You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Wes_W comments on There is no such thing as strength: a parody - Less Wrong Discussion

25 Post author: ZoltanBerrigomo 05 July 2015 11:44PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (70)
Tags: race intelligence parody

Comments (70)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Wes_W 09 July 2015 09:28:10AM 3 points [-]

Also, you bias IQ tests if you repeatedly take them, but you don't do likewise with strength tests so it's much easier to track changes in an individual's strength over time and most anyone whose lifts weights can objectively verify that he has become stronger.

Strength tests are absolutely biased by taking them repeatedly. Athletes call this "specificity".

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 11 July 2015 03:03:28AM 2 points [-]

The practice effect for IQ tests is about two orders of magnitude stronger than for strength tests. You could call this "specificity," but at that granularity, it's a bad thing.

Comment author: Wes_W 11 July 2015 05:29:28AM 1 point [-]

Interesting. Can I ask you to unpack this statement? I'm curious what exactly you're comparing.

The difference between "has practiced a movement to mastery" and "has never performed a movement before" can be very large, like my powerlifter/snatch example in the other comment. But this is comparing zero practice to a very large amount of practice over a very long period of time. I would find it easy to believe that IQ tests see much greater returns from small amounts of practice.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit