I’ve always heard that IQ tests are pretty meaningless in determining a person’s smarts. Is there a better and more comprehensive test?
An IQ test isn’t meaningless exactly, but it is primarily measuring your ability to do well in IQ tests. How well that correlates to any real world feat of ‘intelligence’ or intellectual ability is somewhat arguable. IQ is a rough correlate to academic achievement and a strong indicator of the ability to learn technical skills that involve mathematics or spatial reasoning, but it doesn’t really correlate well to social aptitude or ability to empathise.
Most people want to know their IQ (or that of their children) so they can boast about it, I don’t know if that is ‘meaningless’ but it is pretty pointless.
Stranger
Do folks at mensa meeting sit around and boast to each other? = )
That does bring up a question: Do people with similar IQs socialize well with each other?
You often hear about geniuses not getting along, but that may be personality issues or more tv/film than IRL.
Question #416
Please describe the best way of testing a person’s intelligence…
It’s been quite a few years since I was last in the Mensan small groups but they/we generally got along well, although there was often an age gap because in many such groups it was mainly 50-70 year olds and I was 26-30 at the time and I would not be on the same page on a lot of cultural/era stuff.
Nah, you’re boasting just by beeing at the meeting. Or by joining MENSA.
I recall the late 'Doper Rosie enjoying mensa get togethers. She posted a pic of them on Facebook messing with wind up cars.
But I digress. What other tests are there to measure intelligence?
There are a bunch of tests used to measure intelligence. Probably the most popular are the WAIS in adults and the WISC in children. Those are specifically different than true Stanford-Binet IQ tests, but they’re all generically IQ tests.
There are others, too. Many are abridged versions of the WAIS or WISC, and are designed to take less time for subjects to complete. Others are specifically designed to narrowly measure some core aspect of intelligence, such as processing speed, memory, or task switching.
All of those are correlated with whatever true “intelligence” is. Intelligence is of course a highly complex trait, and their are entire fields of psychology and neuroscience devoted to studying it.
I recall tests taken in early grade school. “Which two animals are alike?” and a picture of a horse, a cow and a chicken. Obviously cows and horses are mammals and have four legs.
We eat cows and chickens, however. Even at such a young age, I wondered if they were trying to trick me.
Sadly, there’s no real best way to measure IQ, although the Stanford-Binet, Cattell, other official IQ tests are reasonably decent.
I recall a cartoon in a newspaper once where the main character is playing a violin with her toes, standing on her hands, while answering a multiple-choice IQ exam with a pen in her mouth, and the psychologist murmurs, “Pity the test only measures one aspect of her talents…”
That’s not my understanding; I think, as stated, IQ primarily measures:
The difference shown in knowing how to take the test is secondary; from what I’ve learned yes IQ tests (like any test) have certain rules and formats that are not intuitive and one can greatly benefit from knowing how to answer the questions. BUT, the improvement one gets in learning how to take them doesn’t actually improve their IQ, it just improves how accurate the test measures it. And that IQ, once properly assessed, doesn’t seem to change much over the years.
So, you take the test for the first time ever, are a little confused by some of it, but get a score of 100. So then you realize maybe the test answers are timed, or better understand what the question is asking or the terminology, re-take and get 110. 5 years later with the same understanding you take the test and get 109 or 111.
IQ isn’t supposed to measure social aptitude or ability to empathise; those are more personality traits. I wouldn’t doubt most people who take the quick online versions of the test are indeed looking for boasting rights. However, that doesn’t mean a smaller percentage of people can really find good use in the results of properly administered tests.
I supposed the specific definition of “intelligence” being sought here would help; whether the OP is asking about a more narrow set of criteria, or more overall aptitude for success in life - which can come about in a number of ways - though we generally view happy successful people as “smart” compared to miserable people.
The OP has stuck around here for 21 years without getting banninated. That’s shows some kind of smarts.
On the other hand, so have I. How hard can it be?
Yeah, I see them all the time on Facebook.
“Only people with an IQ 140 can find all 5 differences.”
Way back in the day, we were assigned 7th grade home room classes based on our IQ test scores. We weren’t supposed to know that, but everyone could tell that homeroom 7A kids were a helluva lot smarter than the 7K kids. Not sure why they did that, because after homeroom, it seemed pretty random for things like math, etc., but perhaps I just wasn’t paying close attention.
Pull my finger.
There are a bunch of very different tests, whose results correlate very well with each other. That’s a sign that there’s some real trait there that’s being measured. And that measured trait, whatever it is, does have some correlation with various measures of success in life (though usually not as strong as the correlation with other IQ tests), so whatever that real trait is, it’s not entirely useless.
Is that trait actually intelligence? Well, define intelligence. The easiest definition of “intelligence” is, of course, “the trait that is measured by IQ tests”. If you mean anything else by “intelligence”, then you need to define it before you can answer the question.
Oh, and it’s also worth noting that, while there are many different kinds of good IQ test, all of them require interpretation by a trained psychologist. The tests that don’t require interpretation are completely worthless at worst (a very common situation, especially with the tests found online), and at best have only a weak correlation with the good IQ tests.
Chronos, did you ever take an IQ test?
How so? What are they doing that requires interpretation?