Quote:
Originally Posted by athenian200
Well, they never claimed to measure your intelliegence, only your intelligence quotient. I would say that the tests measure a person's aptitude in math and language, but it can't measure perceptiveness or creativity. So that might be where the disparity exists. Also, the people with low scores might have just gotten questions they didn't happen to know the answers to, even though their intelligence is actually quite high generally. It could also have just been a hard test, or a bad day.
|
There is a pretty high standard deviation (15 points) on IQ tests. However, it has been shown that the improvement gap (ie: not familiar with questions) is mostly present on people who had little to no formal training (ie: 3rd world country farmer), all the way to extensive preparation. And even then, the gF factor is pretty consistent. For most people, your IQ variates quite a bit less than the SD, no matter how much you prepare.
Short of cheating, of course
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splittet
It annoys me how people seem unable to accept that IQ tests try to measure intelligence, not creativity, how socially skilled a person is, if the person is a good one, is likeable or whatever people think is important. It is like criticizing a physics book for not saying enough about baseball.
|
That's one thing that I find with IQ tests. Too many people get hung up on "intelligence" being the golden standard of a person. It measures what it measures, it correlates to what it correlates. So many things matter in life... Attacking the test or reading more into the test are just flip sides of that sensitivity to "IQ".
(I still want to take the KAIT to see how it's done. Too bad it's so damn expensive to get a "real" IQ test. BAH.)