"... (IQ) tests fall down when it comes to measuring those abilities crucial to making good judgements in real-life situations. That's because they are unable to assess things such as a person's ability to critically weigh up information, or whether an individual can override the intuitive cognitive biases that can lead us astray. This is the kind of rational thinking we are compelled to do every day, whether deciding which foods to eat, where to invest money, or how to deal with a difficult client at work. We need to be good at rational thinking to navigate our way around an increasingly complex world. And yet, says Stanovich, IQ tests - still the predominant measure of people's cognitive abilities - do not effectively tap into it."
"'IQ tests are overvalued, and I think most psychologists would agree with that,'" says Jonathan Evans, a cognitive psychologist at the University of Plymouth, UK. Indeed, IQ scores have long been criticised as poor indicators of an individual's all-round intelligence, as well as for their inability to predict how good a person will be in a particular profession."
"The problem with IQ tests is that while they are effective at assessing our deliberative skills, which involve reason and the use of working memory, they are unable to assess our inclination to use them when the situation demands. This is a crucial distinction: as Daniel Kahneman at Princeton University puts it, intelligence is about brain power whereas rational thinking is about control. 'Some people who are intellectually able do not bother to engage very much in analytical thinking and are inclined to rely on their intuitions,' explains Evans. 'Other people will check out their gut feeling and reason it through and make sure they have a justification for what they're doing.' An IQ test cannot predict which of these paths someone will follow..."
"In a study published last year, Stanovich and Richard West of James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia, found there was no correlation between intelligence and a person's ability to avoid some common traps of intuitive-thinking (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol 94, p 672)."
"...most researchers agree that, overall, the correlation between intelligence and successful decision-making is weak."
"Wändi Bruine de Bruin at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, has shown that intelligence cannot be the only factor that dictates whether someone is a good thinker and decision-maker. In a study of 360 Pittsburgh residents aged between 18 and 88, her team found that, regardless of differences in intelligence, those who displayed better rational-thinking skills suffered significantly fewer negative events in their lives, such as being in serious credit card debt, having an unplanned pregnancy or being suspended from school (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol 92, p 938). Andrew Parker, now with the Rand Corporation in Pittsburgh, and Baruch Fischhoff at Carnegie Mellon found a similar association among adolescents. Those who scored higher on a test of decision-making competence drank less, took fewer drugs and engaged in less risky behaviour overall (Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, vol 18, p 1). This suggests that rational thinking may be more important than intelligence for positive life experiences, Fischhoff says. A potent criticism of Stanovich's theory is the lack of a proven test of rational thinking skills that could be used alongside IQ tests. 'It is not enough to say what intelligence is not measuring, you have to propose alternative ways of measuring rationality,' says Kahneman. Stanovich maintains that while developing a universal "rationality-quotient (RQ) test" would require a multimillion-dollar research programme, there is no technical or conceptual reason why it could not be done. There are already several contenders, such as the measure of decision-making competence used by Bruine de Bruin and Fischhoff. Would a valid RQ test be useful? 'Hypothetically, yes, because it would cover skills that are more directly related to what people will be doing in their jobs,' says Bruine de Bruin. Kahneman maintains that IQ tests, as measures of brain power, work well for academic selection. 'But I would very seriously consider RQ tests as a way of selecting managers or leaders, particularly if I wanted a style of leadership that is thorough and not overly impulsive,' he says. There is a drawback, however: unlike with IQ, it would be relatively easy to train people to do well on RQ tests. 'They measure the extent to which people are inclined to use what capacity they have,' says Evans. 'You could train people to ignore intuition and engage reasoning for the sake of the test, even if this was not their normal inclination.' The flip side of this is that everyone can improve their rational thinking and decision-making skills. Richard Nisbett at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and others discovered that just half an hour's training in statistical reasoning can improve a person's ability to use rational thinking in everyday situations. And we don't need formal training to improve: there are many tricks we can teach ourselves, says Perkins (see "How to avoid making foolish decisions"). We might also be better equipped to elect leaders that did the same."
trump boasts of his high IQ, his money and his power.
I don't know what my IQ is. I do know that many, many people are smarter than me. I'm neither mega rich nor powerful.
I don't admire or envy trump. with all of my faults and shortcomings, I prefer to be me; and, I prefer other imperfect people, who value honesty, humility, integrity, compassion, civility, manners and respect for others.
No comments:
Post a Comment