Cognitive performances tests

[DeviantPenguin]

do you believe in intelligence measures, such as IQ tests (WAIS-R, WISC-R and the like)

while the measuring of logico-mathematical aptitude is quite simple, and universal, how do we measures the verbal efficiency, given the cultural differences ?

mathematics and logic are innate ability, while cultural and linguistic performance are aquired.

shouldn't we measure only the potential ?

do we count fluent l33t 5p34k3rz as great linguist ?

are autistic genius stupid as said by their results on classical performance test ?

[Belial]

mathematics and logic are innate ability, while cultural and linguistic performance are aquired.

Rejected.

There is an innate aspect to both, and a learned aspect to both, and they exist in about the same proportion.

Unless you figured calculus out for yourself?

[DeviantPenguin]

bended-to-the-earth apologies for not being precise.

innate VS. acquired ability is herein understood in the cognitive psychology meaning

innate : common to all humanity, whatever their culture is (the diverse numeration systems all have the same symbolic operations, and moreover, they use the same brain areas)

acquired : culturally/educationnaly dependent : just because a child doesn't know <insert obscure author here> doesn't mean he is a retard, and just because the mean western (tm) guy can't easily learn or understand asians languages doesn't mean he can't understand/conceptualize anything.

am i clearer or do i need to repeatedly hit my head with a rusty spiked club ?

[Belial]

Ahh, apologies. I didn't realize that cognitive psychology didn't use the same definitions of those words.

Carry on, and sorry for disrupting.

That said, feel free to do that club thing. Just videotape it.

[DeviantPenguin]

well, the meaning is different from author to author, and school to school. so... (like the ego of freudians, animus of jungian and whatever concept will make you buy more aspirin)

but that i was more asking for your point of view on the subject.

(can i exchange myself with a randomly selected granny ?)

[jordan]

Linguistic ability is strongly innate, and a significant distinguishing feature of human beings; an excellent (if somewhat biased) exposition of this can be found in The Language Instinct by Stephen Pinker. While very few people could "figure calculus out for [themselves]," as Belial suggests, individuals have been observed to achieve comparable feats in terms of linguistic ability. For example, there's a group of deaf children who evolved their own sophisticated sign language, without ever being taught how to sign. Also, there is a definite developmental stage during which the brain is receptive to language, during which time a child will easily and instinctively pick up a new tongue; children who are deprived of the opportunity to learn any language within this critical period are unlikely to ever develop linguistically beyond a very basic level.

IIRC, many of the verbal subtests on the WAIS are considered to be the most reliable indicators of 'g'.

One of the interesting features of the WAIS is that it can help identify pathologies or talents by exposing discrepancies between scores on subscales or subtests. The comprehensive final IQ score is an extremely crude instrument in comparison. For example, the WAIS-III (UK) indicated that my short-term memory was highly anomalous in comparison to my other scores.

[Belial]

It indicated that my processing was extremely, anomalously low, and that my verbal and linguistic capabilities were off the chart.

Once you averaged it, you got a kind of moderately high total IQ, but nothing to write home about.

I agree the subsections and such make it a much more useful diagnostic tool.

[Yakk]

bended-to-the-earth apologies for not being precise.

innate VS. acquired ability is herein understood in the cognitive psychology meaning

innate : common to all humanity, whatever their culture is (the diverse numeration systems all have the same symbolic operations, and moreover, they use the same brain areas)

That numeration system was invented.
The symbolic operations where invented.

Read up on ancient math -- the notation they had to deal with was painful!

Can you imagine trying to describe an exponential function, when all of your math was in "plain english" and you could only describe multiplication by talking about what happens when you make a rectangle, lay poles on it 1 unit apart from each other, then align the poles into one long line?

When you had no zero, no negative numbers, and the most advanced system of value was length?

When describing area and length as the same kind of numbers was alien to you?

When your numbers where described in words, and you had no bases? To say 200 you would say "a hundred and a hundred" -- you couldn't express 100+100=200, because the shortest way of saying 200 was the same as the shortest way of saying 100+100.

The current indo-arabic-european mathematical notation has won out only because it kicked the crap out of competarers. Even then, I strongly expect it is taught very differently in different areas: so much so that claiming that mathematics is cross-cultural because it uses the same symbols would be like saying that english and french are the same language, because they use the same alphabet.

Even within one nation: I use mathematical symbols in a completely different way than civil engeneers would, than physicist would, than cashiers would, than high school teachers would. While we share a basic pigeon (1+1=2), I require a massive amount of translation help to understand engeneering and physicist math. And while I can understand how to "spell" the same math sentences that a high school teacher would use, I would read them as having a very different "pronounciation" than the high school teacher, because I treat the symbols differently.

The cashier could be argued to only understand the language of math at a pigeon level. At the same time, his dialect is different: 99 plus 14% is clearly 1.13, and not 1.1286. To him, +14% has a bunch of implicit meanings associated with it -- I can understand those meanings, but they aren't my native mathematical language anymore.

'course, this doesn't matter much: note that IQ "logic" tests correlate horribly on before/after on people who have taken formal training in mathematics.

[3.14159265...]

How do I take an IQ TEST?! AND WHERE?!

[space_raptor]

Check the CBC's website, they're currently doing a "test the nation" thing. Not very official, but hey.

Sorry non-Canucks.

Otherwise, you can probably do them at a university. The psych/sociology department maybe?

[VannA]

I have a declining IQ, from 178 at 15 to 155 or so, at 27.

I tend to pwn at pattern matching and linguistics, but my logic/maths is average.

Of course, none of it is really very useful.

I want a measure of somebodies 'quickness', accuracy, curiousity and emotional stability, far more than a gestalt measure of 'intelligence'.

[Puellus Peregrinus]

How do I take an IQ TEST?! AND WHERE?!

Go to MENSas wobbage and look when the next test is being held close to you. You'll get a certificate to show off with.

A science mags home test says my IQ is 174 and claims that the error margin would be only 2%, but no one will ever believe it and even I kind of doubt it.

[Oort]

I took a test online that gave me a 138 or so, but I am highly suspicious.

[Pathway]

Online IQ tests are unreliable--take a real one if you must know. Among other things, just wanting to rush through it will lower your scores.

How do I take an IQ TEST?! AND WHERE?!

I love people like this.

Really, though, if the answer is that critical that you're forced to turn on caps lock for half your post, you might be better off Googling or searching Wikipedia. It would give you a quicker answer, which might be nice seeing as you're about to explode with frustration at not knowing your IQ--although were I in your shoes, I'd rather stay ignorant of it.

[bbctol]

I took a Mensa practice thingum, and got a nineteen out of thirty . I'll go home and put my head under a rock now.

[Tchebu]

Linguistic ability is strongly innate, and a significant distinguishing feature of human beings; an excellent (if somewhat biased) exposition of this can be found in The Language Instinct by Stephen Pinker.

Ah... yes... The Language Instinct... I'm currently reading his How the Mind Works. Quite a nice read.

More on topic, what do you define as verbal efficiency... I dont really understand. Is it the person's grammar skills? His ability to construct nice elaborate sentences? Anything else I cant think of that would involve words falls into the category of logic for me (like "xyz" is to "abc" like "asdf" to "blank", those kinds of questions)

IQ tests are a good measure of how good a logician you are, how quickly and efficiently you can notice logical patterns. If that's what you want to measure in people, IQ tests are your best friends.

[VannA]

Linguistic ability is strongly innate, and a significant distinguishing feature of human beings; an excellent (if somewhat biased) exposition of this can be found in The Language Instinct by Stephen Pinker.

Ah... yes... The Language Instinct... I'm currently reading his How the Mind Works. Quite a nice read.

More on topic, what do you define as verbal efficiency... I dont really understand. Is it the person's grammar skills? His ability to construct nice elaborate sentences? Anything else I cant think of that would involve words falls into the category of logic for me (like "xyz" is to "abc" like "asdf" to "blank", those kinds of questions)

IQ tests are a good measure of how good a logician you are, how quickly and efficiently you can notice logical patterns. If that's what you want to measure in people, IQ tests are your best friends.

Verbal Efficiency?

The ability to clearly and concisely convey a meaning to a wide audience.

[jordan]

Pathway: judging by other posts I've read by pi, I'm pretty sure that he's exaggerating? Like, for effect?

(Now I hope your reply isn't sarcastic as well...)

[jordan]

I have a declining IQ, from 178 at 15 to 155 or so, at 27.

You might have taken two different tests with different ceilings and standard deviations. Also, IIRC, at the higher ends of the spectrum, ratio IQs tend to be greater than deviation IQs.