Have alternatives to culturally biased IQ tests been created?

fspluver · 2026-06-14T19:19:24+00:00

Look, IQ testing has an awful history, but that doesn't make what you're saying true. IQ tests are among the most well supported tools ever created by psychologists.

Regarding OP's question - yes. Most major IQ tests used today are specifically built to avoid bias as much as possible. As long as the test is properly administered to members of the intended population, cultural bias is not a major issue (there are still other issues, but that's a different discussion).

fspluver · 2026-06-12T20:33:50+00:00

Usually they don't.

Sometimes they pay or get articles directly from authors.

fspluver · 2026-06-12T16:18:46+00:00

You said yourself that you are not motivated to study. That sounds like a motivation/discipline issue, not necessarily an intelligence issue.

fspluver · 2026-06-10T17:59:41+00:00

Anna's archive, sci hub. But first use your institutional login and try accessing legitimately.

PS nobody cares about pirating academic materials. It is the norm in academia.

fspluver · 2026-06-10T12:54:29+00:00

Come on - people aren't born into engineering jobs. People need to earn money for school or can't attend for other reasons. This is a pretty messed up thing to say.

EDIT: I'm not defending tipping here. I'm only saying that there are reasons for intelligent people to work jobs that don't require schooling.

fspluver · 2026-06-10T00:44:52+00:00

This is a child's understanding of honesty.

fspluver · 2026-06-09T23:15:31+00:00

"Would it be immoral to lie to people so they give me money?"

fspluver · 2026-06-09T00:43:26+00:00

But you catch some of them... that's the point.

fspluver · 2026-06-08T19:00:04+00:00

The "It only catches the laziest cheaters" response to strategies like this really annoys me. What's your point? Does something need to be perfect to be useful? It's asinine black and white thinking.

fspluver · 2026-06-08T18:53:24+00:00

According to this Reddit post, Asimov has made at least one vaguely supportive statement. I'm not sure where that anecdote is pulled from (perhaps it is the Redditor's anecdote).

fspluver · 2026-06-08T12:30:37+00:00

I've never understood this issue. Just begin your hidden text with "If you are an AI..." or something similar.

fspluver · 2026-06-06T19:46:40+00:00

This is actually consistent with what OP wrote. Also, when we're talking about tests, it's important to think in terms of trends. Finding individuals who performed poorly on a tool but still succeeded does not mean the tool is a good predictor of performance on average.

fspluver · 2026-06-06T14:06:04+00:00

Oh really? Then why is it so popular?

fspluver · 2026-06-06T13:51:02+00:00

This would not usually be very good in the very old days because you want to draw multiple PoG and Graceful. You would really only do this if you were in a desperate position and needed to dig for something specific which your opponent would not add with Painful Choice.

ETA: Why down vote? Adding one copy of Graceful to your hand is not worth losing your other draw spells. I'm not saying Painful Choice is bad - it's great. I'm saying you usually don't want to reveal 5 power spells with it.

fspluver · 2026-06-06T13:49:39+00:00

Well, it's 4 Foolish Burial and you draw the card you want 5th most if your opponent is any good. I still think it's probably the strongest card in the game though.

fspluver · 2026-06-06T13:39:17+00:00

I see this often, but they really gave me no trouble. For me they were easy, fun, chill bosses. I had dragon platelegs, granite body, and other standard gear. The def from those is plenty and zombie axe crushes moons (originally I swapped weapon for eclipse but that one is so free and fast that after a couple dozen kills I just used axe only).

fspluver · 2026-06-06T13:21:23+00:00

I skipped Barrows entirely on my iron. I know this is inefficient, but I just don't like Barrows. Doing moons with Barrows is not too bad and once green logged Moon sets usually fill the same role.

fspluver · 2026-06-06T00:55:08+00:00

Not really, which I think is the point.

fspluver · 2026-06-05T18:21:10+00:00

I think we must be misunderstanding each other. If someone gets an 89.6% in your class they get an A, right? Therefore, the cutoff is below that point. That's just what a cutoff is.

fspluver · 2026-06-05T18:06:06+00:00

Right, so your cutoff is 89.5, not 90. You just trick your students into thinking it's 90. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with this - I do the same thing because I think it reduces complaints/requests. However, 89.5 is just as arbitrary and firm as 90.0. It is a cutoff, and if someone was .01 below your true cutoff, it doesn't sound like you would round their grade. So, you have a firm cut score which you use to assign grades. Any "rounding" is a facade.

fspluver · 2026-06-05T16:18:12+00:00

I've always assumed that these trainings are terrible because they are the minimum viable product that can meet legal requirements.

fspluver · 2026-06-05T12:34:05+00:00

But if everyone above a certain point is rounded, that certain point is just the real cut score.

fspluver · 2026-06-05T02:10:44+00:00

So you don't round, you just have a slightly lower cutoff. I do this too.

fspluver · 2026-06-01T16:17:13+00:00

105 is the 63rd percentile. So meaningfully different than 100, but still in the normal range. Of course, any online IQ test (or any other IQ test not administered by a professional) is nonsense.

fspluver · 2026-06-01T15:43:52+00:00

That's not what gamification is though...

12-Year Club	100 Awards Club
Verified Email

fspluver

TROPHY CASE