Will you become more intelligent or you just will be able to fake being more intelligent?I dont want to brag, but i am really good at counting stars with 4 and 5 spikes.
>>16904095>Will you become more intelligent or you just will be able to fake being more intelligent?Neither.
>>16904097Training iq tests doesnt improve your performance? That sounds impossible.
>>16904106It certainly does.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cogs.12562I think it stands to reason that the other components of the WAIS-V can be improved with practice.
>>16904095You *SHOULD* train IQ tests.Obviously not to an obsessive level, but getting familiar with them is important.If you aren't, individual measurements will vary a lot and be inaccurate.
uneducated pseuds be like>iq isnt real! it's useless!okay then go ahead go train and get a 150 score?>ughh s-shut upp! it's fake! shut uppp
>>16904095>If you train doing Iq testsIf you "train" on an IQ test you're literally invalidating what the test is meant to measure.You are so unintelligent you do not understand what an IQ test is.>>16904725You're an idiot who failed to understand the arguments being made at him, as highlighted by your propensity towards idiotic strawman greentext. I mean we're talking serious category error stupidity here.
>>16904567That makes sense
>>16904826At least i know how to read you moron. Read the title of the thread again.
>>16904106It completely invalidates the test. A GOOD IQ test administered by a respectable body (***NOT INTERNET SHIT***, no internet IQ test is real) measures your ability to incorporate novel information and adapt it to increasingly complex problems. That's why the tests are timed and heavily punish you for guessing wrong answers. It's not testing whether you can get the answer right by taking the test home and puzzling it out for a night. It's testing how quickly you can grok the thing in front of you in a tight enough window to actually discriminate different examinees' individual capabilities.If you take an IQ test once, and get 120, and then take it again and get 150, that doesn't mean you got smarter, that means the test is now invalid because you've been pre-exposed to the information set. Yes, as you might imagine, this means IQ tests are, in general, not exquisitely accurate, but hey still provide useful predictions, particularly for societal studies.
>>16904830"If you train doing Iq tests." isn't even a complete sentence you fucking idiot.
>>16904567It doesn't make you "smarter". It makes you better at scoring higher on the test. Which makes your score a less-accurate indicator of your actual intelligence. Because what the test is testing is how quickly you can learn. You didn't make yourself learn quicker by studying IQ tests. It's something that's innate to you, all you did was create a number for you to feel good about yourself, or maybe advertise to some employer who's going to get a raw deal.
>>16904832How about if YOU CONTINUE READING YOU FUCKING MONGOLOID?
>>16904836Total nonsense. Why do you think Mensa has a practice test on their site?
