tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11327954.post7728696241326698678..comments2023-10-01T06:53:25.728-07:00Comments on IQ's Corner: The Wechsler-like IQ subtest scaled score metric: The potential for misuse, misinterpretation and impact on critical life decisions---draft report in search of feedbackKevin McGrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07945625852793502565noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11327954.post-66718715648596494542010-01-06T06:14:30.950-08:002010-01-06T06:14:30.950-08:00Your comments re: how the distribution may appear ...Your comments re: how the distribution may appear are exactly the point of my post. Like the "step function" graph I posted, the distribution would be a series of steps below the mean increasing to the middle of the distribution and then a set of steps decreasing on the over side. In effect it would look like a histogram plot...a series of increasing columns followed by a series of decreasing columns..Kevin McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07945625852793502565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11327954.post-2133461912007891762010-01-06T06:09:36.283-08:002010-01-06T06:09:36.283-08:00Thanks for the feedback. You are correct that scor...Thanks for the feedback. You are correct that scoring errors can be in either direction and may in some cases cancel each other out....and it is just as possible for errors to be in the opposite direction (e.g., malingering by proxy). I was just trying to show one extreme scenario...in a revision I will discuss errors going both ways and the outcomes of positive or negative bias. Re: more comments re: Flynn Effect--that is going to take more time as I dig into some of the original publications. ThanksKevin McGrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07945625852793502565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11327954.post-9349153534446988012010-01-06T05:54:59.308-08:002010-01-06T05:54:59.308-08:00What would a normal curve look like, with SS based...What would a normal curve look like, with SS based on a mean of 100 and SD 15, if we attempted to draw the curve based on data supplied by the "just multiply by 5" concept? My guess is that the curve(?) would appear as a series of 19 disconnected points, above the SS values 5, 10, ..., 90, 95, with large gaps in between. How can we know what's happening in the gaps between the points? Or in the tails of the curve? Would it be fair (statistically) to connect the dots? What danger lurks beneath this type of "curve", if examiners draw conclusions based on the way that they traditionally use the (continuous) normal curve for IQ scores?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11327954.post-46023467788823444702010-01-05T22:03:46.351-08:002010-01-05T22:03:46.351-08:00Still mulling over your post; I think you are on t...Still mulling over your post; I think you are on to something worthwhile. <br /><br />I was more impressed with the earlier part, and less sure about the section on scoring errors (just my take on it; but perhaps a simpler conclusion is that scoring errors likely exist everywhere, but they are compounded with crude scales).<br /><br />What I need to think about more is cases where scoring errors are biased in one direction or another-- I think you claim that!-- does this happen a lot? If not, I think the simpler conclusion above makes the point more strongly. <br /><br />Also, I was expecting a few end comments on what this might do for interpreting / calculating the Flynn effect (if anything).<br /><br />These are all just my opinions, and so are likely wrong!<br /><br />Finally your post made me think of Lumsden's flogging wall (the height analogy). Just in case you're not familiar with it, it's a great read !<br /><br />https://www.msu.edu/course/psy/818/snapshot.afs/deshon/Readings/Lumsden%20%281976%29%20-%20Test%20theory.pdfBryan Pestahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08489662466643928790noreply@blogger.com