average IQs. I don’t think I’d find that.


17 posted on 12/20/2012 4:40:08 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
I have seen mensa members shot out of the saddle (metaphorically) by people they looked down upon. Being smug about how smart you are doesn't get you anywhere, either.

I have also seen people who knew they were not as quick on the uptake work very hard and surpass others who theoretically should have run rings around them. They made up for (actually, overcompensated) for their deficits by working hard.

In the long run, being willing to put out the effort and not just rest on one's laurels is the most valuable in relatively ordinary life.

Sure, If you have a wee bit of trouble with nuclear physics, you might not get the top research position at CERN, but there are numerous other (often prosperous) niches to inhabit.

You probably could do well in the NBA if you can turn fast and shoot well, and while there is a definite height preference there, the little guy would have the same maneuverability advantage a two-year old has running from an adult. (Try that some time, they can turn on a dime and give you 9 cents change.) Combine that with the ability to hit quickly, often, and accurately from anywhere and if they could get a chance to show their stuff (past the height bias), they might do well. But littler guys won't put the effort in because they realize the height bias exists, and go off in other pursuits.

18 posted on 12/20/2012 6:48:33 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JRandomFreeper

With regard to the weights of the SAT that produce a total score: there is no good argument for any weight, and - logically - no good argument against any weight. In such a case as this “the rule of insufficient reason” says apply equal weights.

Also: the component scores are made available, along with the combined score. So, if anybody wanted, they could apply a different weighting scheme.


19 posted on 12/20/2012 7:10:55 AM PST by Redmen4ever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
IQ tests when they were devised by such people as psychologists and eugenicists...

We have a winner.

IQ tests were advocated by liberal Eugenics advocates like Margeret Sanger and Woodrow Wilson .

20 posted on 12/20/2012 7:33:26 AM PST by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
"That assumes...."

No, it doesn't assume anything, and neither should you. The data is what it is, and the math indicates a strong correlation.

21 posted on 12/20/2012 7:39:29 AM PST by Buffalo Head (Illigitimi non carborundum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: driftless2
In the sixties many leftists tried to spread the lie of the tabula rasa or blank slate.

The "tabula rasa" theory is the basis of free enterprise and personal liberty. It implies that anyone has the potential to rise above their circumstances through effort.

IQ is considered determinative, which makes it a convenient tool for nanny-state authoritarians to maintain their power over everyone else.

22 posted on 12/20/2012 7:46:23 AM PST by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Buffalo Head
There are plenty of high IQ individuals out there who will never have a high income--or do they not count? They didn't use it.

If a talent isn't applied nor developed, it doesn't mean squat. That is my point.

ALL other things being equal, your numbers will work out every time. Otherwise, you don't have a valid experiment.

But all other things are not always equal, and thus, you will find among those ranks people who applied what they had to work with and did better than those who may have had a higher IQ.

23 posted on 12/20/2012 8:31:11 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
I will not even attempt to explain statistical analysis to you. Suffice it to note while the average male is statistically significantly taller than the average female, that does not appropriately imply that every male is taller than every female. Don't let the trees blind you from seeing the forest. Good bye.
24 posted on 12/20/2012 9:28:35 AM PST by Buffalo Head (Illigitimi non carborundum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Buffalo Head

Adios!


25 posted on 12/20/2012 9:51:59 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
Tabula rasa came from Greek philosophy. Claiming that any of that has to do with free enterprise and personal liberty, especially when people like John Money used tabula rasa to raise the notion of “gender identity” as a “social construct” rather than anything definite—IOW, he used tabula rasa to justify transexualism and his work therein (so-called gender reassignment) as well as his theories on sexuality in general (mostly homosexuality)—is way, way beyond specious.
26 posted on 12/20/2012 10:42:59 AM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
No it isn't. I don't know where you picked that up. It's a leftist tool to spread the myth that since all people are born with no hardwired intelligence, every person on earth has the same apitude as every other person, and everybody has the same opportunities to excel in whatever field they want. And since nobody is hardwired to succeed in certain areas, anything anybody knows or does is the result of society putting it there. You couldn't have done it on your own, so whatever you earn is not yours. And males and females only act they way do because the patriarchy decides what the sexes know and how they act.

While everybody should have the same opportunity, people are different. Some people have high aptitudes in some areas (math,science, etc.) that others don't. The facts are incontrovertible: if you don't have the necessary high intelligence for a lot of jobs that need people with high IQs or aptitudes, you're not going to succeed. And the sexes are different as well as a number of studies have conclusively proved.

27 posted on 12/20/2012 11:44:31 AM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: tsomer
The "tabula rasa" theory is the basis of free enterprise and personal liberty.

Nope. It's the basis of the idea that mankind is infinitely malleable, that he can be changed and molded to fit the new socialist world.

It's the human equivalent of Lysenkoism, that genetics is a lie.

Eugenics is not the study of human differences and how they are (or are not) inherited, it's the promotion of selective breeding (or forced non-breeding by sterilization).

But let's assume that the Nazis and others who supported eugenics in the 20th killed 15M people.

The most aggressive supporters of the tabula rasa theory are Communists, since they can then dodge the question of how they're going to get around innate human nature. According to them, there IS no innate human nature. Tabula rasa.

The TR boys killed upwards of 100M people in the 20th, possibly as many as 150M.

If we're going to discredit a theory because of how it is used, shouldn't it be TR that's discredited, not eugenics?

28 posted on 12/20/2012 2:18:36 PM PST by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

I was a bad bad boy back in the 60’s and 70’s. Anyone remember those Minnesota test’s?
I never ever answered one correctly, I just randomly marked them.


29 posted on 12/20/2012 2:43:54 PM PST by Eye of Unk (A Civil Cold War in America is here, its already been declared.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Okay, I think I confused “tabula rasa” with human potential for maturation and adaptation. More than anything else, the notion of the mind as a blank slate implies a neutral state, that under the proper direction can be influenced, or set into motion, and through work, acquire whatever skill and understanding required to do what they want.

I was primarily referring to the intellectual capacity, which is what IQ tests claim to measure— much less to motivation, though this is also influenced externally.

I guess I should have wiki’d the term before jumping; I didn’t realize that as you imply ‘tabula rasa’ means it is of some totally plastic or malleable substance. There is an elastic core to people and I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise.

If you know of an appropriate term for this notion, I’d appreciate hearing it. And, thanks for the correction.


30 posted on 12/21/2012 11:38:34 AM PST by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
Nope. It's the basis of the idea that mankind is infinitely malleable, that he can be changed and molded to fit the new socialist world.

Not in the sense that John Locke referred to it-- his definition of the individual was more general and complex.

Eugenics is not the study of human differences and how they are (or are not) inherited, it's the promotion of selective breeding

I understand this, but determinism is implicit in genetics. Eugenics is it's practical application.

The most aggressive supporters of the tabula rasa theory are Communists,

Classic Liberal thinkers also, but not carried to the absurdly simplistic-- ultimately deterministic--extent of Stalin and Mao.

31 posted on 12/21/2012 12:33:06 PM PST by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson