this post was submitted on 10 Jun 2026
545 points (98.2% liked)

me_irl

7842 readers
2970 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] loonsun@sh.itjust.works 8 points 16 hours ago (4 children)

Hey, Organizational Psychologist here, we are the people who make tests like this. I'll try and provide a brief explanation. Let me first preface that the one in the meme is not a legit one and we dont use IQ as a metric in any cognitive ability testing. We do use cognitive ability testing and these tests are actually somewhat good for selection but they aren't the end all be all. If you would like this is deeply discussed in this review by Sackett et al (2022): https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2022-17327-001

If you want to see a legitimate cognitive ability test, the one I'm most familiar with on the commercial market is by wonderlic: https://wonderlic.com/

Cognitive ability tests unfortunately have a number of issues and as you see from the comments a lot of confusion surrounding them (also the canonical post is hilarious as they are way overboard with their testing imo):

  • you can practice for these tests, which is an ongoing problem for all standardized testing
  • they are very associated with developmental tests for IQ which they only vaguely resemble
  • they have more adverse impact than other measures, meaning they can be fraught with allegations of discrimination

An important thing for you or anyone else to consider is that these tests aren't meant to be used in isolation and overall they only explain a fraction of your potential job performance. Selection is hard, its one of the most studied parts of my field but it's basically an armsrace that has no end. If anyone would like to know more on the science, feel free to reach out.

I dislike organizational psychologists. The whole field. Every time a problematic hr department does something problematic using 'researched methods', the researchers all cry foul and say 'that's not how you're supposed to implement <policy/test>!' But do you not see your own role in legitimizing this behavior? All the research into how to run a happier bee colony is going to be used to justify mistreatment and discrimination by bad actors. Every test and every policy can be maligned, and providing citations just makes that easier. The research field is itself a tool for maintaining capital.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

This is literally illegal where I live. There's a few exceptions like airline pilot, police or firefighter, but besides that it's considered discrimination.

[–] TheHonourablePierrePoilievre@lemmy.ca 1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

It makes sense to have specific skill, ability and knowledge tests as appropriate. Like having a written and road test to get a driver license.

But these overall comprehensive "personality" or "cognitive" tests are blatently unethical.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Yes exactly. I forgot to mention that.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

the one I’m most familiar with on the commercial market is by wonderlic

This test says I'm going to be a stellar quarterback.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 2 points 15 hours ago

Selection is hard

It's not that hard. People in your field just make up a bunch of shit that over complicates it and gets in the way to justify their existence. Anyone halfway decent at hiring can interview a candidate and have a decent idea of if they're a good fit or not.