If you use Internet Explorer you might have a low IQ
- Thread starter gloweyjoey
- Start date
- Views 4,000
- Replies 54
No.
The study shows tendancies. It shows people with lower IQs tend to use IE. It DOES NOT show that those who use IE have lower IQs.
Example:
If it is raining outside, Bob will open his umbrella.
Bob will open his umbrella if it rains. If Bob opens his umbrella when it isn't raining, the above statement will still be valid.
From the study:
If someone has a lower IQ, they will likely use Internet Explorer
If someone uses IE, it does not mean that they have a low IQ.
Besides, IQ is much easier to use, and it much faster.
I would love to see any other browser TRY to get through this:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performa...ng/Default.html
The study shows tendancies. It shows people with lower IQs tend to use IE. It DOES NOT show that those who use IE have lower IQs.
Example:
If it is raining outside, Bob will open his umbrella.
Bob will open his umbrella if it rains. If Bob opens his umbrella when it isn't raining, the above statement will still be valid.
From the study:
If someone has a lower IQ, they will likely use Internet Explorer
If someone uses IE, it does not mean that they have a low IQ.
Besides, IQ is much easier to use, and it much faster.
I would love to see any other browser TRY to get through this:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performa...ng/Default.html
This does not say "you use IE = your IQ is low"
It's saying "if your IQ is low = a higher chance you use IE"
I thought I titled the thread appropriately enough, but i guess the low IQs didn't even bother to comprehend it.
It's saying "if your IQ is low = a higher chance you use IE"
I thought I titled the thread appropriately enough, but i guess the low IQs didn't even bother to comprehend it.
First let me clarify a few things
1) IQ testing cannot be done 'for free on the internet'. Actual IQ test that are of any value require significant time (3-6 hours)and resources per tester. Thus the entire basis of the study is useless, since the score can't be tied to any existing standard. It's highly unlikely any internet user would actually stick through the 3-6 hour process required.
2) The data makes no sense for several reasons. IQ test are scored such that 100 is both the median and average, with a standard deviation of 15. If the 'average' user of IE6 had an average IQ of 80, it means that somehow the 12% of the population (nearly 2 standard deviations away) that actually lies within that range constitutes the majority of IE users. While possible it seems statistically unlikely. Thus it would appear that either the test is innacurate or the scoring methodology is so bad that it creates exaggerated results such as this.
3) The Flynn effect also skews results over time. Every time IQ test are re-normalized (where 100 is mean and average) it is observed that the general population is actually getting SMARTER, as it is necessary to set 100 to higher and higher levels with each test iteration.
4) The data doesn't seem to match up with the existing demographics. I can understand how selection bias would mean that users of Opera/Firefox 'might' skew to higher IQ levels. However IE6/7 are used by the general public more, and thus we'd expect the distribution to be more in line with the national average, with most users around 1 standard deviation of 100. The irony is that their 2006 data show that in general each browser generally has an average around 100 with variation but at least within 1 standard deviation which makes sense. For there to be a shift of greater than one standard deviation in IQ levels in 5 years you'd have to have a pretty good explanation other than IE users are stupid.
5) Their PDF report is GROSSLY missing all the actual useful information a person trying to do real research would want. A lot more detailed methodological analysis is required especially given the nature of the results. If you're not willing to actually show the nitty gritty details of your study, then your results don't warrant any mention.
Basically some company took a worthless IQ test, applied it to questionable data, to come up with an idiotic result.
Also note the company AptiQuant is obstensively some kind of 'aptitude testing house' company that supposedly matches people to jobs via their testing. Note that no rigorous trial has ever shown that such testing actually improves placement of individuals into any specific field in any meaningful way. Thus one has to question the company's motivations as well as the methodologies chosen within the study.
1) IQ testing cannot be done 'for free on the internet'. Actual IQ test that are of any value require significant time (3-6 hours)and resources per tester. Thus the entire basis of the study is useless, since the score can't be tied to any existing standard. It's highly unlikely any internet user would actually stick through the 3-6 hour process required.
2) The data makes no sense for several reasons. IQ test are scored such that 100 is both the median and average, with a standard deviation of 15. If the 'average' user of IE6 had an average IQ of 80, it means that somehow the 12% of the population (nearly 2 standard deviations away) that actually lies within that range constitutes the majority of IE users. While possible it seems statistically unlikely. Thus it would appear that either the test is innacurate or the scoring methodology is so bad that it creates exaggerated results such as this.
3) The Flynn effect also skews results over time. Every time IQ test are re-normalized (where 100 is mean and average) it is observed that the general population is actually getting SMARTER, as it is necessary to set 100 to higher and higher levels with each test iteration.
4) The data doesn't seem to match up with the existing demographics. I can understand how selection bias would mean that users of Opera/Firefox 'might' skew to higher IQ levels. However IE6/7 are used by the general public more, and thus we'd expect the distribution to be more in line with the national average, with most users around 1 standard deviation of 100. The irony is that their 2006 data show that in general each browser generally has an average around 100 with variation but at least within 1 standard deviation which makes sense. For there to be a shift of greater than one standard deviation in IQ levels in 5 years you'd have to have a pretty good explanation other than IE users are stupid.
5) Their PDF report is GROSSLY missing all the actual useful information a person trying to do real research would want. A lot more detailed methodological analysis is required especially given the nature of the results. If you're not willing to actually show the nitty gritty details of your study, then your results don't warrant any mention.
Basically some company took a worthless IQ test, applied it to questionable data, to come up with an idiotic result.
Also note the company AptiQuant is obstensively some kind of 'aptitude testing house' company that supposedly matches people to jobs via their testing. Note that no rigorous trial has ever shown that such testing actually improves placement of individuals into any specific field in any meaningful way. Thus one has to question the company's motivations as well as the methodologies chosen within the study.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2004
- Messages
- 6,613
- Trophies
- 0
- Age
- 34
- Location
- Dar es Salaam
- Website
- vfootball.co.nf
- XP
- 830
- Country
"I uze IQ and it menz i hv low IE bcz i use IQ"
I do agree to a certain extent because when a person discovers other browsers, they will KNOW they are better than IE in terms of interface, features etc
Because the person just wants to open some pages, facebook, chat, facebook etc then he will open the nearest browser on their OS (which is almost assuredly Windows)
LOL at this story. It appeared on Kaun Banega CrorePati (The indian version of who wants to be a millionaire)
One of the first five questions asked to a lady was
"Which of the following is not a browser" and the choices were like IE, chrome, facebook and firefox.
You know what, she didnt know the answer until she used either audience poll or phone a friend
My brother commented that probably the only thing she does on the Internet is facebook and hence when she opens a browser, she sees facebook and therefore does not know if it is a browser or what it is. Maybe she didnt know the meaning of a browser.
Infact, if they would have said, those who safari love fruits then that would also make sense
I do agree to a certain extent because when a person discovers other browsers, they will KNOW they are better than IE in terms of interface, features etc
Because the person just wants to open some pages, facebook, chat, facebook etc then he will open the nearest browser on their OS (which is almost assuredly Windows)
LOL at this story. It appeared on Kaun Banega CrorePati (The indian version of who wants to be a millionaire)
One of the first five questions asked to a lady was
"Which of the following is not a browser" and the choices were like IE, chrome, facebook and firefox.
You know what, she didnt know the answer until she used either audience poll or phone a friend
My brother commented that probably the only thing she does on the Internet is facebook and hence when she opens a browser, she sees facebook and therefore does not know if it is a browser or what it is. Maybe she didnt know the meaning of a browser.
Infact, if they would have said, those who safari love fruits then that would also make sense
You know, I've encountered this when helping people forward their ports on their routers. I'd ask them what browser they used and the majority of the time the answers I would get are "google" and "yahoo"shakirmoledina said:
hahahah thats funny ..........i think its made by internet explorer haters
do you se that IE has all the versions there ..........and chorome ,firefox,opera ect not
XD
do you se that IE has all the versions there ..........and chorome ,firefox,opera ect not
XD
LOL This poll that was done is most likely a troll against IE users. I still have it on my computer but never use it. FireFox FTW.
[sarcasm] i iz use ff so tht mean i can has high iq? [/sarcasm]
Seriously, I don't see a direct correlation between the type of browser someone uses and their IQ.
Seriously, I don't see a direct correlation between the type of browser someone uses and their IQ.
gloweyjoey said:
IQ testing has nothing to do with 'knowledge' and such. A person who could not answer that question could have an IQ of 160. Thus you can't correlate not knowing the answer to something with a person's IQ, since IQ test are purposely not designed to test how much a person 'knows'
It doesn't say that if you use IE your have a low IQ.
It says that people who have a low IQ on average use IE.
On average, if you have a low IQ, you probably are not very logical or a person with common sense. If you do not have a lot of common sense, chances are you do not understand technology or computers. Yet, people who don't understand technology or computers still use them along with windows. IE is the default internet browser for windows.
It makes sense why this is true. They would find that people who use linux distributions have a higher IQ than average vs Windows users. It's not saying that windows users are dumb, it's saying that pretty much it requires a bit more knowledge to use a linux distribution than windows.
---
I love how people think they don't have low IQ but they don't know anything about logic and misunderstand what is being said (because they make a logic error)
It says that people who have a low IQ on average use IE.
On average, if you have a low IQ, you probably are not very logical or a person with common sense. If you do not have a lot of common sense, chances are you do not understand technology or computers. Yet, people who don't understand technology or computers still use them along with windows. IE is the default internet browser for windows.
It makes sense why this is true. They would find that people who use linux distributions have a higher IQ than average vs Windows users. It's not saying that windows users are dumb, it's saying that pretty much it requires a bit more knowledge to use a linux distribution than windows.
---
I love how people think they don't have low IQ but they don't know anything about logic and misunderstand what is being said (because they make a logic error)
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 3,225
- Trophies
- 1
- Age
- 43
- Location
- somewhere
- Website
- spinalcode.co.uk
- XP
- 3,381
- Country
Zetta_x said:
So you're saying that anyone intelligent must logically use linux because it's 'better'? imo people only prefer linux because it's free.
Similar threads
-
-
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
Also touch is better.... Well at least better than the launch DS, the lite one improved that a ton -
-
@
Psionic Roshambo:
I really need to dig out my USB Wii sensor bar and experiment with Wii emulation and synching Wii remotes with BT lol
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
