-
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.
How do types perceive IQ tests?
- Thread starter Blackmail!
- Start date
BlueScreen
Fail 2.0
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2008
- Messages
- 2,668
- MBTI Type
- YMCA
Beat ya!
I don't think type has anything to do with how people view IQ tests. However, type does have a strong influence over shoe preference.
Is it timed or something? I just woke up before so wasn't really rushing...
On the thread topic, I think IQ tests are a novelty, not really anything that says much about a person. Degrees can be the same sometimes. I've seen absolutely brilliant people in areas I've worked in who are the least "qualified" but most competent and cluey about it. And I've seen people with lots of degrees who have no clues about anything.
nozflubber
DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2008
- Messages
- 2,078
- MBTI Type
- Hype
"So, how do you perceive IQs? How do you think your type would perceive it, and why? How does this perception affect type, according to you?
Why are so many so-called "INTJs" awful liars when it comes to IQ (even if this contradicts their type description)?
According to your own opinion, what are the psychological reasons behind this odd behaviour?"
First, it helps to understand where the tests came from. We studied intelligence heavily in Tests and Measurements so I'll chime in with what I recall.
As was mentioned, Binet was working for the French government to develop a simple yet effective way of identifying "imbecile" children that needed more attention to keep them up with other children. The French have a very enlightened philosophy with regards to education and it goes like this: Everyone will learn basic math skills, everyone will learn fine literature, and everyone will learn languages because this is essential to creating a civic-minded French citizen - We don't care who they are or how much help they need, they'll get it. What resulted was the earliest and most familiar forms of the construct as intelligence: Mental Age divided by Chronological age, and was intended just to place children into classes that best fit them.
This notion has changed, however, and intelligence in the modern vernacular might be equated to "mental ego" as has been adequately demonstrated in this thread by people who don't know what they're talking about. If there is a valid relationship between type and Intelligence it begins and ends with that: ego. Any psychological test is only a SAMPLE of human behavior and it does not equate to competance. If I had to define intelligence it would be such: The ability to predict how a particular test WANTS you to answer each item. As such, intelligence tests sample HIGHLY from your ability to.... yes, you said it right Blackmail, take tests
IQ tests won't tell you someone's ability to follow a dialectic, nitpick through the item answers (I can do this with ANY IQ test that is forced response), or their ability to come up with a theory or fine work of art (creativity). Although there is evidence from factor analysis demonstrating construct validity for a G-factor intelligence (or GENERAL intelligence accross all kinds/styles of tasks), the correlation is small and it's not really clear what G-intelligence is, if anything.
The only thing an IQ score might help you to predict at our age (college-age) is how well you might do on the GRE since both tests heavily rely on your test-taking ability and thus correlate heavily. Since you can't take the GRE and see your score without having it count, taking a REAL IQ test like a WAIS (not that bullshit online, stop looking at that garbage) might give you an arbitrary estimate of how much you will have to study to get the GRE score that you want and whether you should practice the verbal more or the math section.
However, athenian is wrong about the ability for it to predict academic performance.... hell, the GRE barely does that and the correlation is only like a 0.1-0.2 and that can easily be explained by the fact that they USE the GRE to help filter through graduate student applications. Intelligence has been ditched by everyone who knows better, not just because they are culturally and racially biased, but because they don't predict useful things.
Why are so many so-called "INTJs" awful liars when it comes to IQ (even if this contradicts their type description)?
According to your own opinion, what are the psychological reasons behind this odd behaviour?"
First, it helps to understand where the tests came from. We studied intelligence heavily in Tests and Measurements so I'll chime in with what I recall.
As was mentioned, Binet was working for the French government to develop a simple yet effective way of identifying "imbecile" children that needed more attention to keep them up with other children. The French have a very enlightened philosophy with regards to education and it goes like this: Everyone will learn basic math skills, everyone will learn fine literature, and everyone will learn languages because this is essential to creating a civic-minded French citizen - We don't care who they are or how much help they need, they'll get it. What resulted was the earliest and most familiar forms of the construct as intelligence: Mental Age divided by Chronological age, and was intended just to place children into classes that best fit them.
This notion has changed, however, and intelligence in the modern vernacular might be equated to "mental ego" as has been adequately demonstrated in this thread by people who don't know what they're talking about. If there is a valid relationship between type and Intelligence it begins and ends with that: ego. Any psychological test is only a SAMPLE of human behavior and it does not equate to competance. If I had to define intelligence it would be such: The ability to predict how a particular test WANTS you to answer each item. As such, intelligence tests sample HIGHLY from your ability to.... yes, you said it right Blackmail, take tests
IQ tests won't tell you someone's ability to follow a dialectic, nitpick through the item answers (I can do this with ANY IQ test that is forced response), or their ability to come up with a theory or fine work of art (creativity). Although there is evidence from factor analysis demonstrating construct validity for a G-factor intelligence (or GENERAL intelligence accross all kinds/styles of tasks), the correlation is small and it's not really clear what G-intelligence is, if anything.The only thing an IQ score might help you to predict at our age (college-age) is how well you might do on the GRE since both tests heavily rely on your test-taking ability and thus correlate heavily. Since you can't take the GRE and see your score without having it count, taking a REAL IQ test like a WAIS (not that bullshit online, stop looking at that garbage) might give you an arbitrary estimate of how much you will have to study to get the GRE score that you want and whether you should practice the verbal more or the math section.
However, athenian is wrong about the ability for it to predict academic performance.... hell, the GRE barely does that and the correlation is only like a 0.1-0.2 and that can easily be explained by the fact that they USE the GRE to help filter through graduate student applications. Intelligence has been ditched by everyone who knows better, not just because they are culturally and racially biased, but because they don't predict useful things.
Similar threads
