Wonderlic Scores Are Out

[djrocks]

The wonderlic is overrated

 

not when your talking QB. dont know what JP losman's was but his mind was not good enough to process information fast enough to play QB in the NFL

Edited March 20, 2011 by djrocks

[Orton's Arm]

Standardized cognitive instruments are re-normed periodically because, essentially, the nature of the population by which the test was previously normed has changed to some degree. A person's performance on a cognitive test, such as the Wonderlic, is compared to the performance of the normative sample (thousands of people who take the test prior to it being published). As a general trend, longitudinal research demonstrates that IQ scores have risen over time. As theorized, this phenomenon is due to multiple contributing factors (i.e., education, health care, nutrition, etc...). So, a Wonderlic score of 20 does mean the same thing as a Wonderlic score of 20 fifteen years ago. It means that you attained an average score, as compared to the normative sample.

 

Players such as Losman and Vince Young are able to improve their scores dramatically due to practice effects. Essentially, when the test is re-administered, they are better able to respond to the nature of the tasks presented to them. Quite possibly, their improved score is more representative of their actual aptitude in a given area (in this case fluid reasoning abilities). In other words, we are not interested in what these players know, but rather, how quickly and efficiently they can process information.

The gradual increase in IQ scores to which you've referred is known as the Flynn Effect. (Even though Flynn was not the one who'd discovered the phenomenon.) There are two possible explanations for the Flynn Effect:

 

- It represents an actual increase in general intelligence--or g--the thing I.Q. tests are supposed to be measuring

- It represents an increase in something other than g.

 

The information I have seen about the Flynn Effect indicates the latter explanation is the more likely. People have become better at test taking without necessarily becoming more intelligent. One factor which has probably contributed to this is longer periods of education. A hundred years ago, it was perfectly normal for people to receive no more than a sixth grade education, after which they would stop school to work full-time on farms or elsewhere. This meant they had less practice taking pencil and paper tests than most Americans of today.

 

I agree that Vince Young and Losman were able to improve their scores due to the practice effect. When a player dramatically improves his score, the initial, non-practiced score is generally considered the more reliable of the two. That was certainly true in Losman's case at least, as he clearly did not have the mental bandwidth necessary to be a long-term answer at quarterback.

[Just Jack]

here are some samples - ive seen almost identical questions on the actual test. and yes, in real life its multi choice, these are just some sample questions, not an actual wonderlic

 

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/closer/020228test.html

 

The problem with those sample questions, is they (ESPN) say to set your clock for 5 minutes. That is too long. The real Wonderlic is 50 questions in 12 minutes, or approx 15 seconds per question. So you should actually set your timer for 3 minutes 45 seconds.

[NoSaint]

The problem with those sample questions, is they (ESPN) say to set your clock for 5 minutes. That is too long. The real Wonderlic is 50 questions in 12 minutes, or approx 15 seconds per question. So you should actually set your timer for 3 minutes 45 seconds.

 

And it's multiple choice in real life so..... I guess the sample question should be taken as just that, a sample Of the type of questions, not a full on recreation of the exact test. The time issue really doesn't sway me on single digit scores. If you get a 9 in 12 mins I'm going out on a limb and saying 15 mins wouldn't dramatically change that score.

[Tcali]

And it's multiple choice in real life so..... I guess the sample question should be taken as just that, a sample Of the type of questions, not a full on recreation of the exact test. The time issue really doesn't sway me on single digit scores. If you get a 9 in 12 mins I'm going out on a limb and saying 15 mins wouldn't dramatically change that score.

I'm almost afraid to ask what Leodis's score was.....

[Aloha22]

Just in case anyone was wondering.

 

I didn't see him mentioned when the ESPN guy listed the other top QBs in the draft.

 

Link: http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFL-source-Colin-Kaepernick-scored-a-37-on-Wonderlic.html

[Bangarang]

The kid is smart, has ideal size (although he can stand to add more muscle/bulk), and has elite arm strength.

 

The problems with him come from playing in a weak conference and playing in the Pistol offense his entire career. Can he play from under center? Can he go through multiple progressions? Can he read a defense? He's certainly a good prospect, however.

Edited March 20, 2011 by Bangarang

[ExiledInIllinois]

Anybody notice what Fitz scored when he came out of Harvard?