Talk:Progressing a Paradigm Shift in Psychometrics

From PsychWiki - A Collaborative Psychology Wiki

Revision as of 16:41, 8 June 2008 by AndyFugard (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

Every normal man, woman, and child is ... a genius at something

On Spearman's:

"Every normal man, woman, and child is ... a genius at something ... It remains to discover at what ..."

Does this really hold? What does it leave out? Presumably the correlations between lots of tasks cannot be ignored, nor can the importance of individual abilities. I like what Johnson and Bouchard (2007) [Sex Differences in Mental Abilities: g Masks the Dimensions on Which They Lie. Intelligence, 2007, 35, 23-39] have to say:

"... we have presented evidence supporting the idealized notion of general intelligence as a general-purpose mechanism that accesses a toolbox made up of components that vary from individual to individual. Though everyone clearly has most if not all of the same tools, individuals appear to differ not only in the skill with which they use their tools, but also in the specific tools they habitually use. For some of the more specific tools, it would appear that using one tool means failing to use another..."
"Performance on image rotation tasks is known to predict success in fields such as airplane piloting, engineering, physical sciences, and fine arts better than does general intelligence, and especially verbal ability [...] What has perhaps not been recognized is that inclusion of verbal ability in assessments used to recruit individuals to those fields may actually act to impair efforts to select those with the talents most relevant to the jobs in question.

This hints at the same sort of thing?

--AndyFugard 09:40, 8 June 2008 (PDT)

Personal tools