Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
Woohoo! 80%!
Guest
Unregistered
G
Clancy said:
An intelligence test about intelligence tests.
I got one question correct.
Thanks for the bibliography, but since none of them link, I can't see what any of the authors say.
Is your point that there's agreement that there's a correlation between IQ and job performance (specifically, the higher the IQ, the better the job performance?)
If that's your claim, could you post an excerpt from one of these articles in support of it and which IQ tests they're using? If that's the claim it just seems a little ironic (as well as, imo, unsupported), considering how IQ testing started in the U.S.
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
I can easily imagine how such a test is culturally biased. It is easy to see if you take do extreme thought experiment.
Suppose you take a bushman directly from the Kalahari to do a Hicks test, because if you assume the test is not culturally biased in any way, it should not make any difference from which culture the test subject is. We explain to him what he's supposed to do, he thinks "W!hat the Fuk! I di!dn't un!derstand a word of t!hat." and see how he performs.
His failure shows that the test is biased on language. The test can only be used if:
- all test subjects have English as their first language or
- there is an equal percentage of african immigrants (with another language then English as their first language) as 'white' immigrants with another language then English as their first language (and a language equally distinct from English as the languages of the African immigrants)
Of course this is an extreme example. A weaker, but more common bias is against people:
- who speak a different dialect or 'slang' than the people who give them the instructions
- who have a lower social status or are economically disadvantaged, since people like that tend to have lower language skills.
There are other factors too:
- Blacks tend to be (on average) poorer than whites. This means that white people have (on average) more electronic equipment in their home, making them perhaps more 'button-confident'.
- This is especially true of computergames: whites are more likely to play computergames, making them more trained in tests involving buttons.
- A very important factor is that blacks are more conscious of the way IQ tests have been abused to discriminate against them. This makes them more nervous about tests that are claimed to be designed to test a part of their intelligence. Whites see an intelligence test as an objective test, while blacks tend to be more paranoid about the motives of the researchers. Nervousness can influence the result of the test too.
I've heard once about an experiment in which blacks were asked to do IQ tests, but the researchers didn't tell it was an IQ test. Instead they said it was a game, and it was just for fun. The result was that the difference between black and white perfomance disappeared. Would be difficult to find a reference about it though...
While the white kids sit at home playing with their playstation, the black kids are shootin' some b-ball on the street. Okay, oversimplification. But don't you think it might cause a difference in average skills of large groups, if individuals in one group are on average more likely to do certain things than individuals in the other group?
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
LukeT:
I sure hope it was 8 or 6...I got one question correct.
bpesta22
Cereal Killer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2001
- Messages
- 4,942
Clancy.
Here's some abstracts from a quick library search. The last one deals with the issue of race differences:
Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life.
Appears In
Intelligence. Vol 24(1), Jan-Feb 1997, 79-132
Personnel selection research provides much evidence that intelligence (g) is an important predictor of performance in training and on the job, especially in higher level work. This article provides evidence that g has pervasive utility in work settings because it is essentially the ability to deal with cognitive complexity, in particular, with complex information processing. The more complex a work task, the greater the advantages that higher g confers in performing it well. Everyday tasks, like job duties, also differ in their level of complexity. The importance of intelligence therefore differs systematically across different arenas of social life as well as economic endeavor. Data from the National Adult Literacy Survey are used to show how higher levels of cognitive ability systematically improve individuals' odds of dealing successfully with the ordinary demands of modern life (such as banking, using maps, reading and understanding forms, interpreting news articles). These and other data are summarized to illustrate how the advantages of higher g, even when they are small, cumulate to affect the overall life chances of individuals at different ranges of the IQ bell curve.
Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications.
Appears In
Psychology, Public Policy, &Law. Vol 2(3-4), Sep-Dec 1996, 447-472.
General mental ability (intelligence) is the dominant determinant of the large individual differences in work output on the job revealed by research, but highly visible individual differences in citizenship behavior on the job make the intelligence-performance relationship harder to observe in everyday life. Over time, the validity of job experience for predicting performance declines, while that of ability remains constant or increases. Path analyses indicate that the major reason ability predicts performance so well is that higher ability individuals learn relevant job knowledge more quickly and learn more of it. The current social policy that strongly discourages use of mental ability in hiring is counterproductive and has produced severe performance decrements. This policy should be changed to encourage the use of ability measures. However, it should also encourage the use of personality measures that increase overall predictive validity while simultaneously reducing differences in minority-majority hiring rates
Reconsidering fairness: A matter of social and ethical priorities.
Appears In
Journal of Vocational Behavior. Vol 33(3), Dec 1988, 293-319.
Publisher Info
Elsevier Science, US. 1988.
Abstract
Reviews evidence that it is primarily the g (intelligence) factor among mental tests that accounts for their validity in predicting job performance, and that Black-White differences in g are real, large, and stubborn and thus can be expected to lead to especially high levels of adverse impact in mid- and high-level jobs. Examples are provided of how race norming and other forms of preferential treatment designed to prevent adverse impact are counterproductive in the long run, perhaps especially if practiced covertly. Strategies are reviewed by which organizations may cultivate the appearance of having avoided adverse impact while simultaneously maintaining or improving the efficiency and equity of personnel systems, without actually having accomplished that feat. Finally, it is argued that the newer conceptions of fairness, which emphasize group parity rather than individual merit, may consign Blacks and other favored groups to 2nd-class citizenship. (PsycINFO
Here's some abstracts from a quick library search. The last one deals with the issue of race differences:
Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life.
Appears In
Intelligence. Vol 24(1), Jan-Feb 1997, 79-132
Personnel selection research provides much evidence that intelligence (g) is an important predictor of performance in training and on the job, especially in higher level work. This article provides evidence that g has pervasive utility in work settings because it is essentially the ability to deal with cognitive complexity, in particular, with complex information processing. The more complex a work task, the greater the advantages that higher g confers in performing it well. Everyday tasks, like job duties, also differ in their level of complexity. The importance of intelligence therefore differs systematically across different arenas of social life as well as economic endeavor. Data from the National Adult Literacy Survey are used to show how higher levels of cognitive ability systematically improve individuals' odds of dealing successfully with the ordinary demands of modern life (such as banking, using maps, reading and understanding forms, interpreting news articles). These and other data are summarized to illustrate how the advantages of higher g, even when they are small, cumulate to affect the overall life chances of individuals at different ranges of the IQ bell curve.
Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications.
Appears In
Psychology, Public Policy, &Law. Vol 2(3-4), Sep-Dec 1996, 447-472.
General mental ability (intelligence) is the dominant determinant of the large individual differences in work output on the job revealed by research, but highly visible individual differences in citizenship behavior on the job make the intelligence-performance relationship harder to observe in everyday life. Over time, the validity of job experience for predicting performance declines, while that of ability remains constant or increases. Path analyses indicate that the major reason ability predicts performance so well is that higher ability individuals learn relevant job knowledge more quickly and learn more of it. The current social policy that strongly discourages use of mental ability in hiring is counterproductive and has produced severe performance decrements. This policy should be changed to encourage the use of ability measures. However, it should also encourage the use of personality measures that increase overall predictive validity while simultaneously reducing differences in minority-majority hiring rates
Reconsidering fairness: A matter of social and ethical priorities.
Appears In
Journal of Vocational Behavior. Vol 33(3), Dec 1988, 293-319.
Publisher Info
Elsevier Science, US. 1988.
Abstract
Reviews evidence that it is primarily the g (intelligence) factor among mental tests that accounts for their validity in predicting job performance, and that Black-White differences in g are real, large, and stubborn and thus can be expected to lead to especially high levels of adverse impact in mid- and high-level jobs. Examples are provided of how race norming and other forms of preferential treatment designed to prevent adverse impact are counterproductive in the long run, perhaps especially if practiced covertly. Strategies are reviewed by which organizations may cultivate the appearance of having avoided adverse impact while simultaneously maintaining or improving the efficiency and equity of personnel systems, without actually having accomplished that feat. Finally, it is argued that the newer conceptions of fairness, which emphasize group parity rather than individual merit, may consign Blacks and other favored groups to 2nd-class citizenship. (PsycINFO
bpesta22
Cereal Killer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2001
- Messages
- 4,942
Earthborn said:
Anyone who'd give IQ test instructions in english to a non-english speaker is a moron. You don't see many morons in this field.
I'd bet if the Bushman had the task explained to him in his native language, and if he were allowed some practice time to familiarize himself with the completely novel task, that his score on the task would predict important things in his culture (e.g., his status).
I'd bet also that if you take bunch of bushmen and have them do this task, then correlate the results with the bushman's own ratings of who in their tribe is smart / stupid, you'd get a significant correlation.
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
I guess the people in the 1920s who advocated immigration control based on such intelligence tests were morons then.
I tend to disagree. I am always surprised about the number of reseachers who claim to be able to measure IQs above 150, even above 200. Its ridiculous...
I doubt it. It would probably be more of a test of how much you allow the test subject to be prepared for the task. I'm sure you can increase the score of anyone if only you give them more attention.
It's nice to see how you avoided my points though. My extreme example of the bushman was to show that differences in language can cause a bias. Something that should also have an effect (albeit smaller) on smaller differences of language ability. But you avoided that.
You also avoided my points about how differences in training in 'test-like' tasks and differences in how subjects perceive such testing can skew the results.
Guest
Unregistered
G
Earthborn said:LukeT:I sure hope it was 8 or 6...
Well, I don't know. I didn't look to see which one I got right. But it sure would explain why I had a hard time arguing about races and IQs at Stormfront.
So what would it take for everybody to give debating some White Nationalists a shot?
For a long time, I imagined a bunch of iron-pumping skinheads packing automatic weapons, but every once in a while, one of them posts a picture of themselves. It turns out they are just a bunch of scrawny losers packing automatic weapons.
bpesta22
Cereal Killer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2001
- Messages
- 4,942
Earthborn said:
I guess I avoided it because I don't see how the language argument applies in the hick task, which involves touching light bulbs.
Assuming the instructions are given in one's native language, I can't see how this test could be biased.
and, as to the unfamiliarity of the task to a bushman, we have the added complication that IQ strongly predicts how well people learn novel tasks.
The irony being that the bushman who took the least amount of time adjusting to the bulb task is also the smartest.
Sorry, I avoided them because I didn't find them very compelling.
There's a rich literature on controlling for everything environmental, and the kitchen sink, yet still finding race differences.
I'm not claiming the race difference is genetic, but if it is environmental, it sure is illusive.
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
So if you don't think it is mostly environmental, how do you explain the Flynn effect?
http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/flynneffect.html
IQ scores have been rising globally, and the current theory of this is is because people are getting more trained at IQ tests and test-like tasks. There are some other ideas, all of them environmental.
If the environment can cause such dramatic increases, it no hard to imagine that people who are in an underprivileged environment are falling behind.
http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/flynneffect.html
IQ scores have been rising globally, and the current theory of this is is because people are getting more trained at IQ tests and test-like tasks. There are some other ideas, all of them environmental.
If the environment can cause such dramatic increases, it no hard to imagine that people who are in an underprivileged environment are falling behind.
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
Here's another short article on the Flynn Effect that specifically mentions the gap betwen black and white:
http://www.americanscientist.org/articles/97articles/nflynn.html
Perhaps the black IQ is just 50 years behind?
http://www.americanscientist.org/articles/97articles/nflynn.html
Perhaps the black IQ is just 50 years behind?
Nope. Tall doesn't mean athletic, it just means tall.
I have no idea if you are being obtuse, or playing the devils advocate, or I am not being clear enough.
So i'll try again.
We all come from the same genetic stock. Literally. All people on earth, with exception of many parts of Africa descend from the same group of people that left Africa many thousands of years ago. In order for any of these people to be bred more or less intelligent, selective breeding, such as we do with dogs and horses, would have to have taken place. It never did.
Throw the Jews in there too. It's cultural.
I am going to make a statement here that is somewhat of a stereotype, but nonetheless remains true in many cases: Blacks in the US have a culture which does -not-, in general, promote scholastic achievement. Popular urban culture is sometimes flat out anti-intellectual. This holds more true for that minority in the US than for any other.
The reverse is true for Asian-American and Jewish culture. Both of these peoples, so to speak, put heavy emphasis on education. This most likely means these people will simply be better educated, as education isn't a one way thing. The person has to want to learn, and apply him or herself. You don't stick a person in school and have them just soak up knowledge.
bpesta22
Cereal Killer
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2001
- Messages
- 4,942
Earthborn said:
Could be.
But, there are other explanations for the Flynn effect in the articles you link to, including better technology, and nuitrition.
I think it's fair to say: The Flynn effect is real, we don't yet know what causes it.
Just as it's fair to say: Race differences on IQ tests are real, we just don't know yet what causes them.
For the later, we have the added proviso that we've ruled out many (all?) simple environmental explanations for the differences.
I don't think IQ bashers can have their cake and eat it too. If IQ tests are culturally biased (i.e., measure something besides IQ) then why do tests scores predict equally well for whites and blacks?
Why do smart black people achieve more than less smart black or less smart white people?
At the individual level, the iq test is race blind. At the group level, large differences exist.
So, how come the regression equation based on white subjects works just as well for predicting social outcomes with black subjects???
Although every basketball coach will agree it's difficult to teach a guy how to be 7' tall.Fade said:
Sounds like an interesting study. When will you publish to back up your intelligence assertion?
Too bad the data doesn't agree with you. Care to cite something?
More doctoral level studies. When will you find the time to do them?
BTW, blacks in Africa do even worse. See, crossbreeding maybe does help. (DNA analysis could possibly be used to make such a study, but PC'libness would never allow it to be done imhsho.)