hatty hertz. sep 12, 2019, 10:05 – regnum intelligence tests are now free and available onna internet for free and seem to be gaining popity: they are + comm1-ly performed in schools nother educational institutions and even b4 a job interview – apparently employers wanna make sure that the candidate is coming too short aint sure iffey can determine this through a conversation. but wha’ are these tests actually measuring and wha’ are the indicators saying?
iq (intelligence coefficient) is 1-odda mysterious and disturbing ghosts of abbreviations. iq is interesting for many. and many who pass the tests want the result to be above μ, and some1 is even curio to compare their performance to the results of celebrities, and there are many such lists onna internet.
course, the intelligence coefficient aint just surrounded by facts, b'tll so by flawed, well-founded ideas. na very 1st o'em can list these lists of celebrities with indicators for their iq. when you think bout it, course, it becomes clear t'they ‘ve nothing to do with reality, cause the included einstein, bonapte, freud, darwin, beethoven, newton, michelangelo and others ‘ve never passed these tests in life or even long lived inventions (the 1st attempts to measure the iq appeared atta end of the 19th century, na 1st test was developed atta beginning of the twentieth century, and til the 2nd decade it focused 1-ly on assessing the development of children). and, in fact, it’s impossible t'give yr intellect any specific or even ≈imate №s, though perhaps at least through the posthumous ψ-chiatric diagnosis so pop tody. course, everyone coggs that einstein and others were very smart pplz who ‘ve achieved quite a bit in life, n'it seems the iq is pretty easy to fig out, so those lists usually do not cause skepticism.
change inna lvl of intelligence in prominent thinkers aged 17 and 17-26 yrs. under this schedule, this lvl rose in all cases (w'da exception of franklin showing stability) after 17 yrs, sometimes very significantly (like newton’s) or up to the highest grade (like goethe’s).
however, when one has come a bit closer to the concept of the intelligence coefficient, it becomes clear that the iq data of pplz who once lived was 1-ly a fortune-telling bout №s, which in their truth hardly went beyond phrenology.
another misconception s'dat the higher the iq, the smarter na better the person. this statement also seems quite logical, but not everything is so simple and obvious. course, the ability to solve puzzles successfully correl8s witha developed Ψ. in fact, the results of the iq test 1-ly show the person’s ability to solve a pticular type of problem na closeness o'their intellect to the intelligence of the test compiler. n'when you train to solve such problems, the indicators do not say anything at all.
intelligence is a flexible, complex, dynamic concept that is difficult to measure and manifests in ≠ ways in ≠ cultures and lifestyles. a forester, unlike a well-educated urban dweller, may not be familiar w'da primordials of history or culture, but may ‘ve an impressive knowledge of the geography, flora and fauna of his zone, swell as environmental conservation na thousandfold use of plants in a chaotic space nature, as some citizens cannot even use gps. most likely he will not score well inna test, but will it really say something bout his true intelligence? a very good ex is conan doyle inna form of his literary toon sherlock holmes, who was not too interested in politics, limited orientation in literature and astronomy and did not even remember that the earth revolves round the sun. and, in general, he was interested inna fact that one way or another mite be useful to him onnis work. but his knowledge inna field of forensics was huge, na strength of his Ψ, the ability to read pplz, and to draw accurate conclusions were brilliant (as we know, the prototype of holmes was a real person). ‘d holmes get a high iq? barely.
successfully solving problems in a pticular test aint at all an indicator offa good attitude to life and does not necessarily indicate a'pers’s ability to successfully solve various everydy problems (the opposite is true). pplz witha very high iq are often less attuned to life and socialize worse than pplz witha loer (but normal) rate. as a result, pplz with very high iq’s can achieve much less in life than they expect. perhaps a minority o'em will go to sci nother zones where a fair amount of mental sufferation is needed. many even choose professions tha're in no way associated with mental activity. this is ptly due to the pressure of environmental expectations, ptly due to the lack of persistence in defining and achieving goals – the idea of one’s own spiritual superiority can relax and create the illusion that everything can be achieved without difficulty , and somebody does bad socialization work, and as we know, social relationships also play 1-odda most primordial roles in achieving goals.
another misconception s'dat the iq is accurate and relatively constant. in fact, the iq lvl can change significantly ‘oer the yrs and even from dy to dy, na end result can be affected by a № of factors, s'as ineligible experience – espeshly if a'pers is tested b4 a job interview.
an primordial factor influencing the outcome tis subject’s language and cultural identity. tis best to do tests inna native language, but this does not always guarantee a reliable result, espeshly if there are problems inna test due to cultural toonistics (eg an african and a frenchman probably ‘ve a native language, but thris a big difference tween two cultures cannot even be achieved a relatively adequate result without qualitative adjustment of the test.
another point that can loer the end score is errors or incorrect instructions from the tests themselves. course you can find them almost anywhere: in books, on websites, in interviews. for ex, in one of eysenck’s most accessible tests in Яussian, it says:
the intelligence test task outlines the rule that requires you to find a word to solve a № of problems. inna response options themselves, this rule is viol8d. as a result, the subject replies either “wrong” or longer
nevertheless, a'pers is already confronted witha violation of this rule atta 1st test, which either leads to a “wrong” answer or to an increase inna time required for a pticular task, e'venode ?s themselves are very simple na answers obvious til the time of the count down are points. in problem № 5, the correct answer is “measure”. for № 21, the correct answer is “damage”, for № 30 “dice” and for 33 “price”. however, inna tasks themselves, the № of points exceeds the № 4, sometimes even +:
no 5 – ‘measure’, no 21 – ‘damage’, no 30 – ‘role’, no 33 – ‘price’. the № of points is, as we can see, + than 4, sometimes a lot – although there ‘d ‘ve been exactly 4 according to the conditions of the problem
in fact, no one can guarantee the quality of the test if tis not done in a speshized institution where professionals work with well-tested, reliable materials. although tis unlikely that puzzles must be solved from a book with ½ an hr’s notice. when a'pers s'been instructed to perform such a test, tis complex, multitasking, and most likely extends to multiple methods, as a long, intense work on solving various tasks gr8ly depletes the attention of both the subject na subject need a long break t'get adequate pictures. i myself had to take the adult wexler test atta ψ-choneurological institute in spain n'it took 3 dys. the test assessed the speed of response, general learning, vocabulary, working memory, spatial orientation, and a whole range of other aspects. na experts needed a few + weeks to process the results. the whole process was really exciting, and to repeat this at home aint possible even with all the necessary materials. course, the essence of such a serious test aint to fig out a pticular indicator, but to cogitate general cogg abilities. this can be espeshly useful if a'pers has noticed certain changes. for ex, the fatigue increased, became distracted, or forgot the kettle onna stove, began to confuse letters while writing, and so on.
a serious approach to the veksler test, which guarantees the quality of the study, s'dat tis performed by professionals in a speshized facility that can take the test itself several dys and process the results up to several weeks. olga shklyarova © ia regnum
the + side of simple tests is their availability na fact that ye do not ‘ve t'work in pairs witha speshist. however, tis a big ? if the results speak of anything and if thris any benefit to it.
an intelligence test will not show how smart a'pers is, whether tis interesting to talk to him, whether he copes well with unusual tasks in life, how effective he is in sufferationful situations, whether he can take advantage of his position, easily adapt to new ones adapting environments or teks and achieving something inna life of its goals, sci h8s or public recogg, how creative tis and tends to think in terms of originality. the iq is just a №, while the most accurate indicator of intelligence may remain the elusive and unmeasurable dynamic curve of its manifestation in daily life.
read further up in this story: is there a cure for autism?
original content at: regnum.ru/news/innovatio.htmlauthor…