http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/toys/testgen/6670/
Today, I have opened my eyes to the utter joy of creating psychology quizzes.
It was an enriching experience and I really enjoyed the freedom in creating questions and answers to match whatever I wanted to test the people for. Of course, I couldn't resist adding some humour to lighten the mood. I feel that the people would reveal their true personality if they felt more at ease. Also, it would help to keep the attention of the person such that they would not decide to leave the quiz half-completed.
My quiz was mainly centered around the openness of people. As the results of the quiz would be more accurate if there were more questions asking the same thing in a different way, I decided to employ that technique.
Regarding ways that my quiz could be improved, I feel that the main problem with my quiz is that it is simply too short. 5 questions are too little to properly judge a person's openness. The number of questions in the quiz should be increased.
Also, maybe there could be a wider spectrum of final results. For example, a range from 1-10 on how open the person is rather than the less detailed "Yes, No, Maybe" results found in my quiz.
Finally, the quiz was created with RI boys in mind, so most of the questions are geared towards males. Thus, the quiz may not be suitable for females to take. Perhaps I should have either included more questions that focused on females or balanced out the male bias in the questions. Hmm. Maybe.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Session 2: Dumbo
For this session's assignment, you will need to blog about an issue covered during the session. A suggested topic is whether you believe IQ testing (for job applications) should be allowed. Please elaborate on this response. (min. 150 words)
Should IQ testing for job applications be allowed?
I believe that IQ testing for job applications should be allowed. Although some may argue that it is discrimination and 'elitism', that it is unfair that an IQ test is used because it will be a disadvantage to those who are less proficient in the tested areas, I feel that having an IQ test is fair game.
Firstly, our society, if not the world is already built on the concept of survival of the fittest. Everywhere in the world, especially Singapore, people of all ages are competing- the children in the education system, the adults for jobs. IQ testing is simply another area for people to compete in.
Would sports, for example, be banned because it is 'unfair'? In essence, almost everything is unfair in life, because everyone is unique, with different capabilities to different extents in various areas. Just because intelligence is in a more touchy area doesn't mean that IQ tests should be banned during job interviews.
Secondly, the employers have a right to demand certain standards from their employees. It doesn't matter what the employer wants, if he or she demands the employee to be able to clean the floor, do 50 pushups or attain a certain score in an IQ test, the employee has to meet that standard. It is the choice of the employers to determine the criteria for employing the person as they are the ones paying the person, so they have a right to test whatever capabilities of the person that they desire. If the employer feels that having a high IQ is necessary for the job, then i feel that he should demand a high IQ for the interviewees.
Thus, IQ testing for job applications should be allowed.
Should IQ testing for job applications be allowed?
I believe that IQ testing for job applications should be allowed. Although some may argue that it is discrimination and 'elitism', that it is unfair that an IQ test is used because it will be a disadvantage to those who are less proficient in the tested areas, I feel that having an IQ test is fair game.
Firstly, our society, if not the world is already built on the concept of survival of the fittest. Everywhere in the world, especially Singapore, people of all ages are competing- the children in the education system, the adults for jobs. IQ testing is simply another area for people to compete in.
Would sports, for example, be banned because it is 'unfair'? In essence, almost everything is unfair in life, because everyone is unique, with different capabilities to different extents in various areas. Just because intelligence is in a more touchy area doesn't mean that IQ tests should be banned during job interviews.
Secondly, the employers have a right to demand certain standards from their employees. It doesn't matter what the employer wants, if he or she demands the employee to be able to clean the floor, do 50 pushups or attain a certain score in an IQ test, the employee has to meet that standard. It is the choice of the employers to determine the criteria for employing the person as they are the ones paying the person, so they have a right to test whatever capabilities of the person that they desire. If the employer feels that having a high IQ is necessary for the job, then i feel that he should demand a high IQ for the interviewees.
Thus, IQ testing for job applications should be allowed.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Session 1
Reciprocal influences
* Behaviour, internal personal factors and environmental influences all operate as interlocking determinants of each other
I feel that this perspective makes the most sense. Humans are impressionable creatures- powerful events leave deep impacts in our mind. An example would be trauma from an accident. These environmental influences leave 'emotional scars' on us, and very often we are affected by these scars for life. A person may be very outgoing at first, but after experiencing the murder of his family, he could very easily become traumatized and turn into someone who felt more at ease when in solitude.
Of course, a person's original behaviour and internal personal factors could also affect the extent of the environmental influences on a person. A headstrong, stubborn person would be less affected by his environmental influences as opposed to a weak-willed person.
A person's internal personal factors would of course affect his behaviour. Some people are more introverted, some are more extroverted. Some enjoy organisation, some enjoy complete freedom. A person's personality would affect his actions towards others. It would also affect how one responds to the actions of others. For example, a forgiving person would be more quick to let someone's mistake be forgotten.
As such, we can see that varying any 1 factor would have effects on the other 2 factors and there are many real life situations that can exemplify this.
* Behaviour, internal personal factors and environmental influences all operate as interlocking determinants of each other
I feel that this perspective makes the most sense. Humans are impressionable creatures- powerful events leave deep impacts in our mind. An example would be trauma from an accident. These environmental influences leave 'emotional scars' on us, and very often we are affected by these scars for life. A person may be very outgoing at first, but after experiencing the murder of his family, he could very easily become traumatized and turn into someone who felt more at ease when in solitude.
Of course, a person's original behaviour and internal personal factors could also affect the extent of the environmental influences on a person. A headstrong, stubborn person would be less affected by his environmental influences as opposed to a weak-willed person.
A person's internal personal factors would of course affect his behaviour. Some people are more introverted, some are more extroverted. Some enjoy organisation, some enjoy complete freedom. A person's personality would affect his actions towards others. It would also affect how one responds to the actions of others. For example, a forgiving person would be more quick to let someone's mistake be forgotten.
As such, we can see that varying any 1 factor would have effects on the other 2 factors and there are many real life situations that can exemplify this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)