Martin wrote in
:

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:37:03 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Martin wrote in
m:

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:26:41 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Martin wrote in
m:

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:58:02 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote in
news:f7kac3df8h83sjkq7647f43k4dm71nba82@4ax. com:

Doug Semler writes:

How the **** would you demonstrate that you have the "valuable
predictor" of intelligence without a group, such as Mensa, that
filters applicants based on intelligence, dip****?

An IQ test would suffice. However, intelligence is usually
fairly obvious.


And yet, even people of moderate intelligence can understand
bernoulli

The average IQ of US enlisted men tested during WW1 was that of
a12 year old.

IQ isn't really age related. though it is true that capacity
increases with age, the measurement is usually like/like otherwise
it's kind of pointless. So it would be fairer to say that they had a
sub-normal IQ of say ,less than 85 than to say they had the IQ of a
12 year old. It'd be a bit like comparing the horsepower of a modern
airplane to the horsepower of a airplane from 75 years ago. In
general, airplanes of 75 years ago had smaller engines, but you
could b talking about a mustang. IOW, you're not neccesarily
comparing like with like.

OK I dug around and Alfred Binet’s intelligence, or IQ, test
used on enlisted men also included an assessment of mental age. I
guess it should have been "The average mental age of US enlisted men
tested during WW1 was that of a 12 year old".

That doesn't make a lot of sense either but ...


Well, it makes sense to me. Pretty much what I was trying to say
earlier.

How was the average mental age of the US population computed? The
biggest sample ever measured at that time was of US enlisted men. Was
the mental age that of a 12 year old French child?

All pretty much the same, actually. Leaving aside minor abberations in
race and culture (and we don't want to start one of those arguments
here, believe me) The difference in 12 year olds who have had similar
levels of stimulation is negligable.
No doubt they had some sort of idea of what a 12 year old was capable of
at the time and used that as a yardstick.
Most likely the way the mental age was measured back then was some sort
of simple literacy/numeracy test.
Even today's SATs aren't a lot different from that kind of measurement.
SATs aren't an IQ measurement, though they would reflect an IQ, they'd
be heavily influenced by the education of the person taking the test,
wheras an IQ test should pretty much eliminate hat factor.
IOW IQ is a measuement of potential. An analogy might be that IQ is like
the cubic inches


To this day, most newspapers use an eight grade reading level as a
standard in order to make their papers accessible to as many as
possible.

Most tabloids use a fourth grade reading level as a standard for obvious
reasons.



Bertie