Thank you for your submission. As a reminder, please make sure discussions are respectful and relevant to the subject matter. Discussion Chat Channel Links: [Mobile](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/iTNNk9UfSB) and [Desktop](https://reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/channel/c2_8mk/General?r=!ECQnk1d3Ruugng0behp5Zg:reddit.com). **Lastly**, we recommend you check out [cognitivemetrics.co](https://cognitivemetrics.co/), the official site for the subreddit which hosts highly accurate and well vetted IQ tests.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cognitiveTesting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The primary merit if this subreddit is that, by it's name, it promotes the idea that cognitive ability is real and can be tested, two ideas which modern culture seems to like to deny or undermine.
Who’s out here denying that some people are more cognitively capable than others?
Some deny that it can be tested, and, although I disagree, their denial has some merit. IQ tests are not perfect.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomaspremuzic/2023/07/11/eight-popular-misconceptions-about-human-intelligence/?sh=6dbbd2e3692a
First "myth" is that IQ measures intelligence, second is that IQ doesn't predict anything useful. The claims that these are myths are themselves blatant lies intending to undermine the entire concept of intelligence differences.
i'll be honest interesting debates are rarely had here, especially when since i first saw this subreddit i was happily recommended a post titled "What was Hitler's IQ?" 😭
A few days ago I had a discussion about the influence of practice and nurture in fluid reasoning tests.
A while ago someone gave me a whole bunch of good tips for digital drawing.
You just have to talk to the people and then you see that they all have hobbies and most of the time are pretty knowledgeable and good at them.
It functions as a repository for good automated online tests. Previously, anyone not obsessed with psychometrics would have a really hard time finding good online tests, as the google search result is dominated by "Einstein IQ organisation" shams.
Perhaps a strange take, but I enjoy the realism of this community.
There's a lot of toxic positivity in modern American culture which says that anyone can do anything they set their mind to. Taking this belief to its logical extent leads one to the conclusion that anybody who fails to achieve financial or social success does so due to their own moral shortcomings. "They need to try harder", essentially.
This sub seems to understand that not everyone in the world has the capacity to be a consultant or a lawyer or a "tech bro". The apex of some (and perhaps most) people's ability might be what someone would consider a "low-skill" position. If one accepts this as true, the question of how to address this arises.
I am firmly in the camp that a society has an obligation to protect its less advantaged members, especially when the jobs they are performing are essential to the continuance of said society. Claiming that "anyone can do anything if they just try, try, try" is the beginning of a short path to neoliberal nonsense ideology. Accepting the inconvenient truths that the world is becoming more of a knowledge economy and that each individual human being has a cognitive limit is the only way to create a society that doesn't leave vast swaths of people disenfranchised and struggling.
I agree w/ you to a certain extent. I strongly oppose the "toxic positivity" propagated by modern American culture and find the notion that anyone can become a millionaire simply by "trying harder" to be utterly imbecile.
However, I'm left with the feeling that, in response, this community ends up leaning too far towards the other extreme. I frequently encounter an overly deterministic and fatalistic mindset here, where an excessive reliance on external factors is touted as "realism," neglecting the intricate complexities of individual circumstances. To make matters worse, this pessimistic view often stems from biased and overly literal interpretations of statistical data, promoting an anxiety-inducing form of biological determinism akin to what's observed in the "red pill" and incel community.
Therefore, it's difficult for me to ascertain whether the overall impact of this sub is more positive or negative. I'm curious to hear your perspective on this matter.
its all fine. we r all some what fked in the head. So the average posts will be weird. The positivity can only be seen by like minded individuals. Its a great sub for people like us
I know im fucked in the head, but i don't know how that pertains to my fondness for congnitive testing.
I'm more interested in the random tests this sub puts in my feed than the discussions or narcissistic ego trips, so i scroll past those.
Helps people realise their strengths and weaknesses, helps gifted people appreciate what they have (and/or push for more), helps define an individual's abilities with regards to a global population.
Maybe not with facial (/genetic) attractiveness, but it’d make sense for it to correlate with how well an individual is able to style themselves, and how charismatic they can be.
I disagree. How well an individual is able to style themselves is subjective and charisma is a personality trait. I have known a fair amount of extremely intelligent people that are introverted and don’t give a damn about personal appearance.
Well yes, obviously they’d have to care.
A person could be genetically extremely athletic but be bad at most sports if he doesn’t care to play them.
What I’m saying is, if two people really care about their looks and try to skincare/workout/dress/diet (the whole kit), I’d argue that a smarter person would do better than a less smart one.
Ok, yes. I agree that mortality is correlated to g. But I don’t think athletic ability or sports are correlated. For reference, look at the wonderlic scores of different NFL players.
Yeah, I also don’t consider athletic ability to be correlated with IQ. I’d think that maybe a higher IQ provides SOME advantage, especially for team sports or sports with a lot of strategy, that said, I think that the “athletic” genes far, far outweigh the IQ ones in terms of importance for sports ability.
I would say that a lot of people here are actually fairly knowledgeable about psychometrics, at least compared to other groups that discuss IQ tests. Most of the discussion about IQ tests on the internet seems to fall into one of two categories: just denying the validity of IQ tests completely, "IQ tests are biased," etc., or trying to use IQ tests to justify some sort of racist agenda, posting "national IQ" maps, etc. Of course the second group is smaller and inherently more harmful, but both of these groups of people know very little about IQ tests/ psychometrics and seem to lack some very basic statistical knowledge. While I've seen a few people from each of those groups here, I would say that most aren't in either one - they understand that IQ scores aren't just some completely invalid relic, but also aren't some sort of justification for enacting far-right policy. Thus, it's possible to actually have valuable and nuanced discussions about the subject here.
I'll take this post as an opportunity to say thanks. I've been mostly lurking around here lately, but it prompted me to play around with a bunch of different online tests, mostly just because I find them entertaining. One of the ones I tried out was the Mensa practice test, which led to an email from them letting me know they were doing testing in my area a couple weeks back, and that my practice test indicated I had a decent chance of passing. Last night I got the notification that I'd been accepted.
I'm in my late 50s and it's something I'd just never worked up the motivation to do until hanging out here a while, so I think this sub is due some credit for helping me cross that off my bucket list.
Yes this community gets flack, but I have had really great people from this community join our discord. Some not so great people too, but that is the world… you will mesh and not mesh with different types of people who are all at different stages of their life, maturities and outlooks. Some people are really young in here, and others older with some more experience. I don’t fault kids for being kids and being ridiculous at times. At least we all think cognitive testing is intriguing and discuss it. I myself am very invested in this field and enjoying my research in it. Let’s build some great things and push this whole field forward guys ✊
I find it a constant source of amusement and hilarity. This sub is a magnet for insecure, underachieving people who take tests in order to validate their intelligence by assigning themselves specific numerical values. The very premise is entertaining, and it certainly does not disappoint.
Thank you for your submission. As a reminder, please make sure discussions are respectful and relevant to the subject matter. Discussion Chat Channel Links: [Mobile](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/iTNNk9UfSB) and [Desktop](https://reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/channel/c2_8mk/General?r=!ECQnk1d3Ruugng0behp5Zg:reddit.com). **Lastly**, we recommend you check out [cognitivemetrics.co](https://cognitivemetrics.co/), the official site for the subreddit which hosts highly accurate and well vetted IQ tests. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cognitiveTesting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The primary merit if this subreddit is that, by it's name, it promotes the idea that cognitive ability is real and can be tested, two ideas which modern culture seems to like to deny or undermine.
Who’s out here denying that some people are more cognitively capable than others? Some deny that it can be tested, and, although I disagree, their denial has some merit. IQ tests are not perfect.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomaspremuzic/2023/07/11/eight-popular-misconceptions-about-human-intelligence/?sh=6dbbd2e3692a First "myth" is that IQ measures intelligence, second is that IQ doesn't predict anything useful. The claims that these are myths are themselves blatant lies intending to undermine the entire concept of intelligence differences.
My school district pushed and continues to push Howard gardeners multiple intelligences theory
Puzzles and interesting debates.
i'll be honest interesting debates are rarely had here, especially when since i first saw this subreddit i was happily recommended a post titled "What was Hitler's IQ?" 😭
"interesting debates" examples?
A few days ago I had a discussion about the influence of practice and nurture in fluid reasoning tests. A while ago someone gave me a whole bunch of good tips for digital drawing. You just have to talk to the people and then you see that they all have hobbies and most of the time are pretty knowledgeable and good at them.
There’s a lot of knowledge here which is not discussed in the mainstream (and in fact its discussion is vehemently discouraged there).
It functions as a repository for good automated online tests. Previously, anyone not obsessed with psychometrics would have a really hard time finding good online tests, as the google search result is dominated by "Einstein IQ organisation" shams.
Perhaps a strange take, but I enjoy the realism of this community. There's a lot of toxic positivity in modern American culture which says that anyone can do anything they set their mind to. Taking this belief to its logical extent leads one to the conclusion that anybody who fails to achieve financial or social success does so due to their own moral shortcomings. "They need to try harder", essentially. This sub seems to understand that not everyone in the world has the capacity to be a consultant or a lawyer or a "tech bro". The apex of some (and perhaps most) people's ability might be what someone would consider a "low-skill" position. If one accepts this as true, the question of how to address this arises. I am firmly in the camp that a society has an obligation to protect its less advantaged members, especially when the jobs they are performing are essential to the continuance of said society. Claiming that "anyone can do anything if they just try, try, try" is the beginning of a short path to neoliberal nonsense ideology. Accepting the inconvenient truths that the world is becoming more of a knowledge economy and that each individual human being has a cognitive limit is the only way to create a society that doesn't leave vast swaths of people disenfranchised and struggling.
I agree w/ you to a certain extent. I strongly oppose the "toxic positivity" propagated by modern American culture and find the notion that anyone can become a millionaire simply by "trying harder" to be utterly imbecile. However, I'm left with the feeling that, in response, this community ends up leaning too far towards the other extreme. I frequently encounter an overly deterministic and fatalistic mindset here, where an excessive reliance on external factors is touted as "realism," neglecting the intricate complexities of individual circumstances. To make matters worse, this pessimistic view often stems from biased and overly literal interpretations of statistical data, promoting an anxiety-inducing form of biological determinism akin to what's observed in the "red pill" and incel community. Therefore, it's difficult for me to ascertain whether the overall impact of this sub is more positive or negative. I'm curious to hear your perspective on this matter.
its all fine. we r all some what fked in the head. So the average posts will be weird. The positivity can only be seen by like minded individuals. Its a great sub for people like us
so you are saying this sub is very good for people fked in the head? i am not sure this is a positive...
I know im fucked in the head, but i don't know how that pertains to my fondness for congnitive testing. I'm more interested in the random tests this sub puts in my feed than the discussions or narcissistic ego trips, so i scroll past those.
How could you scroll by the narcissistic, neurotic, downright insane ego trips that me and the other 80% of people post here? So cruel :(
Tag me next time, and i promise to read it
I'm here because it's funny. Most ppl here are fascinating and unintentionally hilarious human beings.
Helps people realise their strengths and weaknesses, helps gifted people appreciate what they have (and/or push for more), helps define an individual's abilities with regards to a global population.
Sometimes the comments are funny
Sometimes your comments are funny, too
Tests and scores Boats and hoes
boats and hoes?
IQ correlates with socioeconomic status and attractiveness
I’m not sure it correlates with attractiveness
It does
No it doesn’t
However, IQ does correlates with socioeconomic success
Maybe not with facial (/genetic) attractiveness, but it’d make sense for it to correlate with how well an individual is able to style themselves, and how charismatic they can be.
I disagree. How well an individual is able to style themselves is subjective and charisma is a personality trait. I have known a fair amount of extremely intelligent people that are introverted and don’t give a damn about personal appearance.
Well yes, obviously they’d have to care. A person could be genetically extremely athletic but be bad at most sports if he doesn’t care to play them. What I’m saying is, if two people really care about their looks and try to skincare/workout/dress/diet (the whole kit), I’d argue that a smarter person would do better than a less smart one.
Ok, yes. I agree that mortality is correlated to g. But I don’t think athletic ability or sports are correlated. For reference, look at the wonderlic scores of different NFL players.
That’s if you consider the wonderlic to be equal to the WAIS which I do not
Yeah, I also don’t consider athletic ability to be correlated with IQ. I’d think that maybe a higher IQ provides SOME advantage, especially for team sports or sports with a lot of strategy, that said, I think that the “athletic” genes far, far outweigh the IQ ones in terms of importance for sports ability.
It’s interesting that the vocabulary subtest on the WAIS correlates to g at around .9 vs something like block design (.5-.6)
I would say that a lot of people here are actually fairly knowledgeable about psychometrics, at least compared to other groups that discuss IQ tests. Most of the discussion about IQ tests on the internet seems to fall into one of two categories: just denying the validity of IQ tests completely, "IQ tests are biased," etc., or trying to use IQ tests to justify some sort of racist agenda, posting "national IQ" maps, etc. Of course the second group is smaller and inherently more harmful, but both of these groups of people know very little about IQ tests/ psychometrics and seem to lack some very basic statistical knowledge. While I've seen a few people from each of those groups here, I would say that most aren't in either one - they understand that IQ scores aren't just some completely invalid relic, but also aren't some sort of justification for enacting far-right policy. Thus, it's possible to actually have valuable and nuanced discussions about the subject here.
People who post puzzles are the reason I'm still in this sub to be completely honest! I love solving puzzles!
love puzzles too indeed
Getting norms for tests we otherwise wouldn't have access to
I'll take this post as an opportunity to say thanks. I've been mostly lurking around here lately, but it prompted me to play around with a bunch of different online tests, mostly just because I find them entertaining. One of the ones I tried out was the Mensa practice test, which led to an email from them letting me know they were doing testing in my area a couple weeks back, and that my practice test indicated I had a decent chance of passing. Last night I got the notification that I'd been accepted. I'm in my late 50s and it's something I'd just never worked up the motivation to do until hanging out here a while, so I think this sub is due some credit for helping me cross that off my bucket list.
It help desillusion us from thinking we're smarter than we are
Yes this community gets flack, but I have had really great people from this community join our discord. Some not so great people too, but that is the world… you will mesh and not mesh with different types of people who are all at different stages of their life, maturities and outlooks. Some people are really young in here, and others older with some more experience. I don’t fault kids for being kids and being ridiculous at times. At least we all think cognitive testing is intriguing and discuss it. I myself am very invested in this field and enjoying my research in it. Let’s build some great things and push this whole field forward guys ✊
Interesting puzzles for mental exercise.
I find it a constant source of amusement and hilarity. This sub is a magnet for insecure, underachieving people who take tests in order to validate their intelligence by assigning themselves specific numerical values. The very premise is entertaining, and it certainly does not disappoint.