build a better IQ test

Discussions on behavioral ecology, evolutionary psychology, neurology, endocrinology, game theory, etc.

build a better IQ test

Postby hyksos on March 23rd, 2018, 11:43 am 

I am not personally against the idea of an IQ test, in principle. The core of most of my complaints against them is that they are likely not measuring what they claim. The reason is because advances in Cognitive Science, Neuroscience, and Psychology have been very sweeping in the last 20 years. An IQ test created and designed 1976 is likely hopelessly out-dated in this year (2018).

There is hope in the midst of this. We simply need to create an IQ test that takes into account recent advances in the core cognitive disciplines above. I will brainstorm some ideas in this direction, with no intent of being exhaustive of the literature. I do feel all these avenues are fruitful for testing. A list of plausible metrics that I will investigate are

(1) Wideness of Conscious Awareness.

(2) Making decisions under uncertainty.

(3) Ability to engage in "Transfer Learning" from one domain to another.

In the following threads I will investigate each of these metrics and ways in which they could be tested on human subjects. The poor tortured subjects , we can refer to them as "testees", just to humiliate them even more than their test results would have.
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby wolfhnd on March 23rd, 2018, 5:33 pm 

The current tests are adequate for the purpose that they serve. I see no reason to actual measure human intelligence.
User avatar
wolfhnd
Resident Member
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: 21 Jun 2005
Blog: View Blog (3)
Serpent liked this post


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby BadgerJelly on March 24th, 2018, 2:16 am 

Hyksos -

This could be an interesting thread.

I don't see how "Wideness of Conscoius Awareness" comes into play here? What do you mean by this?

1) On the surface it sounds like environmental factors are wrapped up in this too much. This is because I am unsure what you mean by "wideness"?

I have mentioned "fluid" and "crystalline" intelligence before. This ties into our understanding of memory and things like working memory, and explicit and implicit memory (but I am not saying we by any means know all there is to know.) There have been accidents where people become unable to retain new information, yet are quite capable of using their "crystalline" intelligence to assess certain problems.

It would perhaps be extremely useful to measure a person's ability to learn new things, rather than apply tried and tested methods - then there is the problem of distinguishing this from whimsy or intelligent application. Some people's personalities will incline them to stick to tried and tested methods even if they have the mental capacity for novel thinking.

2) Making decisions under uncertainty is something we do all the time. This ties into the above and breaking of traditions. We are primed to try and understand something that changes and brings into question our sense of causation if the previous method gave a dopermine surge.

Here I would be inclined to look at Sapolsky's work on stress and the effects of cortisol. A certain balance of stress is good for one person and bad for another. We all need to be challenged in life and we thrive if the balance is "correct." This will obviously play into the development of intelligent thinking - if we're on fire we're hardly likely to care about anything else; and this is where the more implicit memory kicks in and we act before serious conscious thought (roll on the ground or douse ourselves in the nearest liquid.)

3) This is certainly something we do all the time when faced with a new problem. We turn it over and create analogies in the hope that some relational cause hints at a possible explaination.

This can be tested by asking people to answer certain questions. The instruction should be simple and there doesn't need to be any reading or writing involved.

It would also be worth giving some examples of these tasks prior to the test so the participants understand fully what kind of thing they are expected to do (I understand this noticeable in IQ tests today. It is not merely that someone "increases" their IQ due to practice, but they become aquianted with how to apply themselves to such tasks.)

Then there is a he issue of motivation. THe dopamine factor plays an obvious role in this, and I don't think it difficult to imagine that certain dopergenic responses help intelligent thought develop, as well as general creativity and openness.

What has been found in all testing methods is the correlation between each. It is the "correlation" (being good in one area makng you more likely to be better in another) that leads most researchers to accept some underlying form - which is termed G. At the moment it is a rough measure of what we generally know as "intelligence", but it is by no means accurate unless we consider it as a way of assessing, vaguely, the chance of societal success - and even there the art "geniuses" and such are usually appreciated much more once they're dead

I was actually watching an interview with Bowie last night. He termed "artists" as being unhinged. I think he is correct, and this leads into the view of being willing to go into uncharted territory. Here I strongly believe the unconscious has a big influence.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby BadgerJelly on March 24th, 2018, 2:35 am 

Watched this last night too:

The Remarkable Learning Abilities of the Human Brain

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73fw0PWU-4U
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby BadgerJelly on March 29th, 2018, 5:34 am 

wolfhnd » March 24th, 2018, 5:33 am wrote:The current tests are adequate for the purpose that they serve. I see no reason to actual measure human intelligence.


The question is then what are these tests measuring if not "intelligence" or do you accept they are measuring intelligence (as in G) in part? Then the next question would be to what degree?

This brings into question what Hyksos was getting at. The Standardized test not being a static indicator of intelligence.

So, we then have the issue of are people becoming more "intelligent" (IQ has "risen", meaning if everyone took an IQ test from decades ago they'd be classed as "gifted".) This has been countered by the effect of technology on learning, better diet and education (that is these things have allowed intelligence to flourish rather than heightened innate IQ - possibly?)

Hyksos -

If you return then I would like to open up one line of investigation in which you can expose me to new information (I hope.) That is the differences between explicit and implicit memory. These are two, distinct, yet related functions. I would say explicit memory is required for "intelligence" where purely implicit memory is more in line with habituation - although I am ready to concede that this is not a strict delineation as there is a capacity for "learning" here. The question is then how we relate explicit and implicit learning? How, and if, they interact and to what degree (as far as I know they are not strictly "separate" and bolster each other to some degree.

It is the interaction of imagination in the functioning of implicit motor memory that I find particularly interesting. This would likely involve a stronger relation to episodic memory (events) and future planning than it would to semantic memory (facts). What has always been a big question for me is the role played by the cerebellum in this process. If you've read a lot of material about memory I'd be extremely grateful to hear what insights you have about how the cerebellum interacts with memory retrieval and storage; both explicit and implicit, and the possible correlations and differences between the two.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby hyksos on April 10th, 2018, 3:05 am 

My long posts elaborating on each metric were removed by a forum moderator.

>_>
User avatar
hyksos
Active Member
 
Posts: 1232
Joined: 28 Nov 2014


Re: build a better IQ test

Postby BadgerJelly on April 10th, 2018, 3:18 am 

:( This likely happened around the time Biv's post was deleted too. There was a glitch it appears.

Hope you find the time to outline at least what you wrote - I have read a bit in this particular area so you may not need to go into intricate details - we'll see.
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5133
Joined: 14 Mar 2012



Return to Behavioral Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests