PortadaGruposCharlasMásPanorama actual
Buscar en el sitio
Este sitio utiliza cookies para ofrecer nuestros servicios, mejorar el rendimiento, análisis y (si no estás registrado) publicidad. Al usar LibraryThing reconoces que has leído y comprendido nuestros términos de servicio y política de privacidad. El uso del sitio y de los servicios está sujeto a estas políticas y términos.

Resultados de Google Books

Pulse en una miniatura para ir a Google Books.

Cargando...

What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought

por Keith E. Stanovich

MiembrosReseñasPopularidadValoración promediaConversaciones
753354,854 (3.06)Ninguno
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.… (más)
Ninguno
Cargando...

Inscríbete en LibraryThing para averiguar si este libro te gustará.

Actualmente no hay Conversaciones sobre este libro.

Mostrando 3 de 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 vota 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 |
Mostrando 3 de 3
sin reseñas | añadir una reseña
Debes iniciar sesión para editar los datos de Conocimiento Común.
Para más ayuda, consulta la página de ayuda de Conocimiento Común.
Título canónico
Título original
Títulos alternativos
Fecha de publicación original
Personas/Personajes
Lugares importantes
Acontecimientos importantes
Películas relacionadas
Epígrafe
Dedicatoria
Primeras palabras
Citas
Últimas palabras
Aviso de desambiguación
Editores de la editorial
Blurbistas
Idioma original
DDC/MDS Canónico
LCC canónico

Referencias a esta obra en fuentes externas.

Wikipedia en inglés (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.

No se han encontrado descripciones de biblioteca.

Descripción del libro
Resumen Haiku

Debates activos

Ninguno

Cubiertas populares

Enlaces rápidos

Valoración

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

¿Eres tú?

Conviértete en un Autor de LibraryThing.

 

Acerca de | Contactar | LibraryThing.com | Privacidad/Condiciones | Ayuda/Preguntas frecuentes | Blog | Tienda | APIs | TinyCat | Bibliotecas heredadas | Primeros reseñadores | Conocimiento común | 204,232,541 libros! | Barra superior: Siempre visible