Timeline for Any research on IQ (general) and coping with abstract concepts?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Oct 30, 2019 at 17:55 | vote | accept | Roman Susi | ||
May 24, 2019 at 9:24 | comment | added | Roman Susi | This is true. However, there are already some approaches like www-ihm.lri.fr/~mbl/ENS/FundHCI/2013/papers/… to speak in generalized terms about cognitive dimensions in HCI. So basically if we use an analogy of IQ being muscle power, then no user-centered design is needed to understand most humans can't move 200 kg without some equipment. | |
May 24, 2019 at 9:06 | comment | added | Cameron Brick | Perhaps. Or it's (trivially) true and not very useful, since you can't manipulate user intelligence. Imagine it were personality type; still not useful. The best UX tool is still user-centered design, regardless of individual differences. | |
May 24, 2019 at 8:06 | comment | added | Roman Susi | The question is only partially about "pure" abstractions. Of course, in reality linguistic aspects are involved. But I still believe IQ predicts users' abilities to understand user interfaces. So far most of research I've seen was about mental retardation IQ range. In this question I am more interested in the area around 100 for working age people. The topic seems to be avoided. Maybe, it's somehow "politically incorrect" and avoided by researchers or I just do not know what terms to use for search? | |
May 24, 2019 at 7:16 | comment | added | Cameron Brick | Great. I meant generally that the matrices don't correspond to anything in semantic or linguistic memory; they are themselves abstractions. | |
May 23, 2019 at 15:47 | comment | added | Roman Susi | This answer is reassuring. Any concrete pointer how IQ ranges correspond to levels of abstractions? Or do you mean levels of Raven's matrices roughly corresponds to abstraction levels? | |
May 23, 2019 at 14:39 | history | answered | Cameron Brick | CC BY-SA 4.0 |