If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New Republic)   If IQ scores are rising, why are there so many idiots around? Now experts have an answer: The scores are going up because people have gotten better at taking tests   (newrepublic.com) divider line 126
    More: Ironic, Flynn effect, IQ scores  
•       •       •

3856 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Dec 2013 at 2:24 AM (20 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



126 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-03 02:22:52 AM
It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.
 
2013-12-03 02:26:17 AM
Or maybe minorities are integrating better into mainstream society and aren't culturally discriminated against on the tests as severely as they were a generation or two ago.
 
2013-12-03 02:26:28 AM
It's gotten easier to cheat.
 
2013-12-03 02:27:12 AM

timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.


I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).
 
2013-12-03 02:28:39 AM
IQ doesn't really mean shiat in the real world. I know plenty of people with "high IQ's" who are idiots.
 
2013-12-03 02:30:46 AM
It could be that the whole idea of IQ is utter psuedoscientific bullshiat.  You think?
 
2013-12-03 02:33:17 AM
Aren't IQ scores distributed along a Normal curve?  If so, how can they be 'improving'?
 
2013-12-03 02:34:19 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: IQ doesn't really mean shiat in the real world. I know plenty of people with "high IQ's" who are idiots.


me. high iq but moronic.
/my theory about the scores getting higher is that they're not really. IQ tests are averaged out right? I mean, isn't the average IQ always 100? But if the average person is an idiot, then it would be easier to score high above average for a sensible person. So you'd have many more getting up in the 150s.
 
2013-12-03 02:34:51 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: Or maybe minorities are integrating better into mainstream society and aren't culturally discriminated against on the tests as severely as they were a generation or two ago.


What sort of race-based questions did the old test have?
 
2013-12-03 02:35:22 AM

Peki: timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.

I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).


A presentation by the guy who gave us the Flynn effect... that's f*cking awesome.
 
2013-12-03 02:37:53 AM
Ahh yes, the NCLB effect.

The question now becomes: do we join the people who constantly preach that the stupid will outbreed the intelligent and think Idiocracy is prophecy or do we keep mocking them for being self-important jackasses?
 
2013-12-03 02:40:03 AM

GodComplex: Peki: timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.

I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).

A presentation by the guy who gave us the Flynn effect... that's f*cking awesome.


He's a professor in political studies at the university I work for. Nice bloke - I don't know him personally, but he has a good reputation around campus. He put together an interesting reading list a year or two back.
 
2013-12-03 02:41:54 AM
Smart is great but you also need to be educated and most importantly, motivated. Lazy farks don't accomplish much, no matter how smart they are.
 
2013-12-03 02:43:51 AM

super_grass: Ahh yes, the NCLB effect.

The question now becomes: do we join the people who constantly preach that the stupid will outbreed the intelligent and think Idiocracy is prophecy or do we keep mocking them for being self-important jackasses?


Idiocracy isn't a prophecy; it's a way to show the normals what it's like to be a smart person today. You know, surrounded by idiots.
 
2013-12-03 02:47:01 AM
How can they say IQs are going up when by definition half the people score above 100 and half below? Is there some sort of flattening of the bell curve so more than the usual 2% score over 130?
 
2013-12-03 02:47:52 AM

thisispete: GodComplex: Peki: timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.

I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).

A presentation by the guy who gave us the Flynn effect... that's f*cking awesome.

He's a professor in political studies at the university I work for. Nice bloke - I don't know him personally, but he has a good reputation around campus. He put together an interesting reading list a year or two back.


Thanks for that.
 
2013-12-03 02:50:23 AM
May people make the mistake of thinking that the higher a persons IQ is...the better off they are.

The reality is when you start getting into low / high IQ's the results are the same...communication with people who have 'average' IQ's get very difficult. Most of the people I know who have high IQ's say it makes their life 'challenging', if given the choice most would rather be 'average' (normal).
 
2013-12-03 02:51:48 AM
IQ tests have never been a very good way to measure intelligence.

They have been a very good way to measure how well one does on IQ tests.
 
2013-12-03 02:54:19 AM

thisispete: GodComplex: Peki: timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.

I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).

A presentation by the guy who gave us the Flynn effect... that's f*cking awesome.

He's a professor in political studies at the university I work for. Nice bloke - I don't know him personally, but he has a good reputation around campus. He put together an interesting reading list a year or two back.


Meh, I thought his TED presentation was tiresome and not very thoughtful.
 
2013-12-03 02:54:43 AM

HotWingAgenda: AverageAmericanGuy: Or maybe minorities are integrating better into mainstream society and aren't culturally discriminated against on the tests as severely as they were a generation or two ago.

What sort of race-based questions did the old test have?


Not race so much as culture. I seem to recall reading a story about some people being thrown by simple wording. Like, what is that thing you sit on when you watch TV? Is it a couch? A sofa? Lounge? Davenport? Which word does the test use?

I could be totally wrong, though.
 
2013-12-03 02:59:12 AM

Farty McPooPants: Aren't IQ scores distributed along a Normal curve?  If so, how can they be 'improving'?


Pre-farking-cisely.
 
2013-12-03 03:00:04 AM
So far, two out of twenty.
 
2013-12-03 03:00:13 AM
But, but the answer is always C)
 
2013-12-03 03:00:40 AM

Ablejack: Meh, I thought his TED presentation was tiresome and not very thoughtful.


A bit dry, I'll give you. However, I found it amazingly useful in the context of "how to talk to the Derp brigade." Almost every Tea Partier suffers from the stuff he talks about, and once you hear him break it down, it's kind of like, "Oh, that's how they can vote against their own interests. They literally can't see it."

/knowing why is the first step to fixing it
 
2013-12-03 03:01:29 AM
then again

www.thefrumps.com
 
2013-12-03 03:02:59 AM

Farty McPooPants: Aren't IQ scores distributed along a Normal curve?  If so, how can they be 'improving'?


Yes. They can't rise. They are always distributed normally by design. I think the idea is that a person who scored 100 on a test 20 years ago would only score say a 95 if their results were put into today's distribution.
 
2013-12-03 03:04:44 AM

OscarTamerz: How can they say IQs are going up when by definition half the people score above 100 and half below? Is there some sort of flattening of the bell curve so more than the usual 2% score over 130?


That's what they say, but people are scoring higher on the same tests they they've used for years.  That percentage over 130 is growing

How do you correct for that?  Create a new test, run it against the population and get a new "100", a new average?  But what if you got 100 on the "old test"?  Does your previous score get an asterisk?  Can't have you claiming that 100 came from the new test, son.  You used to be perfectly average, but now you're officially a moron.  I think you get benefits, though.

/thanks for the James Flynn link, Peki, looks interesting
 
2013-12-03 03:08:26 AM
Brawndo. The answer's always Brawndo.
 
2013-12-03 03:09:56 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: Or maybe minorities are integrating better into mainstream society and aren't culturally discriminated against on the tests as severely as they were a generation or two ago.


Yeah, that could be it, except for the fact that the Flynn effect takes place in countries around the world, not just the United States, or whatever country you are thinking of.

OscarTamerz: How can they say IQs are going up when by definition half the people score above 100 and half below? Is there some sort of flattening of the bell curve so more than the usual 2% score over 130?


What they mean by IQ's going up is that if you take an old IQ test from 50 years ago, the average person scores well above 100 on it now, whereas at the time the average person was scoring 100.
 
2013-12-03 03:13:42 AM

fusillade762: HotWingAgenda: AverageAmericanGuy: Or maybe minorities are integrating better into mainstream society and aren't culturally discriminated against on the tests as severely as they were a generation or two ago.

What sort of race-based questions did the old test have?

Not race so much as culture. I seem to recall reading a story about some people being thrown by simple wording. Like, what is that thing you sit on when you watch TV? Is it a couch? A sofa? Lounge? Davenport? Which word does the test use?

I could be totally wrong, though.


Oh, that bullshiat. I always get those sort of things wrong myself.

/growing up, my answer would have been either lawn furniture or the floor
//white, middle class, suburban
 
2013-12-03 03:13:57 AM
Because intelligence and douchery are not the same thing.
 
2013-12-03 03:14:14 AM

timujin: How do you correct for that?  Create a new test, run it against the population and get a new "100", a new average?  But what if you got 100 on the "old test"?  Does your previous score get an asterisk?  Can't have you claiming that 100 came from the new test, son.  You used to be perfectly average, but now you're officially a moron.  I think you get benefits, though.


Sort of. The complicating factor is that there is more than one IQ test. I know they (or at least one version of the test) have been adjusted to account for the Flynn effect, and I know that my IQ score is an adjusted score at 145, but I couldn't tell you what my "absolute" score would be (high 160s? I know I qualify for Mensa, but the correlation between Mensa members and people who have their nose stuck up their own asses made me shy away from pursuing it).

timujin: /thanks for the James Flynn link, Peki, looks interesting


You're welcome. Had no idea it was the same guy (I saw the name, but didn't want to make the leap as I was too lazy to google-fu it, and Fark is unforgiving about those kinds of mistakes).

bindlestiff2600: then again

[www.thefrumps.com image 850x332]


Okay, I'm trying, and I get the joke. But the part of it I'm not getting: What the hell is he supposed to be? I've never seen green jizz, and the joke and his shape don't make him a condom or a sperm. . .
 
2013-12-03 03:15:36 AM

timujin: OscarTamerz: How can they say IQs are going up when by definition half the people score above 100 and half below? Is there some sort of flattening of the bell curve so more than the usual 2% score over 130?

That's what they say, but people are scoring higher on the same tests they they've used for years.  That percentage over 130 is growing

How do you correct for that?  Create a new test, run it against the population and get a new "100", a new average?  But what if you got 100 on the "old test"?  Does your previous score get an asterisk?  Can't have you claiming that 100 came from the new test, son.  You used to be perfectly average, but now you're officially a moron.  I think you get benefits, though.

/thanks for the James Flynn link, Peki, looks interesting


Well IQ is mental age/physical age x 100, so when you're as smart as your peers you will always have a 100 IQ. Which is why it's a weak measure that's only useful on children. The Flynn effect argues that the average IQ will increase .3 every year, so if you have an IQ of 100 at 30 when you have a kid, when your kid is 30, his IQ will still be a 100, but the kid's IQ would be relatively 109 had they been in their parent's peer group.

If you watch the Ted talk, he talks about how our ability to work with hypotheticals is the biggest factor to problem solving. And that it's less evolution and more technology, it's actually interesting.
 
2013-12-03 03:17:15 AM
For some reason, any article about IQ brings out the anti-science types, with their brilliant critiques.

"Ain't no such thing as IQ, these damn egghead scientists don't know nothing no how"
 
2013-12-03 03:19:44 AM

OscarTamerz: How can they say IQs are going up when by definition half the people score above 100 and half below? Is there some sort of flattening of the bell curve so more than the usual 2% score over 130?


Farty McPooPants: Aren't IQ scores distributed along a Normal curve?  If so, how can they be 'improving'?


IQ tests are written so that the average score will be 100. However, a long time ago they found out that people are getting "smarter" and will score on average more than 100. Therefore, the people who make the IQ tests had to make the test "harder" every time so as to push the average back down to 100. This has been a continuing trend since the IQ test was invented where people are getting higher and higher IQ scores and the people who make the IQ tests have to make it more "difficult" as to push the average score back down to 100; this is the Flynn Effect. As a result, an average person taking a modern IQ test today should score a 100, but if he were to take an IQ test from 50 years ago he would score a lot higher.
 
2013-12-03 03:26:49 AM
"The greatest lesson in life is to know that even fools are right sometimes."
 
2013-12-03 03:27:34 AM
Would explain why I always get a score around 80 or so. No, I'm not a chimpanzee. I just hate tests with the fiery force of a thousand suns and usually flunk out after the fourth question or so.
 
2013-12-03 03:32:22 AM

Peki: Okay, I'm trying, and I get the joke. But the part of it I'm not getting: What the hell is he supposed to be? I've never seen green jizz, and the joke and his shape don't make him a condom or a sperm. . .


I'm not sure why, but I was reminded of this:
"A car drives through a puddle of sperm, sweat, and contraceptive jelly, splattering the great chopsocky vigilante from Hong Kong. Inside, two acephalic sardines in mustard sauce are asleep in the rank darkness of their tin container. Suddenly, the swinging doors burst open and a mesomorphic cyborg walks in and whips out a 35-lb. phallus made of corrosion-resistant nickel-base alloy and he begins to stroke it sullenly, his eyes half shut..." Et Tu, Babe Mark Leyner
 
2013-12-03 03:34:24 AM

Ablejack: Peki: Okay, I'm trying, and I get the joke. But the part of it I'm not getting: What the hell is he supposed to be? I've never seen green jizz, and the joke and his shape don't make him a condom or a sperm. . .

I'm not sure why, but I was reminded of this:
"A car drives through a puddle of sperm, sweat, and contraceptive jelly, splattering the great chopsocky vigilante from Hong Kong. Inside, two acephalic sardines in mustard sauce are asleep in the rank darkness of their tin container. Suddenly, the swinging doors burst open and a mesomorphic cyborg walks in and whips out a 35-lb. phallus made of corrosion-resistant nickel-base alloy and he begins to stroke it sullenly, his eyes half shut..." Et Tu, Babe Mark Leyner


Answer: 42
 
2013-12-03 03:39:58 AM
I've known a lot of highly intelligent people who were dumber than a sack of broken doorknobs.

Just saying.
 
2013-12-03 03:52:22 AM

Peki: timujin: It's what we've trained the previous couple of generations to do.

I'll leave this here:

James Flynn - Why Our IQ Scores Are Higher

The bit about concrete thinking did a lot to make conversations with my stepfather a little easier (he's not necessarily low-IQ, but very uneducated, so the result is the same).


Good video thanks.
 
2013-12-03 03:54:08 AM
Yes, but that score (100) doesn't come from the test itself.  It comes from where my score on the test fits into the population of scores from everyone who took the test.

What the article is implying is akin to saying that more race car drivers are getting first place in a season so their overall driving must be improving.  That doesn't make sense.  There's a finite number of finishing positions in each season, x number of firsts, x number of seconds, etc.  Or, even better, there are only so many positions in the first 1/4th of all racers, in the second 1/4th of all racers, and so on.  That is a close equivalent to how IQ scores are tabulated.  It's a zero sum game.

I know it may sound snarky but in an article about IQ tests it seems unwise to use that argument to make a point when your audience will immediately see your logical flaw and then dismiss everything else you say.

Going back to the original topic.  How are the test scores improving?  Are they being done faster, are there more correct answers, or simply more answers, what?  A good IQ test wouldn't be skewed by how well the subject is at taking tests.  If it is, it is no longer a valid test.
 
2013-12-03 04:05:03 AM

Farty McPooPants: A good IQ test wouldn't be skewed by how well the subject is at taking tests.  If it is, it is no longer a valid test.


The argument is that people arent getting smarter but how western/modern society and its schooling prepares you to be a smart test taker, which has nothing to do with intelligence. A good example is how if you have written enough multiple choice tests, you can figure out some of the answers just by the way they are worded without knowing anything about the subject, and the paper is arguing the same phenomenon is happening with IQ test. 

If you want to know how IQ scores are improving, read my previous post above.
 
2013-12-03 04:07:11 AM
I'm not seeing how their conclusion is proven.

They claim since IQ tests that rely more heavily on logic have shown a greater increase than IQ tests that rely more heavily on memorization, this shows people are just better at taking tests.

Wouldn't another, equally valid hypothesis be that people's ability to handle complex logic has improved, while their recall of information has not improved as much?

And in some alternative reality, where the test scores increases were reversed (more memorization gains than logic gains), wouldn't they argue that people are just exposed to a greater amount of facts in our modern world, and that the lack of the same increase in logic scores shows that there isn't a real increase in intelligence, it's only a gain in memorization?
 
2013-12-03 04:09:03 AM

2chris2: For some reason, any article about IQ brings out the anti-science types, with their brilliant critiques.

"Ain't no such thing as IQ, these damn egghead scientists don't know nothing no how"


All you have to do is tell them that there is "evidence" that their "race" is somehow "more intelligent" than other "races" and they'll buy right into it.
The boys over at Stormfront are big fans of that sort of "science".
 
2013-12-03 04:09:40 AM
img.fark.net
 
2013-12-03 04:30:15 AM

Fallout Boy: Farty McPooPants: A good IQ test wouldn't be skewed by how well the subject is at taking tests.  If it is, it is no longer a valid test.

The argument is that people arent getting smarter but how western/modern society and its schooling prepares you to be a smart test taker, which has nothing to do with intelligence. A good example is how if you have written enough multiple choice tests, you can figure out some of the answers just by the way they are worded without knowing anything about the subject, and the paper is arguing the same phenomenon is happening with IQ test. 

If you want to know how IQ scores are improving, read my previous post above.


If people are getting better at taking IQ tests due to learning about how to take IQ tests, wouldn't that in an of itself imply that IQ is increasing?
 
2013-12-03 04:32:51 AM
Ask someone with a high IQ score what does that number mean, they probably won't know....bell curve people. I'm pretty sure I could score a 200+ up against a bunch of retards...or Farkers.
 
2013-12-03 04:36:54 AM
Getting better at test taking? You couldn't prove it by me.
 
2013-12-03 04:42:13 AM
We drove from the Cape to Connecticut this past Sunday morning. My Jeep registered 34F. A light rain started to fall. Ice formed. I slowed way down. From 495 to 90 to 84 we passed accident after accident. Salt trucks came out. Troopers and ambulances dotted the highway at crash scenes. The drive took us four hours and we counted forty crashes or spinoffs.

Cars and SUVs continued to race past us and then crash. They saw what we saw. The kicker: last accident we saw was on a bridge. Very icy. An empty, smashed car was being guarded by a large fire truck. They just parked it there and left it as a warning in the middle lane of the bridge. As we took in the strange sight, a car screamed past us at full speed.

I don't care how any of those drivers scored.
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report