6,353
edits
Talk:IQ: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
No edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 69: | Line 69: | ||
: Yeah, it's actually very good. I was just annoyed that you completely altered the lede while I was gone tbh. I think four paragraphs, (what wikipedia advises) is a good general guide to optimal lede length. And I think the article is worthy of being A-class classified. I'll unlock soon and you can change what you don't like. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 23:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC) | : Yeah, it's actually very good. I was just annoyed that you completely altered the lede while I was gone tbh. I think four paragraphs, (what wikipedia advises) is a good general guide to optimal lede length. And I think the article is worthy of being A-class classified. I'll unlock soon and you can change what you don't like. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) 23:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC) | ||
:: Your recent additions and revisions are very good, just finished reading them. It seems I messed up pretty much every figure regarding sd and percentiles, LOL. I agree on A-class. The only thing I'd improve are details like to add a figure for the re-test reliability in the lede (generally >.8 for complex IQ tests), which would still be "very high" (the "very" could then be re-added). The "dedicated" in the lede seems a bit confusing to me, because the descriptions that follow seem to apply to any IQ test, not just ones that are 'dedicated' to something. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ChNnDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA219&lpg=PA219 Simmonton's research] is relevant to the negative correlation between high achievement and RS. There are various results like [https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8748&context=rtd this] on gifted children have a bit better motor skills, athleticism, hand-eye coordination, which might be relevant to the respective sections. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 17:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC) | :: Your recent additions and revisions are very good, just finished reading them. It seems I messed up pretty much every figure regarding sd and percentiles, LOL. I agree on A-class. The only thing I'd improve are details like to add a figure for the re-test reliability in the lede (generally >.8 for complex IQ tests), which would still be "very high" (the "very" could then be re-added). The "dedicated" in the lede seems a bit confusing to me, because the descriptions that follow seem to apply to any IQ test, not just ones that are 'dedicated' to something. [https://books.google.com/books?id=ChNnDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA219&lpg=PA219 Simmonton's research] is relevant to the negative correlation between high achievement and RS. There are various results like [https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8748&context=rtd this] on gifted children have a bit better motor skills, athleticism, hand-eye coordination, which might be relevant to the respective sections. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 17:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC) | ||
:::: I'll unlock the article, you can change what you want, not interested in edit wars and they are against the rules anyway. I think our conflict over this article has actually improved it substantially, so competition is good in this respect. | |||
> "It seems I messed up pretty much every figure regarding sd and percentiles, LOL." | |||
It's fine, we all make mistakes. I screwed up a lot on the demographics article Australia section also as I wrote that whole section in a hurry (but corrected it when I noticed it). Can be easily fixed. | |||
> "The only thing I'd improve are details like to add a figure for the re-test reliability in the lede (generally >.8 for complex IQ tests)" | |||
Yeah, there seems to be a positive relationship between quality of the test and reliability, and low reliability only really seems to apply to Matrix reasoning type tests as they seem really prone to initial practice effects for whatever reasons (I'd suspect this improvement itself is also substantially g-loaded despite "Goodheart's law", I bet higher IQ people improve more with minimal practice in this specific task). A comprehensive assessment has very high test-retest reliability in most cases. So it'd be fine to add that. | |||
> "There are various results like [https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8748&context=rtd this] on gifted children have a bit better motor skills" | |||
That study seems a tad dubious to me, in terms of low sample size and weird measurements of total athleticism, but it's a robust finding that higher IQ is associated with better fine motor skills (at least below a certain threshold but the stories of clumsy geniuses are likely because such skills are weakly g-loaded and genius seems to be associated with a weakening of 'g' wherein they are extremely specialized in certain cognitive areas). There is also barely any solid research on this topic anyway, so it'd be good to add. [[User:Altmark22|Altmark22]] ([[User talk:Altmark22|talk]]) | |||
==Dysgenics== | ==Dysgenics== | ||
Article needs a section on the Woodley effect and the evidence of substantial secular declines in intelligence to give a more balanced overview of this issue as compared to the coverage of this topic on certain other wikis. | Article needs a section on the Woodley effect and the evidence of substantial secular declines in intelligence to give a more balanced overview of this issue as compared to the coverage of this topic on certain other wikis. | ||
: Agreed, that would be a good addition. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 17:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC) | : Agreed, that would be a good addition. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 17:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC) | ||