Men, women and IQ.

[QUOTE="LordsLoss"]IQ test are not an accurate measure of a person's IQ so...sonicare

People with high IQs are just saying: Don't look at my small penis. With that being said, let me go grab my tweezers and magnifying glass so I can go pee.

Hmm could be due to the majority of IQ tests being written by men and therefore favoring the type of intelligence that more men posses over women.. Still pretty interesting :)Wolls

People with high IQs are just saying: Don't look at my small penis. With that being said, let me go grab my tweezers and magnifying glass so I can go pee.

shoot-first

Hmm could be due to the majority of IQ tests being written by men and therefore favoring the type of intelligence that more men posses over women.. Still pretty interesting :)Wolls

[QUOTE="shoot-first"]

People with high IQs are just saying: Don't look at my small penis. With that being said, let me go grab my tweezers and magnifying glass so I can go pee.

[QUOTE="surrealnumber5"]

[QUOTE="shoot-first"]

People with high IQs are just saying: Don't look at my small penis. With that being said, let me go grab my tweezers and magnifying glass so I can go pee.

sonicare

Feels good to be on winning side 8)

jokes aside I dunno. I see girls put so much effort in all the stuff and are always meticulous, I dunno what gives

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn
-but they all require some form of prior knowledge
-this creates tests that lack validity

2. with that said...
men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely than women to be close to the mean)

edit:
LOL at grammatical error demonstrating the lower end of the male spectrum

Feels good to be on winning side 8)

jokes aside I dunno. Sandulf29

...just as likely to be on the losing side though

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn -but they all require some form of prior knowledge -this creates tests that lack validity 2. with that said... men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely then women to be close to the mean)rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn -but they all require some form of prior knowledge -this creates tests that lack validity 2. with that said... men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely then women to be close to the mean)sonicare

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn
-but they all require some form of prior knowledge
-this creates tests that lack validity

2. with that said...
men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely than women to be close to the mean)

edit:
LOL at grammatical error demonstrating the lower end of the male spectrum

rawsavon

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn -but they all require some form of prior knowledge -this creates tests that lack validity 2. with that said... men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely then women to be close to the mean)surrealnumber5

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn
-but they all require some form of prior knowledge
-this creates tests that lack validity

2. with that said...
men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely than women to be close to the mean)

edit:
LOL at grammatical error demonstrating the lower end of the male spectrum

Sandulf29

The mean score on most tests is 100
-so women are more likely than men to be rated at 100
-men are more likely than women to be rated at a higher or lower IQ score (a 110 or a 90...a 120 or an 80...etc)

According to the tests (which are flawed, as I mentioned), women are more likely (versus men) to be average and men are more likely to be more/less intelligent (versus women) than average. But both are still most likely to be average...that is why it is the average.
-so both have their positives and negatives
-women have less of a chance of being dumb
-men have a greater chance of being smart

But we really can't be sure until someone develops a valid test

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="lowkey254"]

The tests could have a gender bias. Most standardized tests have a culture bias.

surrealnumber5

Come on now....do we really have to resort to gender stereotypes and divide the sexes between brain power? What ever happened to individuality? I don't think there's anything that says one gender has a higher chance at a good IQ than the other.

And, to be honest, IQ doesn't really mean a whole lot these days since its usually related to common sense and has no basis in the specialisation of a particular field.

Come on now....do we really have to resort to gender stereotypes and divide the sexes between brain power? What ever happened to individuality? I don't think there's anything that says one gender has a higher chance at a good IQ than another.

Starshine_M2A2

Actually, that is EXACTLY what the data says...
Now if you want to argue that the tests lack validity (measure what they are supposed to), then I agree (see my previous posts ITT), but the data shows exactly what you claim it does not.

And, to be honest, IQ doesn't really mean a whole lot these days since it usually related to common sense and has no basis in the specialisation of a particular field.

Starshine_M2A2

Intelligence (even in the not so accurate way we measure it) is very important. That does not mean that common sense (as you put it) is not important though...the two are not mutually exclusive

Yes, I was saying that they lack validity for the following reasons:

IQ tests are not reliable ways to test someone's intelligence. My IQ is low because i'm lacking in common sense and mathematics and yet i'm studying for an MA degree and have been able to excel in my particular speciality. So, how does that work? Are you saying that i'm stupid? Common sense doesn't seem to be playing a huge role in this case. So, is it because certain people are more skilled at different things?

You don't increase your intelligence by constantly testing your IQ, you do it by learning and absorbing relevant information and everyone has the ability to do that. There are just too many arguments and too many variables to suggest that women have lower IQs which is what I gather this thread is suggesting.

As for the whole 'women have less chance at a high IQ than men' argument - is that because women are less intelligent OR could it have something to do with the long history or society preventing women from achieving and being afforded the same rights as men? Take France for example - there, women were only allowed the vote in the past 65 years. Had they been allowed it from the beginning, the might have flourished in the same way that men have.

But this is entire thread is irrelevant since it relies on the argument that women as a majority don't have high IQs which is just ridiculous.

I just don't think this needs to be discussed at all. Starshine_M2A2

But this is entire thread is irrelevant since it relies on the argument that women as a majority don't have high IQs which is just ridiculous... Starshine_M2A2

Doubtful. I'm not even sure how a "gender bias" would play out on a standardized test.sonicare

@Rawsavon

It was lowish but I was put in a low level maths class and a high level english class at school. So, i tend to lean towards the argument that individual intelligence, accomplishments and abilities are more insightful than those of the masses. One person might be terrible at maths but great at art and vice versa. I don't really think gender has anything to do with it. But, I see your points.

Yeah but women have bewbs. And we want bewbs, so...women win.22Toothpicks

I don't really think gender has anything to do with it. But, I see your points.

Starshine_M2A2

We use this data to find out 'why'
-there could be gender differences (one could be smarter than the other)
-it could be cultural
-it could be how we ask the question
-etc/any number of things

The point is not to go on what we think, but to go on what we measure and finding out the why behind the numbers.
I agree with you that individual 'stories' are most telling. But that is impossible to do on a mass scale. So we have to settle for generalizations of the masses

[QUOTE="22Toothpicks"]Yeah but women have bewbs. And we want bewbs, so...women win.Allicrombie

[QUOTE="lowkey254"][QUOTE="surrealnumber5"] just ask the person who got the lowest score, they will tell you how the test was bias

sonicare

I believe Borat knew a Kazakh scientist that was able to explain why men are smarter than women.

sonicare

I believe Borat knew a Kazakh scientist that was able to explain why men are smarter than women.

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"] I don't really think gender has anything to do with it. But, I see your points.

rawsavon

We use this data to find out 'why'
-there could be gender differences (one could be smarter than the other)
-it could be cultural
-it could be how we ask the question
-etc/any number of things

The point is not to go on what we think, but to go on what we measure and finding out the why behind the numbers.
I agree with you that individual 'stories' are most telling. But that is impossible to do on a mass scale. So we have to settle for generalizations of the masses

[QUOTE="chessmaster1989"][QUOTE="sonicare"]

I believe Borat knew a Kazakh scientist that was able to explain why men are smarter than women.

sonicare

Borat was such a great movie :lol:

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"] I don't really think gender has anything to do with it. But, I see your points.

ANNIHILISM

We use this data to find out 'why'
-there could be gender differences (one could be smarter than the other)
-it could be cultural
-it could be how we ask the question
-etc/any number of things

The point is not to go on what we think, but to go on what we measure and finding out the why behind the numbers.
I agree with you that individual 'stories' are most telling. But that is impossible to do on a mass scale. So we have to settle for generalizations of the masses

However, one thing I do know is that the discussion of such things HERE is VERY dangerous for the health of your GS account (especially when it comes to race). So I will leave that topic alone

[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="lowkey254"] Sorry for the late reply. In studying psychology (undergrad major) there are multiple variables that you have to take into consideration before offering a test to determine... well anything. It's been proven that the SAT and ACT are culturally bias. Not because one culture excels over another but because the content doesn't match up with the views of certain cultures. Here's an example, and an actual question for an IQ test: Who is MJ? A) Michael Jordan B) Michael Jackson C) Michael Johnson D) Mitt Jacorbski. The answer was Michael Jordan. How can any of these answers be wrong? To someone who is into the sports culture M. Jordan or Johnson would be their choice. lowkey254

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn
-but they all require some form of prior knowledge
-this creates tests that lack validity

2. with that said...
men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely than women to be close to the mean)

edit:
LOL at grammatical error demonstrating the lower end of the male spectrum

rawsavon

I believe the professor, as a member of mensa, used the standard mensa g test, or a variable hereof, which looks like this:

It's a pretty valid formula, as far as IQ tests goes, because of its universal nature.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

1. IQ tests are flawed as they are supposed to measure your ability to learn
-but they all require some form of prior knowledge
-this creates tests that lack validity

2. with that said...
men are more prone to extremes/variations in score (less likely than women to be close to the mean)

edit:
LOL at grammatical error demonstrating the lower end of the male spectrum

BiancaDK

I believe the professor, as a member of mensa, used the standard mensa g test, or a variable hereof, which looks like this:

It's a pretty valid formula, as far as IQ tests goes, because of its universal nature.

Doesn't affect your ability to paint, though...

Doesn't affect your ability to paint, though...

Starshine_M2A2

I wouldn't know, but there is a correlation between a relatively high IQ, and the ability to pick up certain delicate nuances in music, which individuals who sport a comparatively speaking lower IQ score tend to overhear. Make of that what you will, in regards to the aesthetical performances of the invididual.

What little I remember of IQ tests from Psych 101 leads me to be skeptical of their validity. (Yes, I know that's a little ironic.)Elraptor

I am skeptical of the subsequent interpretations and/or uses of the data revealed, but standard numbers will remain standard numbers, inconsequential to their application. As long as a standard formula shows a plethora of correlations which can, within reason, be indicated back to the standard formula, it has a story to tell, however irrelevant we might deem it.

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"]

Doesn't affect your ability to paint, though...

I wouldn't know, but there is a correlation between a relatively high IQ, and the ability to pick up certain delicate nuances in music, which individuals who sport a comparatively speaking lower IQ score tend to overhear. Make of that what you will, in regards to the aesthetical performances of the invididual.

[QUOTE="BiancaDK"]

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"]

Doesn't affect your ability to paint, though...

Starshine_M2A2

I wouldn't know, but there is a correlation between a relatively high IQ, and the ability to pick up certain delicate nuances in music, which individuals who sport a comparatively speaking lower IQ score tend to overhear. Make of that what you will, in regards to the aesthetical performances of the invididual.

drawing or painting is as well mathematical in nature you can see that because you can draw using computers.

That's because music contains mathematical properties which is what IQ tests favour. I don't recall any IQ tests that asked questions about renaissance italian art.Starshine_M2A2

I don't understand how a knowledge revolving the history of art, translates into ones ability to create a piece of art. Nor do I understand how the discussion of what effects ones painting, is relevant as whole.

This might explain women drivers.....

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"]That's because music contains mathematical properties which is what IQ tests favour. I don't recall any IQ tests that asked questions about renaissance italian art.BiancaDK

I don't understand how a knowledge revolving the history of art, translates into ones ability to create a piece of art. Nor do I understand how the discussion of what effects ones painting, is relevant as whole.

My point was that no IQ test can possible be indicative of ones abilities because of the nature of individuality. Somebody who specializes in art is likely going to score low in a test based around mathematics - but it doesn't make them any less intelligent or lacking in the ability to solve basic problems. It makes them different - not unintelligent which is what IQ tests suggest. Low IQ equals low intelligence. That's how people usually see it.Starshine_M2A2

If you test a 5 year old girl, and the results show an exceptional IQ score, and the very same child grow up to be a highly successful woman, you've got nothing.

If you test 10.000 5 year olds, and the results show exceptional IQ scores amongst 100 of them, wait 20 years and then compare the living standards of the 100 whom showed an exceptional high IQ score, with the 9.900 who scored average or below average, and find that the average living standard of the 100 men and women who scored high as kids, is significantly higher than the average living standard of the 9.900 men and women who scored average or below average, well, then you've got something.

You've got an indication.

[QUOTE="Starshine_M2A2"]

Doesn't affect your ability to paint, though...

I wouldn't know, but there is a correlation between a relatively high IQ, and the ability to pick up certain delicate nuances in music, which individuals who sport a comparatively speaking lower IQ score tend to overhear. Make of that what you will, in regards to the aesthetical performances of the invididual.