IQ

[petrushka.googol]

How far is intelligence quotient a true barometer of intelligence ?

 

This is a question that has often intrigued me.

 

Any pointers ?

[iNow]

They are pretty limited and often quite biased.

 

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb03/intelligent.aspx

http://psychology.about.com/od/intelligence/a/intelligence.htm

[John Cuthber]

IQ is a measure of how well you do in IQ tests.

[MonDie]

The Savanna-IQ interaction hypothesis posits that IQ actually reflects a unique system for solving evolutionarily novel problems, but I don't know how they distinguish "novel" problems since every problem will be somewhat novel, right...?

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/the-hypothesis%26quot;

[MonDie]

Whoopsies! This article (by the same blogger) is probably what you would want.

 

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/how-did-general-intelligence-evolve

[mothythewso]

Don't think you'll find many doctors, MD's or PhD's, with IQ's below 100.

[dimreepr]

So which is cleverest?

 

A Doctor with an IQ of 170 or a layman with an IQ of 170?

Edited January 18, 2015 by dimreepr

[Externet]

Should depend on the IQ of the IQ test preparer/composer/designer.

[John Cuthber]

So which is cleverest?

 

A Doctor with an IQ of 170 or a layman with an IQ of 170?

Whichever one of them is happier.

[mothythewso]

I think you meant to say "Which of the two is the more clever?"

Cleverness does not equate with intelligence. Weird Al is clever, Al Einstein was a genius.

[overtone]

 

 

IQ is a measure of how well you do in IQ tests.

It has some problems even with that - they keep having to adjust the tests, so that they work and are self-consistent in temporally or geographically or culturally separated populations.

 

btw: It turns out that measuring Quot scores (the proper name) in secret - with neither the subject or the test giver knowing the test is an IQ test - yields more consistent results over a wider range of subjects. So maybe we are disparaging Quot scores unfairly - the testing protocols may be the source of much noise in the signal.

 

I have run across two interesting correlations involving Quot scores, which agree with my own experiences: higher teaching ability - of anything, to anyone - correlates with higher Quot score (the only profession in which that correlation is found, and strong enough so that one could reasonably hire from a pool of basically knowledgable teachers on that basis alone); and there seems to be a correlation between Quot score and hat size, varying by style of hat - it's not always a linear correlation (in the Beret, for example, one finds lower Quot scores at both small and large sizes, with the higher Quot scores found among the midsize Berets. In the Cowboy it's a flat line).

 

That second correlation is from the prestigious publication Scientific American, in its review of the 1994 book "The Bell Curve".

[John Cuthber]

Quot scores (the proper name)

 

Says who?

[overtone]

Quot scores (the proper name) - -

 

 

Says who?

Scientific American, in their review of "The Bell Curve".

 

As the reviewer pointed out, it's more rigorous: it's a clear and unambiguous reference to a score on a test rather than whatever the score may or may not mean, it has a "Q" in it for ease of comprehension, and it avoids the misleading reference to "Intelligence" that tends to impose a lot of cultural and personal baggage on people's thinking.

 

It was a while ago and memory fades, but in addition to the correlation graphs for Berets and Cowboy Hats, I believe there were graphs for Bowlers, Fedoras, Tams, Ball Caps, Fezzes, and those headgear arrangements that hold beer containers and drinking hoses (a negative exponential, or exponential decay curve iirc).

Edited January 19, 2015 by overtone

[mothythewso]

Overtone:

?

[dimreepr]

I think you meant to say "Which of the two is the more clever?"

Cleverness does not equate with intelligence. Weird Al is clever, Al Einstein was a genius.

 

 

My lack of grammar doesn’t mean I lack insight, cleverness or intelligence means nothing without contentment. John you nailed it +1.

Edited January 20, 2015 by dimreepr

[John Cuthber]

Scientific American, in their review of "The Bell Curve".

 

 

http://xkcd.com/285/

[mothythewso]

Mr. reeper:

Don't think petruska's original question mentioned anything about contentment.

And as I have been admonished so many times in these threads, where's your citation. That's a pretty astounding conclusion, can you back it up with scientific fact?

FYI

Psychology Today says that "intelligence" is a construct that " includes problem solving abilities, spatial manipulation, and language acquisition." It also goes on to say that research can't come up with a correlation to a persons' success or general well-being, that's a far cry from your assertion. But there isn't a generally accepted scientific definition of "intelligence", the closest I was able to find is a pdf file listing about 50 accepted definitions(look under 'scientific definition of intelligence' in your browser) . Cleverness is generally defined as mental quickness, it's associated with high intelligence, but it's not a necessary nor sole attribute.

I'm content in the knowledge that I helped to clear up any confusion on your part.

[MonDie]

Psychology Today says that "intelligence" is a construct that " includes problem solving abilities, spatial manipulation, and language acquisition."

 

There's also "emotional intelligence", measured in the link as the ability to accurately interpret facial expressions.

http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/ei_quiz/

[iNow]

There are several theories of intelligence.

 

http://psychology.about.com/od/cognitivepsychology/p/intelligence.htm

[dimreepr]

Mr. reeper:

Don't think petruska's original question mentioned anything about contentment.

And as I have been admonished so many times in these threads, where's your citation. That's a pretty astounding conclusion, can you back it up with scientific fact?

 

 

Do I really need a citation for an opinion?

 

 

I'm content in the knowledge that I helped to clear up any confusion on your part.

 

 

 

I'm grateful for your concern and apologise for my imprecise use of the written word that lead to you misunderstanding my point.

[mothythewso]

Nah, you're off the hook on the citation; I'd be real suspicious of the source, anyway. Maybe we can pose a new question; would you rather have an IQ 170, vast wealth, and be miserable, or an IQ of 100, barely getting by financially, and be ridiculously happy. Personally, I could settle for an IQ of 135, half a million bucks or so in my IRA, and the occasional LOL moment. Good health would be nice, too.

Don't think it's an appropriate topic for this venue, however.

[dimreepr]

Nah, you're off the hook on the citation; I'd be real suspicious of the source, anyway. Maybe we can pose a new question; would you rather have an IQ 170, vast wealth, and be miserable, or an IQ of 100, barely getting by financially, and be ridiculously happy. Personally, I could settle for an IQ of 135, half a million bucks or so in my IRA, and the occasional LOL moment. Good health would be nice, too.

Don't think it's an appropriate topic for this venue, however.

 

 

 

Indeed, although I’d be happy to further explore the tangent should you care to post such a topic.

[mothythewso]

Perhaps General Philosophy.

[Willie71]

I do a lot of work with IQ even though I don't do the tests. I no longer look at the overall number, but at the scatter of the scores across the subscales to help kids/families make academic and career choices. Some people with average overall scores are gifted in subscales, and should focus their careers in those areas of strength. Being gifted in all areas is quite unlikely. I myself have an eidetic memory, but cannot remember a phone number, address, or name without exceptional effort. On the other hand, I can still see diagrams in text books from high school, and can remember parts of every conversation I have had in my life. I can remember the plot of every book, movie, or TV show I have ever seen. I can remember the history and treatment progression of over 2000 families, but if I met them on the street, I couldn't recall their name. In some areas, I would be scored in the mentally retarded range. I have seen too many kids labelled average or low average based on their overall score, when they have an area of gifted ness in the testing.

 

One of the problems with IQ testing is the reliance on verbal instructions to complete the tasks. This is probably optimal for less than 30% of the kids receiving the tests.

[MonDie]

vindicating Willie on the point about verbal testing.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-hidden-potential-of-autistic-kids/