(copied and edited from my post in the Facebook LW group)
I suspect that it would be obvious to most rationalists that the way people judge other people is flawed. Typically for a heuristic approach, it's correct to a degree, but with many faults. And it's wasting a big amount of information and a potential for a more planned approach where you can ask questions that assess certain qualities and exchange information about people's personalities by giving their "parameters".
I needn't think of it in this way, it was natural for me to take this approach as soon as I learnt my first measurable parameter and its implications (it was IQ). Then I explored more of them and researched them some more.
So far, I know about IQ, rationality (Keith Stanovich's), Big Five personality traits, executive functions, intuition for social situations and a few more things. However, I can't seem to find any literature that helps describe them (how do I detect them in people and what are their implications?) and their implications (how *exactly* is someone with a higher IQ different from someone with a lower IQ?). Also, I can't find literature on other traits.
Any literature on any of that would be greatly appreciated. I wonder if there is a book that deals with the whole issue. Also, I need literature about IQ and Big Five, but anything else would still be useful.
Is that sort of thing popular on LessWrong?
A serious IQ test should not have this kind of bias -- I think they pay randomly selected people to participate. (Of course a few people will refuse anyway, but you can make an estimate how big error that makes.)