Persons recording high scores on standardized IQ tests are generally those who find learning new things comparatively easy, sometimes trivially easy.
IQ tests also work on measuring how fast someone thinks and their memorization, something that is dependent on how natural it is, and how the individual's brain functions have developed. These things cannot be studied directly. Since some individuals can learn more quickly and easily, an IQ test is one way to determine how quickly and efficiently their brains work.
NoThere are a number of sociological problems that are thrown up by IQ testing. The main problem being with language - if English is not your first language or you're just no good at it, tests in English will yield a lower score.IQ tests also only test certain thinking processes associated with intelligence, and individuals have different mental strengths and weaknesses. A low score on an IQ test does not specifically mean you are "less intelligent". For instance, a person who is highly intelligent in a non-academic field, for instance interpersonal communications or automotive maintenance, may score poorly on an IQ test because the test is based solely on performance in traditional academic subjects.
Scores on an IQ test are comparative by nature; they do not test a subject's 'true intelligence', merely their performance on the given tasks in comparison to those of the same age group. Test scores can also be affected by simple things such as a lack of sleep, or having not eaten enough that morning. IQ tests also fail to assess creativity levels.
It should also be noted that IQ test scores can vary, depending on the exact test that is taken.
Well...I'm assuming you're referring to the Standford-Binet Intelligence-Quotient test first used in the 1960s.
It is not generally considered by mainstream modern psychology as an accurate indicator of intelligence. In fact, that lack of a satisfactory definition of "intelligence" still bedevils the discipline. Modern thought on what constitutes "intelligence" (Gardner et al.) has impacted Pedagogy significantly.
To borrow a quote, "IQ is that which IQ tests measure." It is a somewhat touching, yet uninformed, artefact that suggests the precociousness of the young discipline of Psychology; that intelligence could be defined so narrowly and accurately gauged so easily as Standford-Binet put forth is ludicrous.
However, whatever one considers "intelligence," it would, more than likely bear some positive correlation with test IQ test scores.
The definition and quantification of "intelligence" shall elude science for quite some time to come.
There are differing opinions on the accuracy of IQ tests. Although some believe that they are a reliable indicator of an individual's intelligence, others believe that they offer an incomplete picture.
Time clock software is very reliable and accurate. Unlike the traditional paper version, fellow employees cannot punch in or punch out someone who may or may not be in the office yet. The time is set to real time, therefore the results are more accurate.
it made his actual results approach the results predicted by probability.
We retest our experiments to insure accurate results and to compare with our original results.
making data reliable is by trying your answers out at least 3 times and then add them together and divide by how many answers you have.
There are differing opinions on the accuracy of IQ tests. Although some believe that they are a reliable indicator of an individual's intelligence, others believe that they offer an incomplete picture.
a accurate result would be true as possible but a reliable result would be one that is compared
for the end results to be accurate and reliable
it gets them reliable results.
Time clock software is very reliable and accurate. Unlike the traditional paper version, fellow employees cannot punch in or punch out someone who may or may not be in the office yet. The time is set to real time, therefore the results are more accurate.
How accurate data is in the sense that you've repeated an experiment a number of times. I.e., one would answer the question 'how reliable were your results?' with something like 'they were very reliable as the experiment was repeated 67 times'.
Reliable results are results that are reasonably the same. e.g. if you did the same test 3 times and you got 13.1, 13.3, 13.3. this would be reliable
No, it won't change the results so they are still reliable
intelligence as with intelligence even with little work can bring awesome results....
result
Periodic
Unfortunately, it is very difficult to find accurate estimates for the number of people employed by Onvia. A search did not give any reliable results.