Move over IQ, there is a new intelligence test on the scene. Psychologists have developed a 10-minute free trial that they claim is an excellent assessment of "fluid intelligence."
The test, developed by psychologists at UC Riverside and UC Irvine, is called the Matrix Reasoning Task at the University of California (or UCMRT) and measures the abstract capacity of problem solving. According to a study published in the magazine. Behavioral research methods, The 23 test questions were tested on 713 students, and the results correlated with the math test, the university GPA and the college admission test scores. Psychologists are making the test available to other academics for research purposes, but they have not yet published it online.
Before anyone begins to anxiously wait for the public version of this test, it is worth remembering that "fluid intelligence" means something very different in psychological jargon than in the conversation of the laity. For psychologists, it means the ability to think logically and solve problems in new situations, without the influence of preexisting knowledge. "Crystallized intelligence", meanwhile, refers to someone's ability to make use of the knowledge and experience acquired. (Of course, there is no perfect division, very few problems can be solved without any preexisting knowledge, so 20-year-olds tend to be better at questions of fluid intelligence than those at age 5. But, in general terms, the Crystallized intelligence improves as people learn more, while fluid intelligence is considered innate and can not be influenced by learning or training.)
Both fluid and crystallized intelligence are evaluated in the best-known intelligence test, IQ, but this method of sculpting intelligence and affirming that it gives a definitive rating has been strongly criticized by psychologists. In fact, many have argued that evaluating something as complex as intelligence using only one measure is wrong. A 2012 study, published in the journal Neuron, had 44,600 participants perform 12 challenging tasks that tested a range of cognitive abilities and found that the results could not be explained by any "intelligence" tests. Instead, it took three separate components to predict the results: short-term memory, reasoning, and verbal skills.
This finding coincides with the secular perceptions of intelligence. Some people are brilliant in mathematics, others are beautiful sculptors and others can win all the debates. All these are signs of very different forms of intelligence, and they do not necessarily unite in the same person.
So go ahead, take a test that measures your ability to solve problems in situations where preexisting knowledge does not help at all. Just do not expect the results to reflect your intelligence.