That is why we have 10 subtests and composite scores based on which the FSIQ is determined in the final sum of the scaled scores. This still does not mean that their FSIQ is 130+, but it means that they are 130+ when it comes to this particular task. I did not say that only people with an IQ of 130-140+ can recall 8, 10, or 15 digits, forwards/backwards/sequences, but that only 2%=< of people can do that in clinical conditions and administered by a psychologist. There is almost no significant deviation from the norms.Īlso, the fact that you are "barely IQ130" and yet you can repeat 10-15 numbers that you saw has nothing to do with what I said. WAIS-IV norms have been shown to be remarkably stable, both when compared to norms on WAIS versions in other countries around the world, and when compared to norms established on previous versions of the WAIS test. I don't know why we're even having a debate about this. And all that, in clinical conditions where someone else is saying the digits that you have to recall in 10 seconds or so after you heard them. And as part of that subtest, there are three tasks. The Digit span subtest on WAIS-IV is administered verbally. The human benchmark task is only forwards recalling the numbers you just saw - nothing more than that. Studies and norms as well as the things that I am saying here are established based on scores obtained in clinical conditions on tests administered by psychologists. Yes, but it is not a digit span task nor is it administered under clinical conditions. But this sub is the top 2-5%, while those who report scores are usually those in the top 1%, so it is not a reference nor can any conclusions be drawn based on that. You need to look around and see what ordinary people, the general population, can do, not the people on this subreddit. Trust me, 95%+ of people can't do it, no matter what methods they use. I don't know what your WMI is, but anything above 7 digits forwards/backwards/sequence is 125-130+. Chunking is the manipulation of information that you have memorized and is therefore a perfect example of using working memory. Working memory is not short-term memory and has nothing to do with your ability to remember things, but with your ability to manipulate things and information that you have memorized. No trick there, working memory and g are almost isomorphic. 1.5-2SD+ people use it exceptionally well because their WM is usually exceptionally high. Above-average IQ people can use chunking, but only to some extent. Average IQ people know that people can do it, but they also know that they are not among them since they cannot recognize it and react that quickly since they only have a couple of seconds to execute several complex operations with 100% accuracy. Below-average people will not even consider using chunking because they won't even recognize any pattern, to begin with. Do they consider it cheating and do they think this invalidates scores? Of course not. Do psychologists know people use this method? Yes. Do you think you are the only person using chunking for better performance on digit-span tasks? No. Of course, chunking doesn't invalidate your score, but actually shows your working memory capacity - the fact that you can react, remember, recognize and then execute the chunking pattern, all that in a 5-15 seconds time span speaks volumes about your working memory as well as your general intelligence.ĭon't think psychologists and trained professionals who administer those tests don't know about this.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |