IQ is a strange thing, if you look closely at the mechanism of its measurement, it becomes not entirely clear why it is given such importance. The very name "intelligence quotient" alludes to global significance, although in fact these are questions of three types, the answers to which ultimately give a figure captivating with clarity and simplicity of measurement, but far enough from the actual "cleverness" in a broader sense.
In any case, many people have this impression, including me. Once we even tried to bring to a conscious level something that is not in the psychodiagnostic concept of intelligence, which is a very important part of it. It turned out to be something vague like "wisdom" or "the ability to use the mind."
Keith Stanovich, a venerable Canadian psychologist, is developing the coefficient of rationality - the very missing link, the ability (or inability) to apply a “primitive intellectual tool” to the situation. His research is based on the work of the economist-psychologist Daniel Kahneman, who received the Nobel Prize in Economics for this work.
The rationality coefficient will take into account such factors as the influence of cognitive biases on decision-making, the ability to assess risks and solve probabilistic problems, the ability to make decisions based on factual information, and not on the desired picture, the ability to act in accordance with the set goals, the influence of the status quo on the choice of an alternative etc. (some common examples of irrational behavior). In his research Stanovich uses the term dysrationalia by analogy with "dyslexia" to illustrate the "hole" in the understanding of intelligence.
“I define dysrationalia as the inability to think and behave rationally despite having adequate intelligence. Many people display the systematic inability to think or behave rationally despite the fact that they have more than adequate IQs."
In my opinion, this is obvious and ingenious - any adequate person has met a lot of people who behave in an idiotic manner, and in other situations, they show quite a decent ability to work with their heads.
You cannot call such a person a jerk, because it seems that he is not a stupid person - and you get lost without finding a suitable word, you write off on mysterious human nature … but in fact, this is a dysrational person (ok, maybe any dysrational person in certain situations perceives adequate people in this way, but this is already philosophy).
Promotional video:
Of course, such simplicity as measuring intelligence in measuring rationality will not work - a test with a simple final figure, if it appears, will be longer, more difficult than IQ. But if it turns out to deduce a figure that closely correlates with rationality, then there will be an order of magnitude more sense from it than from the IQ figure.
Author: Daniel Kahneman