In other words, the better they did on the IQ test, the worse they did on the practical test and the better they did on the practical tests, the worse they did on the IQ test.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
IQ in general has improved since tests first began. Psychologists think that this is because modern life becomes ever more complicated.
I can well imagine that certain writers, even writers that we'd consider today very great writers, may not necessarily have tested highly on IQ just because of their numerical skills, or maybe they may not be very good at memory, and are not particularly good at these kinds of tests.
When student performance shows increases on test scores, that improvement is not associated with an increase in 'fluid intelligence' - that is, using logical thinking and problem solving in novel situations, rather than recalling previously learned facts and skills.
The latest research has revealed that women have a higher IQ than men.
Historically, absolute IQ scores have risen substantially as we've changed our environment so that more people go to school longer.
Perhaps measuring animal intelligence by comparing it to human intelligence isn't the best litmus test.
I hate tests. It's a really lousy way to judge a person's ability.
But the person who scored well on an SAT will not necessarily be the best doctor or the best lawyer or the best businessman. These tests do not measure character, leadership, creativity, perseverance.
Well, first of all, we did lots of studies where we show practical intelligence doesn't correlate with G. We have probably two dozen studies that practical intelligence better predicts job success than IQ.
The best intelligence test is what we do with our leisure.
No opposing quotes found.