Over and out. I said I took my argument too far. I said you did the same. You are sticking to your guns as if you were leading a revolution, all we're discussing is timers on IQ tests.
1) Nevertheless. The WAIS is the golden standard of IQ tests. I developed an IQ test, ooh look how does it compare to the WAIS?
2)This isn't a proper IQ test, come on. Of course the questions aren't going to scale properly in difficulty, and even if they did, basic time management would solve the problem. As I said, if you get stuck, you are more than 95% likely to get stuck on one of the next two questions. And, why is time management not a facet of intelligence? And why are you ignoring hard correlation numbers with airy arguments? Sure, they hold water, and are important to consider, but as I said, you have clearly taken your thesis too far. People who perform well on the type of test you are suggesting ALSO perform well on the type of test I am suggesting. Ergo timers are clearly not that important. Neither of us are qualified to argue any more about exactly what their effect is and how they should be used (if at all, because tests without timers also correlate very highly. As I said, if you get stuck somewhere you'll get stuck further down, no matter what the time). So let's stop derailing the thread. And, point of information, another test still very widely used with a per-test (or perhaps per-section, can't remember) timer is the cattell. By mensa as well.
3)BAP, there are other measurements apart from correlation. And also, if anything, wouldn't it be nice to have a few very random scores and many very accurate ones at the same correlation, rather than all fairly accurate?
4)BAP, just because I refuse to discuss something doesn't mean I haven't thought about it extensively. Sometimes I'll find someone who I know it may be worth giving it a go though, and I'll try.
.
