Erinevus lehekülje "Geenius" redaktsioonide vahel

Eemaldatud 7443 baiti ,  3 aasta eest
topeltviited välja
P
(topeltviited välja)
 
== Viited ==
{{viited}}
{{Reflist|30em|refs=<ref name="Terman1916p79">{{Harvnb |Terman|1916|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=26l9AAAAMAAJ&pg=PA79 79]}}</ref> <ref name="TermanMerrill1960p18">{{Harvnb |Terman|Merrill|1960|page=18}}</ref> <ref name="PintneronCox">{{Harvnb |Pintner|1931|pages=356–357 "From a study of these boyhood records, estimates of the probable I.Q.s of these men in childhood have been made. . . . It is of course obvious that much error may creep into an experiment of this sort, and the I.Q. assigned to any one individual is merely a rough estimate, depending to some extent upon how much information about his boyhood years has come down to us." }}</ref> <ref name="Shurkin1992pp70–71">{{Harvnb |Shurkin|1992|pages=70–71 "She, of course, was not measuring IQ; she was measuring the length of biographies in a book. Generally, the more information, the higher the IQ. Subjects were dragged down if there was little information about their early lives."}}</ref> <ref name="EysenckonCox">{{Harvnb |Eysenck|1998|page=126 "Cox found that the more was known about a person's youthful accomplishments, that is, what he had done ''before'' he was engaged in doing the things that made him known as a genius, the higher was his IQ. . . . So she proceeded to make a statistical correction in each case for lack of knowledge; this bumped up the figure considerably for the geniuses about whom little was in fact known. . . . I am rather doubtful about the justification for making the correction. To do so assumes that the geniuses about whom least is known were precocious but their previous activities were not recorded. This may be true, but it is also possible to argue that perhaps there was nothing much to record! I feel uneasy about making such assumptions; doing so may be very misleading." }}</ref> <ref name="Cox1926pp215–219">{{Harvnb |Cox|1926|pages=215–219, 218 (Chapter XIII: Conclusions) "3. That all equally intelligent children do not as adults achieve equal eminence is in part accounted for by our last conclusion: ''youths who achieve eminence are characterized not only by high intellectual traits, but also by persistence of motive and effort, confidence in their abilities, and great strength or force of character.''" (emphasis in original)}}</ref> <ref name="Kaufman2009p117">{{Harvnb |Kaufman|2009|page=117 "Terman (1916), as I indicated, used ''near genius or genius'' for IQs above 140, but mostly ''very superior'' has been the label of choice" (emphasis in original) }}</ref> <ref name="Wechsler1939p45">{{Harvnb |Wechsler|1939|page=45}}</ref> <ref name="Eysenck1998pp127–128">{{Harvnb |Eysenck|1998|pages=127–128 "Terman, who originated those "Genetics Studies of Genius," as he called them, selected . . . children on the basis of their high IQs; the mean was 151 for both sexes. Seventy–seven who were tested with the newly translated and standardized Binet test had IQs of 170 or higher–well at or above the level of Cox's geniuses. What happened to these potential geniuses–did they revolutionize society? . . . The answer in brief is that they did very well in terms of achievement, but none reached the Nobel Prize level, let alone that of genius. . . . It seems clear that these data powerfully confirm the suspicion that intelligence is not a sufficient trait for truly creative achievement of the highest grade." }}</ref> <ref name="Simonton1999p4">{{Harvnb |Simonton|1999|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=LcB2kOXT-68C&pg=PA4 4] "When Terman first used the IQ test to select a sample of child geniuses, he unknowingly excluded a special child whose IQ did not make the grade. Yet a few decades later that talent received the Nobel Prize in physics: William Shockley, the cocreator of the transistor. Ironically, not one of the more than 1,500 children who qualified according to his IQ criterion received so high an honor as adults." }}</ref> <ref name="Shurkin2006p13">{{Harvnb |Shurkin|2006|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=cRb_qzEwWWAC&pg=PA13 13]; see also "[http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/beautiful-minds/200909/the-truth-about-the-termites The Truth About the 'Termites']" (Kaufman, S. B. 2009) }}</ref> <ref name="Leslie2000">{{Harvnb |Leslie|2000|loc="[http://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=40678 We also know that two children who were tested but ''didn't'' make the cut -- William Shockley and Luis Alvarez -- went on to win the Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Hastorf, none of the Terman kids ever won a Nobel or Pulitzer.]" }}</ref> <ref name="ParkLubinskiBenbow2010">{{Harvnb |Park|Lubinski|Benbow|2010|loc="[http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=recognizing-spatial-intel There were two young boys, Luis Alvarez and William Shockley, who were among the many who took Terman’s tests but missed the cutoff score. Despite their exclusion from a study of young 'geniuses,' both went on to study physics, earn PhDs, and win the Nobel prize.]" }}</ref> <ref name="Gleick2011p32">{{Harvnb |Gleick|2011|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=j42RD66g72oC&pg=PT32 32] "Still, his score on the school IQ test was a merely respectable 125." }}</ref> <ref name="Robinson2011p47">{{Harvnb |Robinson|2011|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=UFoAiCR58YcC&pg=PA47 47] "After all, the American physicist Richard Feynman is generally considered an almost archetypal late 20th-century genius, not just in the United States but wherever physics is studied. Yet, Feynman's school-measured IQ, reported by him as 125, was not especially high" }}</ref> <ref name="Jensen1998p577">{{Harvnb |Jensen|1998|page=577 "''Creativity'' and ''genius'' are unrelated to ''g'' except that a person's level of ''g'' acts as a threshold variable below which socially significant forms of creativity are highly improbable. This ''g'' threshold is probably at least one standard deviation above the mean level of ''g'' in the general population. Besides the traits that Galton thought necessary for "eminence" (viz., high ability, zeal, and persistence), ''genius'' implies outstanding creativity as well. Though such exceptional creativity is conspicuously lacking in the vast majority of people who have a high IQ, it is probably impossible to find any creative geniuses with low IQs. In other words, high ability is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the emergence of socially significant creativity. Genius itself should not be confused with merely high IQ, which is what we generally mean by the term 'gifted'" (emphasis in original) }}</ref> <ref name="Eysenck1998p127a">{{Harvnb |Eysenck|1998|page=127 "What is obvious is that geniuses have a high degree of intelligence, but not outrageously high—there are many accounts of people in the population with IQs as high who have not achieved anything like the status of genius. Indeed, they may have achieved very little; there are large numbers of Mensa members who are elected on the basis of an IQ test, but whose creative achievements are nil. High achievement seems to be a ''necessary'' qualification for high creativity, but it does not seem to be a ''sufficient'' one." (emphasis in original) }}</ref> <ref name="Pickover1998p224">Cf. {{Harvnb |Pickover|1998|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=P0CSxB2aHMcC&pg=PT243 224] (quoting Syed Jan Abas) "High IQ is not genius. A person with a high IQ may or may not be a genius. A genius may or may not have a high IQ." }}</ref>}}
 
== Bibliograafia ==
75 765

muudatust