Ch8- Thinking And Intelgiece Flashcards
Measuring intelligence (smartness)
Psychometric tests
Psycho metric tests (standardized)
Abilities and skills, objectively
Need reliability (consistency with results)
Validity(measure what they claim to measure)
3 main categories depending on aspect of intelligence:
Achievement, aptitude, intelligence
Achievement test (psychometric)
Test your retroactive/ current skills for ESTABLISHING current intelligence (regular test)
BUT can be used for decision on where it can take you (proactive)
* does this ^ make it aptitude test then? OFFICE HOURS
Aptitude (psychometrics)
Tests current skills to PREDICT your proactive JOB skills (potential)- what job you’d be good for in the future
Stanford-Binet test (modern)
Used to be Binet-Simon test-> NORMATIVE scores fro American kids
Wechsler ADULT intelligence skill (WAIS-IV)- most current version
2 parts:
Verbal tasks- reading comp, vocab, and general knowledge
Nonverbal tasks- arranging pictures in proper order, assembling parts for project, finding pictures missing part
Against cultural bias-> culture-neutral tests: item tasks independent of language (nonverbal performance measures for WAIS- patterns)
Normative scores (Stanford-Binet) ** mean on distribution
Average scores for each AGE (100 is average for all adults)
Intelligence SCORE (not IQ tests) (OG Binet)
Successes/ all questions on intelligence test (doesn’t compare this to class average tho)
Brings about Binets mental age concept
Mental age (IQ, OG Binet)
Testing among same age (normative)
Compare score to normative score of EACH chronological age
If you get same average as that of a certain age group (UR actual age doesn’t matter) you have that MENTAL age
Otherwise you’re TYPICAL
IQ calculation (Wilhem Stern) - kids
CHILDs IG by -> their mental age/ actual age (chronological age) MULTIPLIED by 100
IQ calculation (wilhem Stern) - adults (NO DIVIISON)
Compared to average adult (no age groups) -> average = 100 (mean hump on NORMAL distribution)
Validity (psychometric) the MAIN factor for good test***
Really measure what they claim to measure (the general FINDING wil be same when done over and over))
Can’t be a test for admission to school, and instead wants you’re focking personality
TRICK Q: make sure to look for “result” if there is even one single unwanted result (cultural bias) then its not valid
Reliability (psychometric)
Results for everyone and anyone will be consistent OVERTIME (even if people’s measured intelligence changes overtime??)
validity—leads to->reliability
BUT
Reliability —doesnt always lead to—> validity (still being tested on the wrong thing) (still reliable tho)
TRICK Q: still reliable with cultural bias, because the person that took it will continue to score badly because their cultural bias will still be exploited
Flaws of IQ
Other things contribute to lie success -> privilege, accessibility, nepotism, HARD WORK (smart guy doesnt try)
Child behavior (self control) is more valuable than their intelligence
CULTURAL bias- culturalist on these tests (intelligence is subjective - reflects value of modern western culture)-> also subcultures (hobbies)
WAIS tries to combat this-> culture-neutral tests: item tasks independent of language (nonverbal performance measures for WAIS- patterns)
Analogical representations of information (conceptualizing info 1/2)
Physical characteristics of info
Process it immediately as RAW physical description (cant be blind)
Correspond (analogous) of actual object/ action/ info
GENERAL image
Manipulating mental images-> give you creative thinking and problem solving
Help predict future though mental maps
EX: info- time-> visualize literal clock
Symbolic representation of information (conceptualizing info 2/2)
WORDS
Gate= abstract association
Words and concepts, cant see psychical shape of actual info in the letters
Think about past word info in past
** There’s no physical connection between numbers and real objects (unless you’ve continually associated the visual number 3 to a nostalgic 3 from a school board)
EX: clock-> concept of time
Paradox of choice
They define as “more options= worse than having less”
Impairs thinking and leads to bad decision (efficiency—doesn’t equal-> efficiency when it takes so long and hard to decide, you don’t end up actually finishing as fast as you’d like to and may analyze things incorrectly)
2 approaches- maximizing and satisficing
Maximizing/ maximizer (decision making 1/2)
Overthinking is efficient, but not satisfying (no stress, peace of mind, ignorance is a bliss)
The implication of stressing over objectivity is depressing
Stress over possibilities of regrets and FOMO -> this mentality will ALWAYS bring you dissatisfaction because when you get the objective, you’ll end up still regretting because you’ll think its still not objective somehow
EX: STEM job but youre depressed
Satisficing/ satisficers (decision making 2/2)
SEEK OUT (effort) the “good enough” choice (choose the bare minimum) -> or their subjective choice
Solutions for paradox of choice (my definition )
Satisfice BUT put your decision anxiety into the things you CAN control (your hard work and you being the change you want to see)
Not letting the “good wave” carry you throughout life (but you being that force in your life that bends the waves to your will)
Promise yourself you made the decision with good intent (trust your past self no matter how much you’ve changed)
Have realistic expectations (your schedule WILL NOT be easy-> inevitable) (the way I was ready to go into robot scholar mode before the semester started)
More gratitude for what you have than what you could have (manifestation is cool for this tho because you ARE having gratitude for what you HAVE)
general intelligence (theory)
!!!Higher “this”-> higher IQ scores
ONLY one factor that qualifies intelligence (being smart)
!!!!One entity (intelligence) that then branches off into many different skills (fluid and crystallized) that other may qualify as “intelligences”
The others seem silly now because humans are too complex to classify their intelligences like that
!!!Yes they score higher on other intelligence tests too because of the intersectionality (standardized)
Influences socio-economic and health status (literate abt health issues)
Fluid and crystallized
Fluid and crystallized intelligence (general intelligence)
Fluid: my kryptonite (Socratic seminars) (working memory) during ACTUAL processing
NOT necessarily quickly (watch out)
Crystallized: pulling up critical thinking in low-pressure moments (more time to grab from memory storages
Strong crystallized= aided by strong fluid since if you think efficiently, you can also simultaneously conjure up and accurately describe your memory intelligence- me with voice memos (and they are both in hand in hand in general intelligence)
Creativity and problem solving
New ideas for successful outcomes (to problems)
Doesn’t have to come from a traditionally “intelligent” person
KW: curious,
divergent thinking to test if someone’s creative
To boost (for those convergers)-> literally be mindful of thoughts
Multiple intelligences (gardeners theory)
Diffferent types that make up unique PATTERN (above average in all): inTRApersonal (self), inTERpersonal (social), mathematical, linguistic, spatial (thinking in terms of images), kinesthetic, or musical
Implies were all intelligent in different ways
Critics: little basis in fact, just feel-good, these should be SKILLS
Triarchic theory (sternberg)
Only 3 alternative ways to BE intelligent (not show)
Analytical int.- tests - puzzles, problem soling
Practical int.- everyday tasks, being good judge of people
Creative int.- gain insight and new ways
Emotional intelligence (john mayor)
Managing, understanding, responding, regulating, controlling emotional experiences in OTHERS and YOURSELF
!!! NOT eliminating emotions
Predicts high school grades
Cope better with exams (me, im emotionally intelligent because I am well rounded)
Critics: not really an “intelligence” - like the definition is being bent too far
Divergent thinking
Creative thinkers
Thinking of multiple ways to use a single thing (problem solve )
Brain activity in daydreaming, imaging future, and episodic memory
Convergent thinking
Only one, but most EFFICIENT solution/ use.
CONVENTIONAL
A watch does one thing, and hardwired by scientists to do so (one raw use)
Divergent: silly ppl make smart watches with multiple doohickeys
Both equally involve intelligence
Binet-Simon Intelligence scale (not IQ)
They define intelligence: high-level mental processes (memory involved)
Measure kids mental abilities (vocab)
- to really gauge kids OVERALL intelligence, you need their average across diff components
Working backward (PS)
What kind of solution will produce this outcome?
Overcoming a mental set (PS)
Breaking your habit (where your thoughts USSUALLY go to *OUTSIDE of this situation- cater to this NEW situation -> don’t expect everything to stay the same in this new situation-> expect the unexpected
Overcoming functional fixed ness (PS)
Instead of using hammer for what its meant to be used, use it in a more efficient wya (tailored to specific situation)
EX: looking at words in a familiar break down (insight puzzzles)
Finding an analogy (PS)
Using similar methods in similar situations (generalization but * applied to this SPECIIFC situation ) (opposite to mental state _ that situation was similar, but generally its better to)
Cognitive processes and how to test them
Speed of mental processing, working memory, and attention
How they’re measured->
SOMP - simple reaction (choose correct response for stimulus as QUICKLY as possible) and choice reaction time (GI)- more stimuli
Working memory- general intelligence score- memory tests with 2 subjects
Less related to GI- that need to be worked in small time frame memory tests with simple processing - recite list
Attention- GI- paying attention and completing task with distractions (multiple info)
Heuristic (decision making) analogy but for decision making
Using rule of thumb (generalized solution) as mental shout cut to solve problem that will keep you less stressed
Minimal mental resources
Adaptive (biological - fight or flight)
Types; availability, representativeness, affective heuristics
Availability heuristic (DM)
Based on how quickly you can retrieve memory (first come first serve)
Too lazy to look into actual research (gut feeling but specifically first come)
Also, first that STRIKES MOST FEAR first serve (shark attacks are uncommon)
Representative heuristic (DM)
Judging book by cover
Taking good qualities from observation and just choosing that one, despite the inevitable “you-never-know-ness”
ALSO base rate: the ACTUAL factual amount of times your cliche is correct in the real world (about a person or thing’s OCCURENCE)
Affective heuristic (DM)
Following your HEART-> based SOLEY on emotions
Id rather go to chino morenos anus NO QUESTION
Overstimate how bad something bad will affect us -> inaccurate decisions based on their current crazy emotions (fear and FOMO on chino)
Framing effect (DM)
The power of language when it comes to advertising (beaker volume test)
Especially under time pressure
Job
Not ph
Schemas
Give v ppl specific roles in context of situation
Efficient thinking
Consistent attributes
Stereotype
Schemas cause quick stereotypes - when we break out the schema does this become a new creative stereotype
Exemplar model
Think of dog- there’s no single best representation (all diff types)
FUZZY idea
Prototype model
Most typical members of a category (certain characteristics)
No trait, not in the category (“some are more prototypical- encounter the most in our exemplar)
Reasoning
We use it but we MOSTLY just follow along with our beliefs in the end (informal)
Types: confirmation bias (only like evidence that align with our beliefs), illusory correlation (correlation of events are automatically evidence- n actual research), hindsight bias (you think you knew it, AFTER the fact- we reinterpret old evidence to make sense of the actual outcome
Reasoning with scientific method (formal)
Key for problem solving
Reorganizing your mental state (comfines)
