Eh accurate at what? Reproduction over time or at "identifying intelligence"?
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Conversation
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Replying to
Huh, been a long time since psych undergrad but I was always under the impression they were bad at this.
1
Calling IQ more stable than other psychology measures is dunning via incredibly faint praise.
1
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
To "dun with faint praise" is to insult something by saying an ostensibly nice, but very weak, thing about them as if it's the best thing you could say.
1
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
More or less.
I believe IQ measures something semi-stable, but whether it's a valuable or even coherent something is a question I've not seen answered adequately.
Does the size of your nose matter? It's also an accurate measure, but unlikely to matter much outside of glasses.
1
It's also a question of how much surface area of what it claims to be the problem space it is actually covering.
Intelligence quotient is a VERY hubristic label for "well, we think these are some measures of cognitive performance anyway..."