AccueilGroupesDiscussionsPlusTendances
Site de recherche
Ce site utilise des cookies pour fournir nos services, optimiser les performances, pour les analyses, et (si vous n'êtes pas connecté) pour les publicités. En utilisant Librarything, vous reconnaissez avoir lu et compris nos conditions générales d'utilisation et de services. Votre utilisation du site et de ses services vaut acceptation de ces conditions et termes.

Résultats trouvés sur Google Books

Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.

Chargement...

What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought

par Keith E. Stanovich

MembresCritiquesPopularitéÉvaluation moyenneDiscussions
753360,903 (3.06)Aucun
Critics of intelligence tests-writers such as Robert Sternberg, Howard Gardner, and Daniel Goleman-have argued in recent years that these tests neglect important qualities such as emotion, empathy, and interpersonal skills. However, such critiques imply that though intelligence tests may miss certain key noncognitive areas, they encompass most of what is important in the cognitive domain. In this book, Keith E. Stanovich challenges this widely held assumption.Stanovich shows that IQ tests (or their proxies, such as the SAT) are radically incomplete as measures of cognitive functioning. They fail to assess traits that most people associate with "good thinking," skills such as judgment and decision making. Such cognitive skills are crucial to real-world behavior, affecting the way we plan, evaluate critical evidence, judge risks and probabilities, and make effective decisions. IQ tests fail to assess these skills of rational thought, even though they are measurable cognitive processes. Rational thought is just as important as intelligence, Stanovich argues, and it should be valued as highly as the abilities currently measured on intelligence tests.… (plus d'informations)
Aucun
Chargement...

Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre

Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre.

3 sur 3
Why, oh lord, why, does every popular science book repeat over and over again the same two concepts, filling well over 200 pages with slightly different wordings of the same thing?

It happens here, too: the (interesting) stuff could have been comfily put in 50/70 pages, making it more readable.

Anyway, it seemed to me a good - although somewhat vague - introduction. ( )
  kenshin79 | Jul 25, 2023 |
IQ tests are reliable measures of intellectual ability, but intelligence is only one aspect of the cognitive mind; the other aspect is rationality, which is only weakly correlated with intelligence and is not adequately measured by intelligence tests. ( )
1 voter Benthamite | Jan 6, 2009 |
Dear Psychology,

I really wanna be friends. You ALWAYS have the answers and are so much smarter than me.

But, well, with your "cognitive miser," "fluid intelligence" and "myopic loss aversion," you come off as kinda smug. And how many times are you going to say the same thing? Over and over and over again? Don't you know when to shut up? Or is just that you have nothing else to say? You're like my grandmother who goes on about her recipes. Don't get me wrong -- the food is great, but no matter how much she talks, I'll never be able to cook like that. In fact, I don't want to! I've got other stuff to do! Besides, her house doesn't even look like anyone lives in it and it smells funny.

I still dig you and all, so I'm sure I'll come hangout again sometime. And maybe you're right, I am just (Moby) Dick-whipped, but let me work through it on my own, please?

Fully Disjunctive Reason This,

Esteban
( )
  KidSisyphus | Apr 5, 2013 |
3 sur 3
aucune critique | ajouter une critique
Vous devez vous identifier pour modifier le Partage des connaissances.
Pour plus d'aide, voir la page Aide sur le Partage des connaissances [en anglais].
Titre canonique
Titre original
Titres alternatifs
Date de première publication
Personnes ou personnages
Lieux importants
Évènements importants
Films connexes
Épigraphe
Dédicace
Premiers mots
Citations
Derniers mots
Notice de désambigüisation
Directeur de publication
Courtes éloges de critiques
Langue d'origine
DDC/MDS canonique
LCC canonique

Références à cette œuvre sur des ressources externes.

Wikipédia en anglais (3)

Critics of intelligence tests-writers such as Robert Sternberg, Howard Gardner, and Daniel Goleman-have argued in recent years that these tests neglect important qualities such as emotion, empathy, and interpersonal skills. However, such critiques imply that though intelligence tests may miss certain key noncognitive areas, they encompass most of what is important in the cognitive domain. In this book, Keith E. Stanovich challenges this widely held assumption.Stanovich shows that IQ tests (or their proxies, such as the SAT) are radically incomplete as measures of cognitive functioning. They fail to assess traits that most people associate with "good thinking," skills such as judgment and decision making. Such cognitive skills are crucial to real-world behavior, affecting the way we plan, evaluate critical evidence, judge risks and probabilities, and make effective decisions. IQ tests fail to assess these skills of rational thought, even though they are measurable cognitive processes. Rational thought is just as important as intelligence, Stanovich argues, and it should be valued as highly as the abilities currently measured on intelligence tests.

Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque

Description du livre
Résumé sous forme de haïku

Discussion en cours

Aucun

Couvertures populaires

Vos raccourcis

Évaluation

Moyenne: (3.06)
0.5
1
1.5
2 2
2.5 1
3 3
3.5
4 1
4.5
5 1

Est-ce vous ?

Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing.

 

À propos | Contact | LibraryThing.com | Respect de la vie privée et règles d'utilisation | Aide/FAQ | Blog | Boutique | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliothèques historiques | Critiques en avant-première | Partage des connaissances | 207,186,913 livres! | Barre supérieure: Toujours visible