Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 48: Line 48:     
Something else I think you have to consider with this kind of test is that it is easy to misrepresent yourself on it.  I believe "openmindedness" to be a trait which most people would deem to be a good trait.  Therefore going into this exam, people will want the outcome to give them a more favorable score so it is heavily reliant on the test takers being 100% accurate in their responses.  Whereas with an IQ test, you are asked questions with definitive answers where you either know the answer, or you don't. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 10:33, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
 
Something else I think you have to consider with this kind of test is that it is easy to misrepresent yourself on it.  I believe "openmindedness" to be a trait which most people would deem to be a good trait.  Therefore going into this exam, people will want the outcome to give them a more favorable score so it is heavily reliant on the test takers being 100% accurate in their responses.  Whereas with an IQ test, you are asked questions with definitive answers where you either know the answer, or you don't. --[[User:Colest|Colest]] 10:33, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
: Good point, but asking about specific amounts of time spent considering the evidence would seem to minimize the problem you describe.  If further precautions are warranted, then follow-up questions about when, where, what, how could be asked concerning reviewing evidence.  In fact, I'll add that now.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:52, 9 May 2007 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,936

edits

Navigation menu