From: roberts@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Eric Roberts)
Subject: Re: IQ Test?
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Univ. of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 20:05:49 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.131706.20033@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> johnson@sleipnir.mnesouth.corp.mot.com writes:
>In article <mike_steiner-070193170153@192.35.50.131>, mike_steiner@qm.claris.com (Mike Steiner) writes:
>=)In article <1993Jan7.060255.2079@julian.uwo.ca>, roberts@gaul.csd.uwo.ca
>=)(Eric Roberts) wrote:
>=)> 
>=)> In article <01GT7GVXIZAAADDWGI@ccfvx3.draper.com> skh4161@mvs.draper.com (Kjeld Hvatum) writes:
>=)
>=)> >You're right if you're talking about the kind of small differences (130
>=)> >IQ vs. 140 IQ) that seem to be important to some people.  But if you're
>=)> >talking about 67 IQ vs. 143, your statement is very likely to be flat
>=)> >wrong.
>=)> >
>=)> debate. (I am aware of the fact the studies have shown that IQ
>=)> can not be increased significantly, the largest increase I have ever
>=)> read about was 30-40 points, maybe the reason for this is that we are
>=)> not educating in the proper manner.)  
>=)More than likely it means that there is an inherent limit in each person. 
>=)If it were a matter of education, then wouldn't there be less of a
>=)differential between the highest and lowest measurements?
>
>As far as changes in IQ, I'd be interested to know how controlled the
>circumstances were when documenting 30 to 40 point changes.  I,
>personally, have got a fairly inconsistent set of results:
>
>Age	IQ
>---------------------
>7	179  test unknown
>13	110  test unknown
>18	135  estimated through percentile from SAT
>18	144  estimated through percentile from ACT
>34	165  Langdon Polymath (self-scored)
>
>My own theory is that I think differently enough from most people that I
>can excel in some areas which are considered difficult, while falling down
>in others which most people find easier.  Thus, my score is far more
>dependent on the individual test, or even the individual questions, than
>people whose mental skills are arranged in a more typical fashion.  In
>particular, I would score higher on a test which was designed with
>questions and problems that the writers considered harder.  It
>could be interpreted, though, that my IQ dropped an amazing 69 points in
>the second seven years of my life, and rebounded almost completely since
>then.  I suspect I may be highly abnormal in this inconsistency, but most
>probably not unique.
>Another question might be who actually documented these changes.  If it
>was somebody intent on demonstrating a system for increasing IQ, I would
>be more skeptical of the results than if it was more pure research.  Any
>details, Eric, on these 30 to 40 point changes you mentioned?
Those results were documented by several researchers. 
The research wes usually done by giving an IQ test, coaching the person
for some limited amount of time on basic problem solving techniques,
given another IQ test. I do not personally find this research very
convincing. The reason I mentioned it in my post, was that if I did not
I would have people sending me flames for the next two weeks about it.:)
You will find material about this in any book about IQ tests...
>
>Also BTW, I'd be interested in knowing if anyone else experiences the
>level of inconsistency that I do, or has any better explanation for it,
>just for my own curiosity.
>-- 
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| "Johnson"                              |Just because you're paranoid doesn't|
>| johnson@sleipnir.mnesouth.corp.mot.com |   mean they're not out to get you. |
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>| Let's face it; if our lawyers knew what went on here, they'd shut us down.  |
>+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+


Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa