# It's a travesty to end someone's career over "chink in the armor" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 21, 2012, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474 "2012-02-21T00:06:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 17
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/321 "2012-02-24T17:20:19Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > (Meanwhile, though, I’m still having trouble finding anything to back up a claim that IQ tests have a “vocabulary section.” The questions I linked to certainly require substantial vocabulary knowledge, but that’s not the same as having a “vocabulary section.” > > “Verbal intelliegnce” =/= “knowledge of vocabulary.”) It would be unethical and otherwise inappropriate and unacceptable of me to share the specific content of published measures of intelligence with you. However, it’s clear enough from the descriptions of these measures online that Vocabulary is a specific, consistent and important component of IQ testing. See for example: > **[Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Adult_Intelligence_Scale)** > > The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) is an IQ test designed to measure intelligence and cognitive ability in adults and older adolescents. For children between the ages of 6 and 16, Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) is commonly used. > The original WAIS (Form I) was published in February 1955 by David Wechsler, Chief Psychologist at Bellevue Hospital (1932–1967) in NYC, as a revision of the Wechsler–Bellevue Intelligence Scale released in 1939. It is currently in its fifth... > [@](#): > > Vocabulary: The degree to which one has learned, been able to comprehend and verbally express vocabulary (e.g., “What is a guitar?”) > **[Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wechsler_Intelligence_Scale_for_Children)** > > The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) is an individually administered intelligence test for children between the ages of 6 and 16. The Fifth Edition (WISC-V; Wechsler, 2014) is the most recent version. > The WISC-V takes 45 to 65 minutes to administer. It generates a Full Scale IQ (formerly known as an intelligence quotient or IQ score) that represents a child's general intellectual ability. It also provides five primary index scores, namely Verbal Comprehension Index, Visual Spatia... > [@](#): > > Vocabulary - examinee is asked to define a provided word. [http://assess.nelson.com/test-ind/stan-b5.html](http://assess.nelson.com/test-ind/stan-b5.html) > [@](#): > > Activities: Vocabulary > **[WISC-V - Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children | Fifth Edition | Pearson...](https://www.pearsonassessments.com/en-us/Store/Professional-Assessments/Cognition-%26-Neuro/Wechsler-Intelligence-Scale-for-Children-%7C-Fifth-Edition-/p/100000771)** > > Order the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children: Fifth Edition (WISC-V). The WISC-V is a test that measures a child’s intellectual ability & 5 cognitive domains. > [@](#): > > KBIT2: Improved Crystallized (Verbal) Scale—includes receptive and expressive vocabulary items that do not require reading or spelling Also: [Worksheets, Educational Games, Printables, and Activities | Education.com](http://www.education.com/reference/article/measures-intelligence/) > [@](#): > > “Vocabulary.What does corrupt mean?” Vocabulary, as a subscale, is one of the strongest individual correlates of the full scale IQ, and when people have investigated abbreviated batteries for estimating IQ, Vocabulary is one of the ones that works really well for such a task. > [@Frylock](#): > > Are these typical IQ test questions?!?! > > If so, I am, and I am not exaggerating, utterly shocked. > > How in the world could a test like this be thought meaningful as a measure, specifically, of intelligence? > > Please tell me these are not typical. > > If they are then I am in need of immediate talking down. No. Any test you find online is nearly guaranteed to not be an actual, standardized, established or accepted measure of IQ. The most commonly used measures of IQ are, in my anecdotal estimation, the Wechsler scales (WISC, for children, WAIS for adults), the Stanford Binet, or the Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test. > [@Frylock](#): > > What’s the nature of your training, exactly? And is administration and interpretation of IQ measures part of your current work? My training was as a clinical psychologist, which I underwent in the early to mid 1990’s. I have a Ph.D. and am licensed as a clinical psychologist. My current clinical practice does not include individual intelligence testing as a matter of course. I do use the Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test (KBIT2) in one of my research projects. If I were to offer intellectual testing as an individual clinical service, I would as a matter of conscience want to get some retraining, just to make sure I’m not too rusty, but I feel pretty comfortable that I know what I’m talking about on this subject matter. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/322 "2012-02-24T17:45:19Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Considering that my SAT score is past the 99.9 percentile Yes, but how many colanders do you have? Everyone has gaps in their knowledge. Some gaps are more surprising than others, but everyone has gaps. For example, a friend of mine used the term “perseverate” a few weeks ago, and I was astonished because I thought that it was a completely archaic term that no one would EVER use in regular conversation. Why? Because I had only ever seen it in Spenser and I took my exposure to it and extrapolated from there to reach “archaic and obscure.” Then I looked it up and found that I was wrong, not only about the word being in modern use, but that the word was in Spenser (it didn’t exist when Spenser was writing). In other words, I had entirely the wrong end of the stick. I don’t know why, but I did. (I also thought pineapples grew on trees and it took a dope thread to set me straight.) _The fact that I didn’t know those things about the word in no way means that no one else did either._ A lot of people on this board seem to think that if they don’t know something, it can’t be generally known. I tend to think if I don’t know something, I don’t know it and that doesn’t reflect other people’s knowledge at all. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/323 "2012-02-24T17:47:18Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Vocabulary, as a subscale, is one of the strongest individual correlates of the full scale IQ, and when people have investigated abbreviated batteries for estimating IQ, Vocabulary is one of the ones that works really well for such a task. I don’t understand how this is possible. A person’s command of vocabulary is extremely contingent on the vocabulary he has been exposed to, isn’t it? And I would assume that the vocabulary one has been exposed to has nothing to do with one’s intelligence. So how can it turn out that the measure of vocabulary strongly correlates with the measure for intelligence? > [@](#): > > No. Any test you find online is nearly guaranteed to not be an actual, standardized, established or accepted measure of IQ. The most commonly used measures of IQ are, in my anecdotal estimation, the Wechsler scales (WISC, for children, WAIS for adults), the Stanford Binet, or the Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test. Okay. Is there no way I can find out what an actual IQ test looks like without purchasing one for a thousand dollars or so? > [@](#): > > My training was as a clinical psychologist, which I underwent in the early to mid 1990’s. I have a Ph.D. and am licensed as a clinical psychologist. My current clinical practice does not include individual intelligence testing as a matter of course. I do use the Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test (KBIT2) in one of my research projects. > > If I were to offer intellectual testing as an individual clinical service, I would as a matter of conscience want to get some retraining, just to make sure I’m not too rusty, but I feel pretty comfortable that I know what I’m talking about on this subject matter. Thanks for providing that information. One thing I read says that the Weschler Scale vocabulary section is scored based on the “sophistication of the definition given.” Couple of questions about that, if you’re up for answering them: A. How do they measure this sophistication B. Does the definition have to be _correct_? (If not, then believe it or not, this makes me feel better…) ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/324 "2012-02-24T17:51:26Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Considering that my SAT score is past the 99.9 percentile, it would be rather surprising if any word I didn’t know recently was known by more than two or three percent of the population–just by basic statistical reasoning, wouldn’t you think? I have to believe that you’re either whooshing or trolling us now. I can’t figure out which. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/325 "2012-02-24T18:00:48Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I have to believe that you’re either whooshing or trolling us now. I can’t figure out which. I understand the skepticism, but don’t accuse other posters of trolling in this forum. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/326 "2012-02-24T19:19:05Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > What grade did they teach you how to spell “weird”? (As long as I’m such a pretentious wannabe, I’ll point out that “i before e except after c, or when sounded like A, as in sleigh or in neigh” doesn’t apply to the word “weird” in any spelling system I know of–British, Canadian, American, or otherwise.) Well, since you brought it up, there’s also no English spelling system that puts a “u” in “tailor”: > [@SlackInc](#): > > So I don’t think it makes sense to have this double standard, where we have to be conscious of the race of athletes to tailour headlines around them in a positive manner. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/327 "2012-02-24T19:21:47Z")
Someone needs to sacrifice a chicken to Gaudere. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/328 "2012-02-24T19:23:04Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > I don’t understand how this is possible. A person’s command of vocabulary is extremely contingent on the vocabulary he has been exposed to, isn’t it? Sure, i’ll buy that. But, given individuals with equal exposure, do you contend that their vocabulary skills will be equal? And if overall exposure varied so greatly, vocab wouldn’t independently track well with full scale IQ. It’s important to keep in mind also that your IQ score is not just the raw numbers of right and wrong answers you got when tested, but the conversion of that raw score based on scores from normative groups similar to you. > [@](#): > > And I would assume that the vocabulary one has been exposed to has nothing to do with one’s intelligence. So how can it turn out that the measure of vocabulary strongly correlates with the measure for intelligence? This I don’t buy at all. I think the vocab you are exposed to has a great deal to do with your intelligence. Smart people don’t typically select books to read with more challenging vocabularies? As to whether it correlates, the fact is that it does, so if there’s a question, it’s what does that really mean. > [@](#): > > Okay. Is there no way I can find out what an actual IQ test looks like without purchasing one for a thousand dollars or so? Not really even then, because typically to purchase these types of measures you need to also provide your qualifications for using them ethnically and appropriately. > [@](#): > > Thanks for providing that information. > > One thing I read says that the Weschler Scale vocabulary section is scored based on the “sophistication of the definition given.” Couple of questions about that, if you’re up for answering them: > > A. How do they measure this sophistication > B. Does the definition have to be _correct_? (If not, then believe it or not, this makes me feel better…) I assume that this refers to the fact that it is possible to get one pont for an answer that’s close but not entirely correct, and 2 points for a fully correct answer. Yes, you have to be correct. I’m getting the sense that there is a thing that you want IQ tests to be, but they just are what they are. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/329 "2012-02-24T19:26:43Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Well, since you brought it up, there’s also no English spelling system that puts a “u” in “tailor”: You’ve given me a million dollar idea. What if there was an app that could check your text and alert you to that sort of thing? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/330 "2012-02-24T19:28:07Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > This I don’t buy at all. I think the vocab you are exposed to has a great deal to do with your intelligence. Smart people don’t typically select books to read with more challenging vocabularies? A It seems to me that the ability to hear an unfamiliar word, divine its meaning through context, and then recall and correctly use the word at a latter time would also be a function of intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/331 "2012-02-24T19:44:31Z")
Before any ersatz copy editors jump on my shit, I just noticed another typo in my previous post, which is somewhat ironic, if not in a clearly meaningful way. But to purchase standard IQ measures, you have to prove that you are qualified to use them “ethically,” not “ethnically.” I just recently switched from the Droid to the Razr. The keypad is a little bigger, so I don’t struggle quite as much, but I still make more typos than when using a standard keyboard. I do apologize, and I realize that this quite reasonably calls my intelligence into question. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/332 "2012-02-24T19:50:53Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Sure, i’ll buy that. But, given individuals with equal exposure, do you contend that their vocabulary skills will be equal? No, I wouldn’t make that claim. > [@](#): > > And if overall exposure varied so greatly, vocab wouldn’t independently track well with full scale IQ. Unless full scale IQ tracks well with exposure to vocabulary. > [@](#): > > This I don’t buy at all. I think the vocab you are exposed to has a great deal to do with your intelligence. > > Smart people don’t typically select books to read with more challenging vocabularies? Fair point! > [@](#): > > As to whether it correlates, the fact is that it does, so if there’s a question, it’s what does that really mean. Yes, that what I was clumsily trying to get at. > [@](#): > > I’m getting the sense that there is a thing that you want IQ tests to be, but they just are what they are. Not that I want it to be–something I thought it _was_ based on what people I trust have told me and various bits and pieces I’ve read here and there. Also based on my own lay reasoning concerning what it would take to measure general intelligence. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/333 "2012-02-24T19:55:03Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Not that I want it to be–something I thought it _was_ based on what people I trust have told me and various bits and pieces I’ve read here and there. Also based on my own lay reasoning concerning what it would take to measure general intelligence. On this point, I think it’s important to recognize that talking about IQ and talking about intelligence are somewhat different things. IQ is a way of measuring intelligence, but it’s a specific measurement of a less well defined construct. Nevertheless, it’s a pretty good measurement, in terms of performing overall the way that generally we would expect it to, but there’s lots of room for argument about how we think intelligence should be defined, whether it should include this component or that, and so on. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/334 "2012-02-24T22:43:31Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > For a smart person, you continue to make basic errors in reasoning, in particular those involving a dramatic overgeneralization from a single data point. Actually, if his claim that his SAT score was higher than 99.9% of all people who took it then he shouldn’t be described as merely “smart person” but as a “brilliant person” or “a genius”. Admittedly, I have little confidence in the veracity of his claim. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/335 "2012-02-24T23:29:03Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Everyone has gaps in their knowledge. Some gaps are more surprising than others, but everyone has gaps. Believe it or not, at my school, one of my fellow students who scored in the 99th percentile on her SAT didn’t know that the cardinal directions were not relative concepts. That is, she asked us “how can Lake Michigan always be to the east”, which is a common way of orienting yourself in the Chicagoland area. For whatever reason, she had thought east and west were always right and left. That flabbergasted me. People have odd gaps in their knowledge. Yeah, we razzed her a bit, but I’m certainly guilty of such weird gaps, too. (As for “perseverate,” I admit, I’ve never heard that word before your thread. Or, at least if I did, I don’t remember it.) ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 24, 2012, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/336 "2012-02-24T23:44:15Z")
> [@pulykamell](#): > > (As for “perseverate,” I admit, I’ve never heard that word before your thread. Or, at least if I did, I don’t remember it.) I don’t think it’s odd not to have heard the word. It’s not super common. But it’s odd that I had somehow endowed it with an ancient lineage and even remembered exactly where I had read it before–and it was all just my imagination! ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2012, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/337 "2012-02-25T06:33:11Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Actually, if his claim that his SAT score was higher than 99.9% of all people who took it then he shouldn’t be described as merely “smart person” but as a “brilliant person” or “a genius”. Admittedly, I have little confidence in the veracity of his claim. Great, you should make a lot of money by making me a prop bet on it then. Assuming you accept the standards of the [Triple Nine Society](http://www.triplenine.org/main/admission.asp), my 1985 1480 (740M/740V) clears the bar by 30 points (and I took it only once btw, as a high school junior). The cost of [ordering the score report,](http://sat.collegeboard.org/register/sat-fees) including archival fees, is $38.50. We can agree that the loser of the bet pays for the report plus whatever amount you would like to wager. Heck, I’ll give you 3 to 1 odds to sweeten the deal–how can you resist? Obviously you shouldn’t bet (but then maybe I’m saying that as bluster to bluff you…which would make this a double reverse psychology move a la _Princess Bride_). The bottom line is that I may be many things, but dishonest is not one of them. Everything I have attested to here is true to the best of my knowledge. And now I really do need to go; but I shall return. 🙂 ETA: I did also once get a psychologist-administered IQ test, which had one section that was like a combination of the SAT M and V (including vocabulary words btw) which I of course aced (150 or so). The other half though was like pattern recognition and stuff and I got only a 102 on that part, which the psychologist said was a very unusual disparity. Not sure what that means but I like the College Board test better! LOL ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2012, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/338 "2012-02-25T06:40:45Z")
Wait, you took the SAT in 1985? Or am I misunderstanding something? ---
**Author:** ![FixMyIgnorance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7feea3/32.png) [@FixMyIgnorance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FixMyIgnorance)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2012, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/339 "2012-02-25T07:21:19Z")
No one is immune from having little gaps of ignorance spattered throughout their knowledge. BTW the SAT is insanely weak and quite easy to score well on (IMO) – it hardly exempts anyone from fallacy via argument from ignorance, nor does it guarantee brains. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [February 25, 2012, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474/340 "2012-02-25T07:50:56Z")
I certainly hope when I’m in my mid-40s I don’t feel the need to repeatedly brag about my SAT scores from when I was in High School. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474.md?page=16) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/its-a-travesty-to-end-someones-career-over-chink-in-the-armor/613474.md?page=18)