MBTI Type and I.Q.

[lastrailway]

Originally Posted by ptgatsby

...A clinician oversees IQ tests for reliability and because of the nature of the tests. Same reason MBTI isn't taken and just scored, but is done through a clinician of sorts...

....In general, T has no significant correlation to IQ... N has a very significant correlation.

It is important to note that it is only one sub-trait that is at all significant in this discussion - "openness to ideas". N includes it indirectly, but has a very different distribution of N/S, making the pool smaller, thus seemingly higher, while the FFM trait makes it easier to measure that one factor in general, showing that the other factors are not significant at all...

Do you know how exactly is evaluated a "normal" IQ test? By "normal" meaning not the online IQ tests one can take for free and have them automatically scored.

What I do not understand is how an IQ test is related with openess to ideas. If I recall well it mesures abilities like memory, spacial and visual sense, etc. Aren't those abilities typically related with Ss?
As for the T I said before, thinking about it better, you are probably right, because the T/F axis does not examine the ability to think or feel, but the preference on a more thinking or more impulsive way of reacting to external stimulis. So it doesn't have to be related with either IQ or intelligence

Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser

As far as MBTI the most important trait for doing math is having T. But even then you have to have some aptitude for it also. On the other hand I think the second most important trait for doing math is N. I wouldn't doubt that there are a few NF's that have developed some good math skills, but without the T I doubt that they could explain their reasoning as clearly as a thinker. N is very useful for problem solving though. It's quite possible to be able to solve a problem without giving a clear explanation for how you arrived at your answer.

Why T and N are important traits for doing math? Math is all about learn a set of pre-existing systems and apply them correctly. Math, just as logic, are ways of though that are develloped sigles ago

Originally Posted by Santtu

I agree with you to great extent. "Science" does not define how to make a theory, assumption or a hypothesis, with the exception in the most well-defined, narrowed-down details. Strict adherence to validated procedures is of course needed to maintain validity of the experiments as well as the theories. It is easier to notice deviance from parameters with S-type thinking, when the expected value is known already. With all the fact-checking and double-checking, and N person is capable to do that job too.

N is instead greatly useful to form new hyphothesis and to work in an uncharted territory. I wouldn't say that N is required, but it helps. S (with recalling details exactly) is required, but science is not about using details in the way they have always been used, but in an innovative way. Well, I would say that a S person could learn the "innovative" way as the regular way and do good science. SP are innovative in another sense, but do they choose scientific careers so often?

Both N and S type of scientist need to study existing publications too to find where the state of research is going and what would need to be studied next...

I generally agree with you, though even the new hypothesis usually is hardly as innovative as one would expect. Science, with all the specialisation of today is roughly working in some predefined ways. I believe that the N or S preference might be more important when you actually have to evaluate the results/data than when you form the new hypothesis. That said, I am referring mostly to applied sciences than to abstact

[Splittet]

SENG: Articles & Resources - Gifted kids at risk: Who's listening?

IQ correlates positively with a preference for introversion, intuition (by far largest correlation), thinking and perceiving.

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Originally Posted by Splittet

SENG: Articles & Resources - Gifted kids at risk: Who's listening?

IQ correlates positively with a preference for introversion, intuition (by far largest correlation), thinking and perceiving.

Actually according to that article "giftedness" correlates positively with a preference for introversion, intuition, thinking and perceiving. Just skimming the article I couldn't find how they were defining giftedness though. It seemed like they were using a variety of sources: IQ tests, SAT scores, etc..., so I'm skeptical as to what type of uniformity they have among all of their data sources.

[Splittet]

Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser

Actually according to that article "giftedness" correlates positively with a preference for introversion, intuition, thinking and perceiving. Just skimming the article I couldn't find how they were defining giftedness though. It seemed like they were using a variety of sources: IQ tests, SAT scores, etc..., so I'm skeptical as to what type of uniformity they have among all of their data sources.

I wouldn't necessarily just base my statement on that article, would I? (Since intelligence is a major interest of mine, I have seen a lot of IQ data over the years) Anyhow, the article does say the average IQ of all the N types is higher than those of the S types. I am certain introversion is positively correlated with IQ. All data I have seen seem to suggest thinking is just slightly positively correlated with IQ, but basically I think there is very little difference. About the J/P I have seen different data, but I think the article is correct, since giftedness seem to have a pretty strong correlation with perceiving, I think it must be positively correlated with IQ. But sure, I would love to see some better data on this.

[ygolo]

Originally Posted by Splittet

I wouldn't necessarily just base my statement on that article, would I? (Since intelligence is a major interest of mine, I have seen a lot of IQ data over the years) Anyhow, the article does say the average IQ of all the N types is higher than those of the S types. I am certain introversion is positively correlated with IQ. All data I have seen seem to suggest thinking is just slightly positively correlated with IQ, but basically I think there is very little difference. About the J/P I have seen different data, but I think the article is correct, since giftedness seem to have a pretty strong correlation with perceiving, I think it must be positively correlated with IQ. But sure, I would love to see some better data on this.

Quite frankly, this research is better presented than most IQ sources I have seen.

The Author provides an incredibly long list of references, and attributes basically every stat he used to a primary, or made clear how it was derived. In addition, p-values are mentioned along with key correlations. If all IQ research accessible to the web-surfer was this good, I would be far less skeptical. (There is still the charge of the "g Factor" being an unfalsifiable entity, and that ad-hoc hypothesizing is what keeps the notion alive, by constantly changing the IQ tests).

[Uberfuhrer]

Originally Posted by Splittet

SENG: Articles & Resources - Gifted kids at risk: Who's listening?

IQ correlates positively with a preference for introversion, intuition (by far largest correlation), thinking and perceiving.

So are we saying that a retarded person cannot be Intuitive?

[Splittet]

Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer

So are we saying that a retarded person cannot be Intuitive?

No, a retarded person might very well be an intuitive. Some might say even I fit the description.

Anyhow, thank you for having such good faith in my ability to read statistics. I wonder what I did to deserve it ...

[Uberfuhrer]

Originally Posted by Splittet

No, a retarded person might very well be an intuitive. Some might say even I fit the description.

Anyhow, thank you for having such huge faith in my ability to read statistics.

I was gonna say, because most of my high school and middle school years consisted of being in special ed classes (or classes for social misfits), and I was mainly placed in remedial classes.

[TaylorS]

Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer

Yeah, but the S would more likely use math to figure out the answer, while the N will use a hunch. I think actual science is an ST field, while pseudo-science is NT, since pseudo-science is a combination of speculation and systems (as opposed to people) orientation.

I think a better way of stating this is NT = Theory amd ST = Experiment/Observation. Most scientists are probably ST lab workers, naturalists, field geologists working for a mining company, etc.

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by lastrailway

Do you know how exactly is evaluated a "normal" IQ test? By "normal" meaning not the online IQ tests one can take for free and have them automatically scored.

It depends on the test. The original IQ tests were quite broad and meant to be predictive of performance in the military. A lot of tests are hangovers from those days.

The more recent ones that have been widely validated and used for research (WAIS and KAIT are the two I keep mentioning, but there are others) tend to have a pretty broad battery of sub tests, everything from recall to word play.

The questions themselves are suppose to test the ability to manipulate and store data, from the past and from the present. For example, a common example on word play is the "Two birds with one stone" or "eggs in one basket". These kind require a certain degree of knowledge beforehand but the tester is looking to see if the mind is able to connect abstractions into concrete examples, etc. Like the free tests - the patterns, etc - those test fluid intelligence a bit more, but are often not built correctly online. A decent example of a more layman's version of these, but have some validation, are the top tests here. They are different than the aptitude tests that are down below.

What I do not understand is how an IQ test is related with openess to ideas. If I recall well it mesures abilities like memory, spacial and visual sense, etc. Aren't those abilities typically related with Ss?

Well, not to put it in too fine of terms... IQ does correlate to openness and to N and is more or less anti-correlated with S/ -openness. It is better to start from there rather than ask the opposite.

The reason why, and this is all theory, is that those that are open to new ideas end up having two ramifications which might be related - they absorb information faster, better and broader and they are more willing to change bad information with good information. Same theory goes for the P>J, I>E.

The tests are suppose to be a battery of sub-tests in order to avoid the aptitude problem. For example, the difference between doing basic word-problems (arithmetic) might depend on all sorts of outside factors, like job/training/education... but the likelyhood of being able to do those at the 130 IQ level and the ability to memorize and repeat/transform a string a numbers is unlikely - most major tests will have 2-5 major groupings of tests, each with 2-5 under that. In the WAIS, those two are part of the same 'verbal' category, as I believe the contradictions and common sense parts are. (Can google WAIS IQ to get a boatload of information on the test.)

The ability to do all of these things well comes down to the rate at which you can absorb and transform information - both from your past and from the present. This generally prefers people who self-test to N.

As for the T I said before, thinking about it better, you are probably right, because the T/F axis does not examine the ability to think or feel, but the preference on a more thinking or more impulsive way of reacting to external stimulis. So it doesn't have to be related with either IQ or intelligence

It just depends on the factors being measured and the tests being used. Using normal distribution, ie: FFM/Big Five, the most significant trait/sub-trait is openness (to ideas, as a sub trait). MBTI does create a few artifacts on the other three dimensions, so while it is correct to say that T/I/P have higher IQs, it's not as clear how accurate it is (or relevent.)

However, it has been shown that it can be significant inside MBTI and outside... But it isn't exactly agreed upon.

A lot of it has to do with distribution, arguments over mean/average, blah blah. Outside of just being a curiousity, I don't consider the I/T/P (and equiv FFM traits, although N- shows influence on some sub-traits in IQ) very important in understanding it... this is very notable when you break down into the 25 or so sub-traits that FFM tends to use and only one sub-trait significantly stands out.

I should mention that despite how I may sound, I have real problems with IQ. They have become exceptionally linear (strong correlations to pure academic testing, which proceeds into college, then into good jobs based upon that alone) and I fear are heading stronger that way due to the need to validate the tests against external factors.

And of course, all of this is pretty topical. Self-directed tests should never correlate that strongly against something that challenges the person... and the correlations across the board tend to be weaker than people think. In a way, the personality-> IQ correlation is akin to asking a person "Are you smart?" in a round about way.