Are you S-M-R-T????

[chronomaster]

Conners 3 Psycho-educational assessments.

Not IQ tests.

Where were you earlier, Mr. Psychologist?

[TOH]

133.

[DragonEkarus]

O.=.o



I remember it being a lot higher than that when I was a kid... Guess concussions are bad after all

[rumsfald]

Conners 3 Psycho-educational assessments.

Not IQ tests.

What are you talking about?

According to the publisher, Conner's 3 is a series of self-rated checklists for ADHD. Which is neither a measure of ability nor educational achievement.

The "about" page that Crow linked sez it was "inspired" by Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, and indeed they look like Raven's rip-offs. That publisher claims some business-baiting bullshit like "Measure mental ability useful in high-level strategic, leadership roles."



As for this web-app, curious it mentions a SD of 15 but provides no Standard Error of Measurement, which is a shady practice. Without a SEM, you have no idea how reliable the scale is - there might be no difference between a score of 100 and 130.

[at0m]

Just a reminder, 100 is defined as the statistical average.

[loldollas]

[quote author=Funbuck$ link=topic=6047.msg227885#msg227885 date=1319237419]
Conners 3 Psycho-educational assessments.

Not IQ tests.

What are you talking about?

According to the publisher, Conner's 3 is a series of self-rated checklists for ADHD. Which is neither a measure of ability nor educational achievement.

The "about" page that Crow linked sez it was "inspired" by Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices, and indeed they look like Raven's rip-offs. That publisher claims some business-baiting bullshit like "Measure mental ability useful in high-level strategic, leadership roles."



As for this web-app, curious it mentions a SD of 15 but provides no Standard Error of Measurement, which is a shady practice. Without a SEM, you have no idea how reliable the scale is - there might be no difference between a score of 100 and 130.
[/quote]

Conners can be used for much more than just ADHD testing, from what I gather, it's also used to determine if you can comprehend basic symbols and if you can understand your world-matrix properly.

there's a few more cognitive-driven assessments but I can't remember the names of them...WSIC...WITT? hmm..

[at0m]

Also, 126, but I didn't have the patience to take more than 20 minutes to do it.

[rumsfald]

Conners can be used for much more than just ADHD testing, from what I gather, it's also used to determine if you can comprehend basic symbols and if you can understand your world-matrix properly.

there's a few more cognitive-driven assessments but I can't remember the names of them...WSIC...WITT? hmm..

Conners' rating scales are designed and validated to assess for ADHD and the most common conditions that co-occur with ADHD. That's what the publisher states, that's what the Mental Measurement Yearbook agrees with. If you try to do anything else with them, let me introduce you to my friend Daubert.

"symbols and world-matrix?" that sounds like a different measure.

Also, WISC - Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (an IQ test in the classical g sense)
WIAT - Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (a measurement of educational achievement. Achievement != IQ)
WAIS - Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale

this is not mentioning my favorite name for a cognitive measure EVER, co-designed by Richard Woodcock (he goes by Dick) partnered with his pal Dr. Johnson to create the Woodcock-Johnson. Dick. Wood. Cock. Johnson.

[HelixInk]

135 (which oddly enough happens to be the same number as when they tested me at age 6 in school)

[Elder]

Merc link=topic=6047.msg227865#msg227865 date=1319227109]
115. I got bored at about question 28, so I guessed on the rest of them.

about the same 118. doing 39 pattern recognition puzzles is not a good way to spend a saturday afternoon..

Also luin: dont feel bad i noramlly would score right up around 129 on other iq tests because they involve more diverse questions like in math and language

[Vongore]

Those aren't IQ tests, those are Knowledge tests.

IQ tests are made to measure your recognizing and process ability, how your brain handles different situations, that's why Rorschach tests are so common with IQ tests and verbal questions such as "What's longer, a string or a cloth" work better for kids.

Knowledge tests sometimes are measures with the same IQ system, but that's wrong and it's just a lame excuse, since knowledge is influences by so many factors it's impossible to get another number but measuring knowledge.

Also, i got 122

[rumsfald]

The Rorschach is a projective test that purports to measure personality. It does not measure anything related to IQ in the classical sense of Spearman's g. Also, it is a piece of shit for what most people use it for.

I don't know what other point you are trying to make. Raven's has often bee used as a nonverbal proxy/screener to measure IQ. The WISC has long been one of (if not the most) popularly used tool to measure IQ in children in the US (long since dethroning the Stanford-Binet). Similarly, the WAIS has long been the dominant tool to measure IQ in adults in the US. The WIAT, as I said, is a measure of educational achievement (maybe that is what you mean when you say "knowledge"). And the WJ-III and WJ-III: NU is probably the most robust system for covering the Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) theory of intelligence.

[Vongore]

Jumped the shark with the Rorschach example, but what i meant was that knowledge tests =/= IQ tests, so math and language comprehension doesn't measure IQ

[Badgerman of DOOM]

Jumped the shark with the Rorschach example, but what i meant was that knowledge tests =/= IQ tests, so math and language comprehension doesn't measure IQ

I'd argue that math can work for an IQ test, it being a system of logic.

[Duck, Duck, Goose]

Got 122 with 20 minutes left... guess if I actually bothered to find the patterns in some that I guessed it would be higher... ???

[spm201]

126. Glad to see no one on BRBu is getting less than 100