Wonderlic Sample Test

[fifty5]

On a different tack, how about:
"50= highest possible score, superior intelligence
21= average intelligence
14= equivalent to unskilled worker
Below 14= moron"

Out of 9 those break points translate to 9/9, less than 4/9, and less than 3/9. Maybe the last one has some acceptability, but that 'average' would be 5 wrong out of the 9 staggers me - and also that the difference between 'average' and 'moron' is just 1 answer on the test seems ludicrous, or a damning verdict on the expected population doing this on-line test.

General validity seems low. This web page seems to me well below that standard.

 

[fieryjen]

Question 2 made me pause, for the exact reason Joe suggested. I hate it when there are questions like this on a test, when you have to "dumb down" any higher level thinking process because of "what they mean".

To this day I swear I encountered an ACT question that was worded incorrectly and gave me the same kind of trouble.

Or maybe that's just my ego getting all vocal

 

[fieryjen]

On a different tack, how about:
"50= highest possible score, superior intelligence
21= average intelligence
14= equivalent to unskilled worker
Below 14= moron"

Out of 9 those break points translate to 9/9, less than 4/9, and less than 3/9. Maybe the last one has some acceptability, but that 'average' would be 5 wrong out of the 9 staggers me - and also that the difference between 'average' and 'moron' is just 1 answer on the test seems ludicrous, or a damning verdict on the expected population doing this on-line test.

General validity seems low. This web page seems to me well below that standard.

That's true too. I was quite surprised that there were only nine questions, which is why I didn't even start discussing results. It's no more than a very, very rough estimate of what your actual score might be anyway, so the actual questions and their validity seemed the more interesting choice.

 

[JagFarlane]

That's true too. I was quite surprised that there were only nine questions, which is why I didn't even start discussing results. It's no more than a very, very rough estimate of what your actual score might be anyway, so the actual questions and their validity seemed the more interesting choice.

Well like they said it was on a sample test -shrugs- The real on is all 50

 

[fieryjen]

Well like they said it was on a sample test -shrugs- The real on is all 50

Yes, but then, why put a sample test online and put up a big scale explaining that 9=50, if that's not really accurate? In my opinion, they spend a little too much time advertising their sample test, and not quite enough time making sure to explain that it really doesn't mean all that much.

 

[jomar]

If the domain of "football player" is someone whose occupation is playing football, then there are some players of football that aren't football players. If the domain of "football player" is someone who has, at any time, played football, then there are no players of football that aren't football players.

It may seem like an easy discarded technicality--and it truly is one--but it doesn't hold up when we take it to QL or PL (sort of, on that one).

I'm not saying its not a functional question, just that its missing a proposition in there that makes it perfectly sound.

How do /I/ define it? Like, shooting from the hip gut reaction?

I think of it like "Billy was playing football afterschool the other day, is he a football player?" with "I don't know, is he on the school team?". Or "Wow, Steve is really good out there, is he a football player?" with "He used to be before he blew his knee out."

Or do we mean something more formal?

Not necessarily more formal, but clearer. In the first post above, you seem to use the same term (football player) to define different domains. Use "professional football player" as the football player domain term and the sentence in bold is incorrect because not all players of football are professional football players.
Or maybe: If the domain of "football player" is someone who has, at any time, played football, then there are no football players that aren't players of football.

I'll go look at the test now. Eh, I see what you mean. Though clumsy, in the terms defined by the question, he is a football player. But, no wonder the test licks.