Re: Triple Nback benefits

we know that no one here
has an IQ of 180 or so

Really? You claim perfect knowledge of everyone's IQ scores? How much
novel BS are we supposed to swallow here?

Ohms

The.Fourth.Deviation. wrote:
> If what you all are suggesting is true, it means that there is a WM/GF
> max that humans can attain, and that people here must be near that
> max, and therefore untrainable by DNB. But we know that no one here
> has an IQ of 180 or so, so therefore why should we think that no one
> can improve? In addition, what exactly is this IQ point that people
> are suggesting prevents one from experiencing benefits? I think that
> this argument is very tenuous...
>
> On May 31, 1:48 am, "The.Fourth.Deviation." <davidsky...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > That's not necessarily so. I don't remember seeing anything in Jaeggi
> > suggesting that individuals who scored high initially did not
> > significantly improve. The headline of a study supporting this must be
> > "High IQ individuals have less to gain from brain training". But so
> > far, most studies just show that it increases performance or increases
> > efficiency of PFC. A person may lose 5 pounds of weight, but looking
> > in the mirror feel as if they still look the same. How do we know
> > these high aptitude individuals do not merely discount results? At
> > this juncture there is no research I know of which suggests to that to
> > be the case.
> >
> > Plus there is some confounding of ideas here.  A person with higher
> > testosterone will be initially stronger, and have more potential than
> > someone with less testosterone. I know of no reason to think that
> > intelligence does not work similarly, and as I mentioned, no research
> > I know of suggests this either.
> >
> > On May 31, 1:34 am, brain train <brain.train...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > completely agree with Milestones- people with  high potential (currently
> > > hidden) who are being pulled down on IQ measure due WM issues are the ones
> > > who are likely to benefit most from DNB.
> > > i also think that these are the same people who must be looking around to
> > > find a solution to their problems from different sources like- forums like
> > > this forum, scientific magazines, research papers, brain-training tools,
> > > books etc. Reason being that they have a hint that they are operating below
> > > their potential.
> >
> > > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 8:06 AM, milestones <wgweathe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > On May 31, 9:21 am, "The.Fourth.Deviation." <davidsky...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > First, everything is hard until your brain adapts to it.
> >
> > > > > Second, I personally conclude that .5 is a strong link between gf and
> > > > > DNB, but it still leaves room for a lot of other factors, which is why
> > > > > DNB only predicts part of gf. That is why people can achieve high N
> > > > > levels, but still have a lower IQ. I believe that a person of IQ 100
> > > > > can achieve levels 5+ through training because PIQ/GF is only one
> > > > > aspect of DNB performance. And DNB can be learned, making it harder
> > > > > for us to link performance with IQ. A newbie genius will most likely
> > > > > be outperformed by a mediocre DNB devotee. I predict that a person of
> > > > > IQ 100 could even achieve DNB 6 or 7, or higher, after sustained
> > > > > training efforts.
> >
> > > > One thing to note, though as I have many times in this group. There is
> > > > a difference between a person with a average/normal IQ versus someone
> > > > who may be functioning at average IQ but has greater potential and who
> > > > may in fact have an IQ in excess (or far in excess) of what they are
> > > > testing at. Their performance could be depressed by  learning
> > > > disabilities, ADHD, depression, schizophrenia, manic depression, or a
> > > > number of things which WM training -- along with other interventions
> > > > --- may help in varying degrees. For someone without any impediments
> > > > to their potential, interventions like DNB are most likely far less
> > > > efficacious and IQ will likely move less (since day to day functioning
> > > > and theoretical potential are already close together). This could be a
> > > > person of average intelligence or a gifted individual. If I had to
> > > > guess, this group seems to attract people with above average
> > > > intelligence but who are not living up their potential for the
> > > > aforementioned reasons. For me, prior to training, my WM was mediocre
> > > > compared to my long term memory, which was quite good, so DNB has been
> > > > an optimal intervention. My example shows that if someone has strong
> > > > long term memory, and comparably lower WM, then DNB might help
> > > > functioning a lot. But then, not everyone will experience this, and
> > > > other interventions may be preferable to DNB depending on the issues
> > > > the person is dealing with.
> >
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > > > "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to brain-training@googlegroups.com.
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > brain-training+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Dual N-Back, Brain Training & Intelligence" group.
To post to this group, send email to brain-training@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to brain-training+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/brain-training?hl=en.