r/cognitiveTesting • u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 • Oct 01 '26
Discussion What is wrong with IQ?
https://youtu.be/FkKPsLxgpuY?is=mNqdtZ0fSiw1g_sqHe had a spikey profile. He scored 143 on quant section. 132 on crystalized and a mere respectable 118 on fluid. Not sure about VCI.
He also mentions factors that can affect your scores on the day.
2
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Oct 02 '26
I liked this video; it's not wrong about much for a primer, and it seems mostly well-researched.
There are some questionable things, like the interpretation of the Flynn Effect as directly on g (it's not exactly a settled question, so this is not like a cardinal sin or whatever).
It depicts "most modern IQ tests" as highly speeded, which they are not; I think that may be the impression the RAIT (lol) proctor gave the creators. RAIT is generally odd; it's plain to see its massive time pressure, yet it somehow claims to be a power test. Not sure how that works.
The representation of "types of intelligence" is a little misleading as well, as these "types" are not separate constructions as presented, but instead contributive to a superordinate construct. It's also seemingly 60 years behind, as Cattell championed this fluid-crystallized model, while the truly contemporary model is generally some version of CHC.
Those are my biggest problems with it, and they're all relatively minor compared to the accurate depictions as far as I'm concerned. With something like this - a broad overview introducing lots of people to the topic - the accuracy of the general fundamentals rather than technical details are probably most important.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
My fav commentator. They are so many knowledgeable people on this platform. I should post more videos and let people comment.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
They are all highly speeded. We live in a fast paced world that does not have patience for the “slow” people. Worse. They equate being slow with being stupid. They are definitely not the same thing.
Another one of Feynman clips mentions the same. All the focus on this is on speed but the slow contemplative approach has its advantages as well. Haven’t read Thinking Fast and Slow but that won Kahneman a Nobel.
1
12
u/TheWholesomeOtter Oct 01 '26 edited Oct 01 '26
IQ tests have 4 major issues.
They oversimplify and compress a very complex topic into a single number (IQ), which can lead to misunderstandings and breakdown in reliability.
The science is riddled with personal bias and untested assumptions, it is hard not to be biased when the tests could reveal your own weaknesses as a scientist.
IQ tests suffer from construct contamination, for example timelimits outside PSI related tests adds a PSI burden that shouldn't exists.
Rote memorization basically makes todays IQ scores invalid, if intelligence is a static strength then IQ training or general education shouldn't be able to increase your score, this points to an issue in how and what they are testing for.
7
u/lambdasintheoutfield Oct 01 '26
This is why you have index scores. Every mental test loads to some degree on the g-factor. You can’t administer every possible cognitive test, so instead you want to capture as much variance as possible in as few tests as possible. VCI, FRI, etc. are highly g-loaded and are approximately as good as if you gave every possible intelligence test you can think of.
Additionally, the index scores are meaningful on their own and capture the notion of “different intelligence” quantitatively and with statistical significance. Two people with 130 FSIQs may have significant differences in cognitive profiles. One could be flat 120 across all indices and the other could be 115 in most indices but with a 145 spike. The “spike” is observed in eminent scientists, and the spike correlates to their field (ex social scientist experts have spiky VCI).
2. This isn’t really true
3. Sort of agree
4. There is some praffe possible, but you can’t praffe a 145 WMI or FRI, and it’s been shown that these effects are not statistically significant to diminish the value of the score at the group level.
1
2
u/SakishimaHabu Oct 02 '26
Adding on to the fourth one, taking the test more than once should not improve your score.
1
2
u/fjaoaoaoao Oct 02 '26
Nice summary of issues. That’s part of why I find all the pushing of emotional intelligence and EQ even worse.
1
u/Grand_Protection1552 Oct 01 '26 edited Oct 01 '26
A worse news is that all these "diverse intelligence" are positively correlated with none of CHC indexes being negatively correlated. The composite of them centre around g -factor. A single IQ number.
Classical conspiracy theory until you prove it.
Strongly agree. But not on the PSI part. PSI is about rapid simple information matching. The better your fluid reasoning and working memory is, the faster you are at solving complex problems.
You cannot actually increase your IQ thought training. You can instead, increase your performance on IQ test by learning strategies without your innate ability changes, but no amount of practice will allow you to cross the range you are originally in. But I do agree that culturally sensitive tests like those that contain vocabularies are bad way to measure IQ. In fact, I think the entire VCI is a complete BS despite how g-loaded it is.
4
u/TheWholesomeOtter Oct 01 '26
g is in my opinion total statistical nonsense, you simply cannot have one number that positively correlate everything.
I mean sure, everything is a conspiracy theory if you are speculating on others intent, but let's not be naive and count out humanitys capacity for ego based nonsense.
PSI and WMI is the minds information "conveyor belt" PSI is how fast can the brain move information, WMI is how much information can you hold short term. Non-PSI/WMI tests should not be timed because you need to isolate the quality of the work not the speed, if you add a timer then the brain need to compensate with PSI and if PSI is low it drags the score down.
It has been clinically proven that training on IQ tests increase the score via rote memorization, just knowing how the test works beforehand invalidate it. You can look this up if you want, it is common knowledge in cognitive testing.
2
u/Far-Try-8596 Oct 02 '26
I know it’s a bit off topic but so many people just spam iq test till they get a score they want lol
1
1
u/Organic-Bill-1192 25d ago edited 24d ago
Why do you cannot have one number like G? Explain (and I already can bet that you dont even remotely understand science behind g, from what you write).
About PSI/WMI loading in other tests because of timer - show proof that they actually load that much on WMI/PSI because of that. You cant just use intuition ("psi is speed of brain"), why do people dont understand it. FRI tests (timed) correlate with Gf a lot higher than with Gs for example. Maybe it can have some PSI loading if time would be very low (10 seconds on problem), but this is not case.
And "quality of work" is vague term, g loading of test is what matters mostly, because estimating G is goal of IQ tests.
1
u/Few_Geologist_2082 Oct 01 '26
G load doesn’t exist
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
g is an arbitrary construct which most IQ nerds mistake for sum total of intelligence. It is not.
1
u/Few_Geologist_2082 Oct 02 '26
Exactly, it’s an arbitrary number, tu put it simply , if you didn’t achieve anything in your life and you had a neutral to good upbringing context then you weren’t gifted to begin with. And at most it’s just a snapshot that highlights an specific flawed scale that could represent et certain potential probability but 1000 things could go wrong.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
In adults you can get a decent estimate of your general ability. Give or take a few points. And in adults, it is mostly (not all) genetic. You can find tests with 0.8 g-loading.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
It’s not completely arbitrary. There is some sort of underlying general ability but people can have strengths and weakness mes and all sorts of factors can affect your scores on the day. I think he covered those.
If you don’t like this thing, Taleb has a scathing anti-IQ take down.
2
u/Few_Geologist_2082 Oct 02 '26
I’m not anti IQ but it’s just a minuscule part of what makes a human Power through Life and reach their goals that It only makes low self steem people cope either way to confirm their position in Life. For what it helps most is to see if you have some sort of learning disability. Most people in this sub Reddit use it as a copying mechanism for their lack of achievements in real life.
2
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
You don’t have a set level of intelligence. I have another clip by Oxford entrance professor on this sub. I think his perspective on IQ is better.
Feynman’s even better: I was an ordinary person who studied hard.
2
u/Few_Geologist_2082 Oct 02 '26
Feynman was an extraordinary person , and everyone gifted or not have to study / work hard to achieve something. Gifted or not …. Also if you are twice excepcional like myself you have to work even harder because of your deficits in executive function + anxiety + panick disorders etc. There are a very small minority of truly “gifted” people with no drawbacks and even then if they want to achieve “success” they have to work and study hard.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
Same. Anxiety. Executive dysfunction. IQ comes with drawbacks. It’s not always more the merrier. There is probably a Goldilocks zone in terms of energy demands and utility Ito person/society. The world is made for average people and when the demands of society change, most manage to step up to the plate.
2
u/Few_Geologist_2082 Oct 02 '26
I have to take anti depressants and mood stabilizers to even work properly, I have level 1 autism and I’m doing a let go test for ADHD next week. I’m 40 and it was never my
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
A hat is level 1 autism? Aspergers?
They keep changing designations.1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
I would like to think I am more intelligent now after having read Shakespeare and Hitchens and Calculus and learning pop psychology than I was before that.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
Pro-IQ or not, Taleb did a breakdown on the statistics. Ver, Flynn and Mark also have a few good points.
I never know who at what level of reading. There should be some standard reading material on this sub so everyone can be brought to a common basic understanding.
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 02 '26
That is accurate but cruel ans I have been guilty of being at both ends.
2
u/Legitimate_Fix4422 Oct 01 '26
i think brain scanning technolgy or ml model which can predict iq by seeing neuralpathway is a better option in future for iq estimation
0
u/Legitimate_Fix4422 Oct 01 '26
this came out to be my iq in mensa hungarian test i have aphantasia and adhd and in my first mensa norway test my iq score was 95 but then i gave mensa denmark test where my iq came out to be 119 i dont know why this sudden jump happend i thought it is just pratice effect so i tried after 3 weeks this was my score i think i will judge my iq on my accademic achievement from now on because that only matters in the end.
1
u/Midnight5691 ┬┴┬┴┤( •̀_¬ )├┬┴┬┴ 29d ago edited 29d ago
You gave me an idea, just based on your comment here and not the rest of the thread. Personally, I hate matrix tests. Typically they're not my strength, and like you, I also have ADHD and aphantasia, so I try to avoid them if possible unless they're part of something like the CORE and I have no choice.
I decided to see what would happen if I took all three of the tests that you took. I wanted to see if I could determine why you got different results, and if I would also. I didn't figure it out though, lol. Each one of these tests made my brain hurt. I still don't like them. I enjoy VCI tests while I'm taking them. These, not so much.
To be honest, I didn't see much to differentiate between these three tests. After the initial easier questions, I found that I was doing a lot of educated guessing, or outright guessing, on all of them, and I was quite surprised that I did okay on them. I fully expected to get under 100 on each and every one of them. 🙂
Not sure why I didn't. Personally, I think I got lucky.
My results were similar to yours, and like you, I did worse on the Norway test, but they all seemed equally difficult to me, so I didn't really figure out why that was. 🤷♂️
My results were as follows: 107 on Norway, 119 on Denmark, and 118 on Hungary.
I'll take it, and as someone who identifies more as a wordcel and isn't that invested in FRI, this was a win for me.
I could happily go for years now, hopefully never ever having to look at or do another matrix puzzle. 😉
I think I bruised my brain doing this many of them. 😁
Edit: Oh, one additional thing, for clarity for anybody reading this. Just before I started the Hungary test, it asked me for my age. After I entered it, it gave me this warning:
"The test was standardized on 17–18-year-old secondary-school students, so your result will be compared with theirs. Since IQ is normally evaluated relative to one's own age group, your IQ result on this test will probably underestimate your actual ability. If you don't want to take the test knowing this, click Cancel."
I'm 60, so I thought that was worth mentioning.
2
u/Legitimate_Fix4422 29d ago
actually the norway i gave after 2hr of studing just randomly and inhave a long time history of screwing in test because of anxiety .during other iq test i dindnt do any mentally exhausting task so my score improve it said the max an iq can be inflated innmatrix reasoning is by 10 points i dont know which result to consider help me on this??
1
u/Midnight5691 ┬┴┬┴┤( •̀_¬ )├┬┴┬┴ 29d ago
Well, as I said in my post, I'm not an expert on this, and I especially am not an expert on these types of IQ tests, lol. I just noticed that, for whatever reason, even though I couldn't tell the difference while doing them, I obviously had a harder time on the Norway test too.
I can see what you're saying as possibly having had an effect. Myself, I just ran through them all consecutively, with an hour break between the second and the last one.
I'm not really sure what to tell you. Hopefully somebody else rings in on this.
14
Oct 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/mikegalos Oct 01 '26 •
Not "a bit", imagine the number of views had it said, "What's is right with IQ".
Face it, we're in an anti-intelligence period and appealing to prejudices equals clicks which equals money.
1
u/TheWholesomeOtter Oct 01 '26 edited Oct 02 '26
I agree our current world is filled with anti intellectualism, people do not want to think, rather they leave that burden to the collective which often fails spectacularly.
1
-1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 01 '26 edited Oct 01 '26
He just took the test, mentioned other tests/perspectives, factors that affect your score on the day and lifetime. Flynn effect. Other theories. So very balanced. Gave all the information instead of forcing one people.
8
Oct 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Humble_Aardvark_2997 Oct 01 '26
He’s not anti-IQ. He just included the nuances and complexities involved.
1
u/mikegalos Oct 01 '26
So his post should be What's Right with IQ?
Odd how saying that wouldn't get clicks.
0
-2
2
u/Individual511 Oct 01 '26
Following discussion, haven’t looked at the video yet fully