<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: iq test</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'iq test'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22iq+test%22&t=%22iq+test%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:32:14 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Motivation: IQ Tests More Than Intelligence</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4762798&amp;cid=t_181556_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F04%2F28%2Fmotivation-iq-tests-more-than-intelligence%2F</link>
            <description>One of the common misconceptions about psychological testing is that even the so-called objective psychological tests (usually done on a computer or paper-and-pencil tests) tap into a single &amp;#8220;truth&amp;#8221; about the person. And that there is very little subjectivity in such tests.
In fact, one&amp;#8217;s approach to taking a psychological test has a big impact on the test&amp;#8217;s results &amp;#8212; and the interpretations of those results by a trained psychologist.
The problem is that psychologists &amp;#8212; and worse, the legal system &amp;#8212; uses these tests as not only an indicator of where a person is in their life right now, but as a predictor of their future potential. If something as simple as one&amp;#8217;s motivation can have a significant impact on one of these scores, what does that m...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4762798</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:24:30 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4762798</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Meaningful Use Mondays – Medicare vs. Medicaid Penalties and Other Differences</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4361099&amp;cid=t_181556_113_f&amp;fid=34634&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FEmrAndHipaa%2F%7E3%2FGi9w-tkf70Y%2F</link>
            <description>To continue last Monday’s post regarding the differences between participation under Medicare and Medicaid, the Medicaid program imposes no penalties (or as Medicare euphemistically calls them, “adjustments”) for not being a successful meaningful user. Medicare adjustments are scheduled to begin in 2015. Upon discovering this discrepancy, one (somewhat devious-minded) physician suggested to me that this provided a loophole: declare as a Medicaid participant, begin participating (successfully or unsuccessfully) in 2015, and insulate yourself from any penalties. I’m sorry to report that, as creative as this strategy seemed, non-meaningful use Medicaid participants will still be subject to adjustments to their Medicare fee schedules when those penalties begin.
Two other noteworthy dif...</description>
            <author>EMR and HIPAA</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4361099</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:09:12 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4361099</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>defensive PS</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3872729&amp;cid=t_181556_136_f&amp;fid=39215&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fcancersuucks.blogspot.com%2F2010%2F08%2Fdefensive-ps.html</link>
            <description>I went to Girls latin School. I have a doctorate degree. I am smart. All those misspellings on my blog that I just cannot be bothered fixing are the fault of my computer. Oh, and the bad grammar as well, Ms grammar police- unless I am taking poetic license. (Source: Cancer does suck but it is a little funny.)</description>
            <author>Cancer does suck but it is a little funny.</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3872729</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 01:12:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3872729</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>IQ Test DNA Fingerprints:  Comparison of WJ III/BAT III to WJ-R/BAT-R</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3490744&amp;cid=t_181556_122_f&amp;fid=37835&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iqscorner.com%2F2010%2F04%2Fhere-is-another-of-iqs-corner-iq-test.html</link>
            <description>Here is another of IQ's Corner &quot;IQ Test CHC DNA Fingerprint&quot; test comparison series.&amp;nbsp; This particular CHC fingerprint figure compares the CHC composition of the respective full scale total composite IQ scores from the WJ III/BAT III and the the earlier version of these batteries....the WJ-R/BAT-R.Background information regarding the development, use and interpretation of this IQ global IQ score feature can be found at a prior post and in the IQ Test CHC DNA Fingerprint section on the blog side bar.&amp;nbsp; More can be found at IQ's Corner sister blog...the ICDP blog.I now present a comparison of the R/III versions of the WJ/BAT batteries as I have seen psych reports where a subject had previously been administered the WJ-R and was later tested with the revised WJ III (in the case of Spa...</description>
            <author>Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests (aka IQ's Corner)</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3490744</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 21 Apr 2010 15:42:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3490744</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>IQ Test DNA Fingerprints:  Comparison of WJ III, WISC-IV and WAIS-IV</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3346586&amp;cid=t_181556_122_f&amp;fid=37835&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.iqscorner.com%2F2010%2F03%2Fiq-test-dna-fingerprints-comparison-of.html</link>
            <description>Here is another in the series of IQ's Corner &quot;IQ Test CHC DNA Fingerprint&quot; test comparison series.&amp;nbsp; This particular CHC fingerprint figure compares the CHC composition of the respective full scale total composite IQ scores from the WJ III/BAT III and the WISC-IV and WAIS-IV.Background information regarding the development, use and interpretation of this feature can be found at a prior post and in the IQ Test CHC DNA Fingerprint section on the blog side bar.More to come. [Double click on image to enlarge]Technorati Tags: psychology, school psychology, educational psychology, clinical psychology, neuropsychology, forensic psychology, forensic psychiatry, intelligence, IQ tests, IQ scores, IQ, IQ testing, WISC-IV, WAIS-IV, WJ III, WJ III NU, BAT III, BAT III NU, applied psychometrics, ps...</description>
            <author>Intelligent Insights on Intelligence Theories and Tests (aka IQ's Corner)</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3346586</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:42:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3346586</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Reflections on Creativity: Interview with Daniel Tammet</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3272997&amp;cid=t_181556_122_f&amp;fid=36582&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeedproxy.google.com%2F%7Er%2FSharpBrains%2F%7E3%2Fxmww43wvlsw%2F</link>
            <description>(Editor&amp;#8217;s Note: contributor Scott Barry Kaufman recently interviewed Daniel Tammet, one of the 100 known prodigious savants living at the present time. Their in-depth conversation &amp;#8211;summary and links follow Scott&amp;#8217;s reflections below&amp;#8211; provoked a powerful reaction in Scott&amp;#8217;s mind, as you are about to read).
Last night I was eating dinner with my parents back in my hometown in Philadelphia. I was telling them about my interview with Daniel Tammet, and how I was working on a post about my reflections on the interview. My father, who reads everything I write (which can be awkward sometimes!), looked at me and said, plainly and simply, &amp;#8220;I see a lot of similarities between you and Daniel, Scott.&amp;#8221; Those words were a kind of crystallizing moment for me. I su...</description>
            <author>SharpBrains</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3272997</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 03:13:06 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3272997</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The 2nd Highest Risk for Heart Disease?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3259048&amp;cid=t_181556_111_f&amp;fid=36048&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.b5media.com%2F%7Er%2Fb5media%2FAHeartyLife%2F%7E3%2F4uRLTeF3s38%2F</link>
            <description>Quiz time here at Blisstree: What is the second highest risk for cardiovascular disease? We know that smoking, obesity, sedentary lifestyle, and family history are risks, but neither of them comes in second, although smoking comes in at number one.
Give up? It&amp;#8217;s IQ &amp;#8211; intelligence quotient. Seriously. According to a British study published in February issue of the European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation, 
lower intelligence scores were associated with higher rates of cardiovascular disease and total mortality at a greater level of magnitude than found with any other risk factor except smoking. (Source)
Your IQ is usually determined using a set of tests that are based on a so-called average. There has been and continues to be significant debate as to how ...</description>
            <author>A Hearty Life</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3259048</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:26:27 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3259048</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Brain Exercise: Software vs. Crosswords</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=1427209&amp;cid=t_181556_122_f&amp;fid=36582&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feedburner.com%2F%7Er%2FSharpBrains%2F%7E3%2F285139564%2F</link>
            <description>Today I had a great conversation with Martin Buschkuehl, one of the U Michigan researchers involved in the cognitive training study that has received much media attention since early last week, when the study was published at the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
I will publish the interview notes next week. For the moment, let me paraphrase his answer to the question: &amp;quot;Why are computerized programs like the one you used fundamentally different from, say, simply doing many crossword puzzles?&amp;quot;.
His answer was that for 3 reasons:

Adaptive: The constant adaptability of the challenge level, thanks to real-time assessments. The person using the program is truly pushed to his or her peak level all the time, thereby &amp;quot;stretching&amp;quot; the targeted ability.
Complex...</description>
            <author>SharpBrains</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=1427209</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 05:15:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">1427209</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

