Remix.run Logo
Workaccount2 3 days ago

EQ, SQ and whatever other-q, are not really a true thing. They're more feel good tests for Facebook dwellers who get confused on IQ tests.

There are social assessments, but they are for identifying disorders.

grugagag 3 days ago | parent [-]

Same could be said about IQ..

pxc 3 days ago | parent [-]

IQ test questions have clear right and wrong answers that can be determined in advance of writing the test. But EQ tests just measure a (not necessarily unanimous) consensus of subjective intuitions by a handful of psychologists.

It's true that EQ tests have all the same problems as IQ tests. But they also have additional problems.

(I learned this when I chatted with a psychologist about an EQ test he administered to me, but I just reviewed it now. See the "Psychometric properties" section of the Wikipedia article: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy_quotient )

hirvi74 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I remember when I took the WAIS-IV. While, I did not have access to how the test was scored, I am not certain that a few sections of the test could not be open to interpretation.

#Story below, feel free to skip:#

One section involved comparing and contrasting two words. I remember one of the questions being "practical vs. pragmatic." For the differences, I really wanted to say, "There is no such thing as a pragmatic joke!" However, I do not know if that would have been accepted or not.

On the symbol matching part of the test, I kind of got into it with the psychologist. In that section, there was a key at the top of the page that presented multiple different symbols all with an associated a number. There was somewhere between 25 and 50 of these symbol questions on the page in random order. For example, question one would be a square, and I would write '3', question 2 would be circle, and I would write '5', and so on.

Upon seeing this section of the test, I figured out, "Why not just fill in all the squares with '3', then do all the circle problems, then the triangle problems, etc.?" Well, I started to do just that, and the psychologist freaked out. "No! The test was not designed to be solved that way. You have to solve all the questions in sequential order." Of course, being the impulsive ADHD person I am, I said, "What do you mean? It's my test. I don't give a fuck how it was designed." After a bit more back-and-forth arguing, it was at that point the psychologist then told me, "Time is ticking!" Well, I started to freak out a bit, because I had no idea the test was timed. The psychologist never even told me prior to that moment. So, I became even more unmotivated after that interaction, and occasionally would give the wrong answer to some questions that were ridiculously easy just to see what would happen -- would the psychologist even notice or care? No, he didn't. But I did realize one thing: IQ is not solely a measurement of intelligence, because clearly I could fuck with it a bit, and the test couldn't measure me lack of earnest motivation. Though, in the end it doesn't really even matter because that test informed me of nothing I (nor anyone else that knew me) already didn't know. Wow, I don't have a severe mental disability nor am I the next Von Neumann. Glad to see over a hundred years of psychometric research has truly amounted to a lot...

mensetmanusman 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

People tend to tell me I have a high EQ, and I agree it’s hard to measure.

For fun I recently completed a test where they just show eyes and you have to match their emotional state from a list (someone asked me to try this). I got nearly 100% when the average was 60^ or so.

Thought it was an interesting approach to one aspect of EQ.

pxc 3 days ago | parent [-]

The EQ test I took had a component that was questions like this.

I'm not sure how meaningful it is for me given that I've been visually impaired my whole life. Nowadays, I can rarely see the eyes of strangers.

But I did kinda hate questions like this, found them unpleasant to think through. I scored normal on the overall EQ test, but didn't do as well on the portion related to reading eyes or faces.

It's interesting to imagine being able to intuitively breeze through a test like that, as well as how much information or precision is missing from my perceptual world!

I wonder how the eye test might or might not correlate with a similar test centered on voices. I feel like I can interpret voices much more easily. Maybe I'd do a little better there?

mensetmanusman 3 days ago | parent [-]

They said people like me have a strong cringe response, which I found to be true - it can be vocal response indicated, but definitely a combination of verbal and physical cues. E.g. When fellow engineers start veering far left field in long rambling responses to marketing and business leaders I want to disappear feeling embarrassed for the engineer not realizing what is happening.