It seems to me, given the origins of IQ testing as a method of identifying students who may have academic difficulty*, if it had not been named 'intelligence' testing but had been named 'academic readiness' testing, a world of pain, suffering, misguided thinking both by laypersons and scholars, etc. would have been avoided. Intelligence seems to focus on an internal capacity compared to academic readiness, which allows for any number of influencing factors to be examined. It becomes less a description of an immutable characteristic, and instead a description of a person embedded in a life circumstance.
But, what's done is done. Therefore, these futile discussions will continue. *as represented by Wertheimer, 2012; A Brief History of Psychology, 5th edition Paul On Apr 8, 2014, at 2:41 PM, John Kulig wrote: It is possible that g may be modularized at the neural level, but for me here is the issue: we have measuring instruments that can measure g (at least, items that load heavily on the factor we label 'g'). This g score is usually the best single predictor of things like occupational success, school success, etc. Heritability is also highest on the g-items. Would measuring instruments of separate modules such as memory or specific forms of reasoning do a better job predicting - alone or in aggregate? ========================== John W. Kulig, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology Coordinator, Psychology Honors Plymouth State University Plymouth NH 03264 ========================== ________________________________ From: "Mike Palij" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "Michael Palij" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:30:39 PM Subject: [tips] How Intelligent is IQ? - Neuroskeptic | DiscoverMagazine.com<http://DiscoverMagazine.com> On Tue, 08 Apr 2014 05:55:37 -0700, Christopher Green wrote: >Maybe there is no g. Maybe there are independent memory and >reasoning functions but statistically they look like g because >almost all IQ test tasks require both. > http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2012/12/24/how-intelligent-is-iq/#.U0Pwfui9KSM Which reminds: did they ever resolve the modularity and g conundrum? That is, if there really is such a thing like g, how does it account for the evidence of modularity of cognitive processes that appears to operate independently of each other (i.e., uncorrelated)? See for example: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02643294.2011.557231#.U0Q_WKLeRfQ Really, does anyone seriously entertain "g" as a theoretical construct and not a by-product of higher-order factor analysis? -Mike Palij New York University [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66454&n=T&l=tips&o=35955 or send a blank email to leave-35955-13338.f659d005276678c0696b7f6beda66...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263003&n=T&l=tips&o=35956 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-35956-13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263...@fsulist.frostburg.edu<mailto:leave-35956-13441.4e79e96ebb5671bdb50111f18f263...@fsulist.frostburg.edu> --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=35958 or send a blank email to leave-35958-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
