I thought IQ tests were pseudoscientific anyway?
If the number doesnt have any rigorous meaning then who cares if it changes, up or down, could mean anything.
If the number doesnt have any rigorous meaning then who cares if it changes, up or down, could mean anything.
This is false. Look a this reddit post[1] for a summary of the scientific consensus.
[1]https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/oh6115/perf...
The reddit post just shows that some (maybe even a majority of) psychologists accept IQ. I could post an equal amount of links to psychology studies rejecting it. But that doesn't even matter. What's more important is that the field of psychology as a whole is still in it's infancy as a science. Up until about the 90's almost 100% of it was pure bunk. Psychologists were using the DSM up until only a couple of years ago! Recently there has been the revelation of the reproducibility crisis. In short, psychology has a long way to go before it's on the same level as other sciences, I wouldn't be so certain of something from psychology's dark past like IQ.
I concede most people don't actively train for IQ tests, especially not people who only have to do it once. But one can't exactly claim "IQ tests are flawless measures of IQ" when they can be trained and gamed, which is the point.