Riot IQ Test

Started by Freud’sMommy
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I'll still likely be using traditional in-person, paper-and-pencil/tablet testing for many years to come. Although some of the work they've been doing looking at brief, repeat cognitive testing via smartphone, such as in folks with MCI, could be interesting. I don't know if the current older adult population is the best fit with that paradigm, but maybe as the older Gen X folks continue creeping along.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
msc545 said:
I am not going to get excited until I see some validity and reliability data.
Click to expand...
Maybe I missed something, but you’d think the website would link to its psychometric studies if they existed. I didn’t see anything at all about reliability and validity, but I admit I spent about 2 mins. on the website.

I think computerized tests hold promise, but I’m leery of all the startups creating these tests with little to no input from neuropsychologists.
 
AcronymAllergy said:
I'll still likely be using traditional in-person, paper-and-pencil/tablet testing for many years to come. Although some of the work they've been doing looking at brief, repeat cognitive testing via smartphone, such as in folks with MCI, could be interesting. I don't know if the current older adult population is the best fit with that paradigm, but maybe as the older Gen X folks continue creeping along.
Click to expand...
They started doing some smartphone-based cognitive, symptom, and balance assessment in the sport-related concussion world too these past few years. That population is a much better fit for the modality too like you mentioned. I have mixed feelings about the cognitive assessment tools available there, but the balance assessment using the phone’s accelerometer is a great use of the modality.
 
jdawg2017 said:
Maybe I missed something, but you’d think the website would link to its psychometric studies if they existed. I didn’t see anything at all about reliability and validity, but I admit I spent about 2 mins. on the website.

I think computerized tests hold promise, but I’m leery of all the startups creating these tests with little to no input from neuropsychologists.
Click to expand...
I looked very closely and there are no links to any studies or any test examples. Just marketing junk.
 
Yeah, actual utility is pending; technical manual comes out later this year with their norming data. They have videos on YouTube and a list of the tests and composites.

Appears to be a WAIS clone and appears face valid to me. I’m skeptical about their spatial ability index though because of the lack of manipulatives. Pearson said they tried to move all subtests to Q-interactive for WAIS-5 but couldn’t do so because it harmed that particular domain.
 
I'll wait to look at the data, regardless, probably not moving to online any time soon. We already see differences in digital vs. paper/pencil administration, particularly for timed tasks. Also, when they say, "releasing publicly," do they mean to all comers? not a great look for the ethics of test security. That'd be the biggest reason I wouldn't touch it.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I'll be curious about the reliability in particular, given the modality. Things can become much more variable as you allow people to take tests in all manner of uncontrolled settings/conditions.

IMO, the main advantage to online/app-based assessment instruments is their potential to be short, easy to use, and repeatedly re-administered to track change over time. Not so much for highly-reliable one-off administrations. But maybe that'll change at some point.
 
For the youngsters out there:

Long before any SDN'ers career, psychologists used to administer tests in group settings (e.g., MMPIs to individuals being hired in security sensitive positions, "IQ" tests to classrooms sometimes via teachers). There was significant blowback on this, and the federal laws started prohibiting unsupervised administration. Ever since the test publishers have been trying to get back into it (e.g., trying to get unsupervised online administration, making educational institutions the first option on their phone systems, etc). It’s probably not in your best professional interest to support online tests.
 
psych.meout said:
It very much is that and the vibe is disrupting "qualified professionals doing cognitive assessment in favor of a black box controlled by this company."
Click to expand...

If I can't score it by hand as a double check, I don't use it. Full stop. Also, I'm not giving up patient data to testing corporations without the patient's consent.
 
WisNeuro said:
If I can't score it by hand as a double check, I don't use it. Full stop. Also, I'm not giving up patient data to testing corporations without the patient's consent.
Click to expand...
I don't even know if providers are their target demographic. So much of what I've seen is targeted towards the market of lay enthusiasts of cognitive testing. The kind of person whose entire personality was being in gifted and talented courses in elementary school and spends a significant amount of time posting on forums lamenting that they haven't become fabulously wealthy as an adult. Or it's parents trying to train their children to game the system and get them into G&T as kindergarteners.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
AcronymAllergy said:
I'll be curious about the reliability in particular, given the modality. Things can become much more variable as you allow people to take tests in all manner of uncontrolled settings/conditions.

IMO, the main advantage to online/app-based assessment instruments is their potential to be short, easy to use, and repeatedly re-administered to track change over time. Not so much for highly-reliable one-off administrations. But maybe that'll change at some point.
Click to expand...
Good points, thanks
 
psych.meout said:
It very much is that and the vibe is disrupting "qualified professionals doing cognitive assessment in favor of a black box controlled by this company."
Click to expand...

An Orwellian nightmare in the making. The benefits of a professional class are community standards and accountability. Big tech doesn't have to abide by these rules at the expense of their consumers.
 
R. Matey said:
An Orwellian nightmare in the making. The benefits of a professional class are community standards and accountability. Big tech doesn't have to abide by these rules at the expense of their consumers.
Click to expand...
It's even worse than that. Tech has an open culture of "move fast, break things" that flouts, if not intentionally breaks, rules and has essentially zero accountability in any way. And why would they, as they have been incentivized by the economy, gov't, and overall culture to do so and they never face consequences for doing otherwise.
 
psych.meout said:
It's even worse than that. Tech has an open culture of "move fast, break things" that flouts, if not intentionally breaks, rules and has essentially zero accountability in any way. And why would they, as they have been incentivized by the economy, gov't, and overall culture to do so and they never face consequences for doing otherwise.
Click to expand...

Right, though I think there are cultural tides turning against big tech. Who knows if it will be enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Newest EPPP test materials a must?
Replies
6
Views
7K
PsyDuck90
P
L
  • Locked
ISO- WAIS-IV complete kit to purchase
Replies
1
Views
1K
AcronymAllergy
AcronymAllergy
D
Best Companies with EPPP Practice Tests?
Replies
5
Views
3K
WisNeuro
WisNeuro
D
Feedback from an "UNnamed" EPPP Testing site.....please provide input
Replies
5
Views
2K
oliversacks4thewin
oliversacks4thewin
P
psychological testing
Replies
34
Views
4K
msc545
M