NationStates Jolt Archive

The Intelegince Quotation system is flawed. After the scores go beyond 150 it starts to fluctuate, not to mention tests use different standards. However it can provide a basis (basis mind you) for intilectual ability so it isn't entirely worthless.

And you couldn't post this in the IQ thread that's already active?

If your car had a flaw where it exploded if it went over 150 miles per hour, would you drive it at all, knowing that it's still a perfectly good car under 150?

The Intelegince Quotation system is flawed. After the scores go beyond 150 it starts to fluctuate, not to mention tests use different standards. However it can provide a basis (basis mind you) for intilectual ability so it isn't entirely worthless.

There's also the fact that it's (generally) culturally slanted to those in the Anglo-Saxon world, and that a concept such as "intelligence" is made up of so many diverse and often contradictory components that - personally - i think quantifying it with a set of numbers is at best fallacious and at worst quack science.

Stephen Jay Gould agrees with me, for one.

Old news. There isn't even a definition of intelligence that everybody agrees with and that can be applied universaly, much less a way to measure it reliably.

Thank you, Pantygraigwen.

Seriously, have I.Q. tests really been proven to determine much of anything about a person at the end of the day? I'd think any impact it would have on someone's life would have the influence of a placebo effect of sorts on the outcome....

It's Quotient, not Quotation

Seriously, have I.Q. tests really been proven to determine much of anything about a person at the end of the day? I'd think any impact it would have on someone's life would have the influence of a placebo effect of sorts on the outcome....

Interesting point. I can see how the conviction that you possess an innate superior intelligence could drive a certain person forward beyond perhaps what they would otherwise have achieved.

Or send them into a mad spiral of bitterness that life has treated such a gifted individual so unfairly.

Dependent, really.

The best way to determine one's IQ is a 3 round game of Scrabble.

The best way to determine one's IQ is a 3 round game of Scrabble.

I like :fluffle:

I like :fluffle:I hate. I can't deal with scrabble... it sends chills down my spine. I think I managed to get 'had' once. Convoluted Charades is much funner - it's not a game, it's an art form(try and make up the most complex charade for the fairly easy to get phrase and try to completely perplex your audience. And if at all possible - crossdress). And I also like Pictionary and Taboo type games.

I hate. I can't deal with scrabble... it sends chills down my spine. I think I managed to get 'had' once. Convoluted Charades is much funner. As are Pictionary and Taboo type games.

Oh, I suck at Scrabble, but doesn't mean it isn't fun.

I hate. I can't deal with scrabble... it sends chills down my spine. I think I managed to get 'had' once. Convoluted Charades is much funner - it's not a game, it's an art form(try and make up the most complex charade for the fairly easy to get phrase and try to completely perplex your audience. And if at all possible - crossdress). And I also like Pictionary and Taboo type games.


lol...."had"

I like your games as well. Board games rule.

lol...."had"

I like your games as well. Board games rule.Can you imagine trying to draw 'post-modernism' or 'privatisation'. Those were some of the words we came up with. We had beautiful pictures of a dove, a torch and a rose with the pencil jabbing furiously at the torch for privatisation. In the end we got it by linking a magnifying glass, an eye and a train station.

edit: you'd have to be aware of British politics to get the torch link.

Can you imagine trying to draw 'post-modernism' or 'privatisation'. Those were some of the words we came up with. We had beautiful pictures of a dove, a torch and a rose with the pencil jabbing furiously at the torch for privatisation. In the end we got it by linking a magnifying glass, an eye and a train station.

edit: you'd have to be aware of British politics to get the torch link.

"Here's a picture even you can understand: it's a door! USE IT!"

What a charming little cliche.

If your car had a flaw where it exploded if it went over 150 miles per hour, would you drive it at all, knowing that it's still a perfectly good car under 150?

If you're driving your car over 150 miles per hour you probably deserve to explode.

Yeah, one of the first things you learn in any good psychology program is that the IQ measuring instruments aren't really all that accurate for certain individuals. That, and the general IQ scores have been going up over the decades, as people are learning more and more all the time, so the average isn't 100 anymore.
The cultural thing is a minor aspect really... they tried to make a "Canadian" version for Canadians, and found out that we did better on the American IQ test, because Canadians don't know anything about Canada's history. :P
As for the Scrabble idea... might be okay for the literary side, but you're ignoring the mathematical side, which is just as important for the overall scoring. (Well, okay, that's not ENTIRELY true, since if you're more gifted on one, they weight them differently, so my 132 isn't the same as someone else's who's only good at math, or someone who's only good at words)

But, as someone already said, it's a good general indicator. I don't think a really accurate intelligence test will be created any time soon.

The cultural thing is a minor aspect really... they tried to make a "Canadian" version for Canadians, and found out that we did better on the American IQ test, because Canadians don't know anything about Canada's history.

That sounds very fishy indeed, since it is my understanding that effective IQ tests are designed to produce the same results no matter how much you know. IQ tests are designed to test your ability to learn, not how much you have learned.

However, there are many programs these days that help people do better on IQ tests, thus exploiting an inevitable flaw in the tests.