The discussion centers on the validity of IQ tests in measuring intelligence, particularly in light of the observation that repeated testing often leads to improved scores. Participants conclude that while practice can enhance scores, this does not indicate an actual increase in intelligence. IQ tests are deemed reliable for identifying developmental disorders when administered by certified psychologists, but their validity for other purposes, such as bragging rights, is questioned. Ultimately, accomplishments in real life hold more significance than test scores.
PREREQUISITESPsychologists, educators, and individuals interested in the implications of IQ testing for assessing intelligence and developmental disorders.
In short, no. There have been many theads on the subject here on PF. I suggest a forum search. The links at the bottom of this page are a good place to start.Frenemy90210 said:
If I take the same test over and over again, this is quite true.Frenemy90210 said:
Mine generally stays the same. But I only take them about once every 10 years, so I don't think I'm "practicing".
see Phinds' post.
No, I think this says that the score is not independent on whether you have taken the test before. Still, isn't this true with any test? Now, we can try a separate experiment: prepare for the test _ without taking it_ if there is a (statistically) - significant difference between the two, maybe you can argue that Intelligence ( as implicitly defined) is not a menaingful construct. Notice that IQ/Intelligence are latent constructs and not direct observables, just as is the case with depression, etc. There are only so many different types of questions one may ask in an IQ ( or other type) of test. Knowing the answers in advance will undoubtedly affect your score.Frenemy90210 said:
V50 is correct, IQ tests were created to identify learning/develpmental disorders. When given by a certified psychologist testing for these disorders, they can be useful in getting appropriate help for the disabled person.Vanadium 50 said: