mini-q: Intelligenzscreening in drei Minuten

Baudson, Tanja Gabriele; Preckel, Franzis

doi:10.1026/0012-1924/a000150

Cited by 39 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This suggests that there was a potential lack of motivation among at least some participants. However, in a recent study, Baudson and Preckel (2015) found that in other rather simple cognitive tasks, the proportion of successful participants was also only INDIRECT QUESTIONS: COMPREHENSIBILITY AND PRIVACY 27 90%, and thus, close to the accuracy we observed in the DQ condition. This provides evidence for the notion that it is probably unrealistic to expect perfect scores in tasks like the ones we investigated.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 85%

On the comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection of indirect questioning techniques

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 85%

On the comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection of indirect questioning techniques

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…We used a screening measure of fluid intelligence, the mini-q (Baudson and Preckel 2016), to have an additional indication of the groups' giftedness over and above their identification as member of Mensa or recipient of honors for outstanding success in education. In line with our expectation, members of Mensa showed the highest values in fluid intelligence, followed by the High Achievers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fluid intelligence was assessed by the mini-q intelligence screening test (Baudson and Preckel 2016). The test presents 64 sentences, each followed by a figure (e.g.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brilliant: But What For? Meaning and Subjective Well-Being in the Lives of Intellectually Gifted and Academically High-Achieving Adults

Pollet

Schnell

2016

J Happiness Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Not much is known today about relationships between giftedness and well-being, particular among adults. The present article examined if highly gifted people manage to live meaningful and happy lives in their adult years. Two aspects of giftedness were taken into account: intellectual giftedness, and academically high achievement. Representatives of both groups were compared with each other and a control group with regard to meaningfulness and subjective well-being, respectively. Furthermore, predictors for both facets of well-being were examined. The sample consisted of 198 Intellectually Gifted, 141 academically High Achievers, and 136 control subjects. Results: High Achievers showed degrees of meaningfulness and subjective well-being that were comparable to those of the control group. The Intellectually Gifted, however, reported significantly lower values in both facets of well-being. Results of hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that Intellectually Gifted and High Achievers follow a different path towards meaningfulness and subjective well-being. Among the Intellectually Gifted, generativity is the strongest predictor for meaningfulness, whereas for the High Achievers, meaningful work is most central to their meaningfulness. As regards subjective well-being, selfcompassion was established as the strongest predictor for the Intellectually Gifted, whereas development was the most important predictor for the High Achievers.

show abstract

“…The Mini-Q test of GMA ( Baudson and Preckel, 2015 ) did not predict whether participants found the win–win solution, suggesting that the task is not simply about cognitive abilities. Instead, detecting win–win solutions may require a certain mind-set and not general mental abilities (e.g., creative problem solving).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 97%

“…As a measure of mental ability, participants completed the Mini-Q ( Baudson and Preckel, 2015 ), a 3-min intelligence screening test based on a verbal reasoning test developed by Baddeley (1968) . On this test, participants are asked to decide as quickly as possible if a statement correctly describes a constellation of three (geometrical) figures by clicking a right or a wrong button next to the statement.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Bamberg Trucking Game: A Paradigm for Assessing the Detection of Win–Win Solutions in a Potential Conflict Scenario

Nalis¹,

Schütz²,

Pastukhov³

2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In win–win solutions, all parties benefit more from the solution than they would if they each pursued their own individual goals. Such solutions are beneficial at individual and collective levels and thus represent optimal solutions. Win–win solutions are desirable but often difficult to find. To allow the study of individual differences and situational factors that help or hinder the detection of win–win solutions, we created a paradigm that fills a gap in the repertoire of psychological instruments used to assess collaboration, cooperation, negotiation, and prosocial behavior. The new paradigm differs from previous ones in two aspects: (a) In existing paradigms that focus on social motivation, possible strategies are evident, whereas we focused here on the question of whether people can detect the solution and thus disentangle ability from motivation, (b) Paradigms that focus on cooperation typically entail a risk associated with the partner’s defection, whereas cooperation in our paradigm is not associated with risk. We adjusted the Trucking Game—a method for assessing bargaining—to include a situation in which two parties can help each other achieve their respective goals and thus benefit over and above the pursuit of individual goals or compromising. We tested scenario-based and interaction-based versions with samples of 154 and 112 participants, respectively. Almost one third of the participants or dyads found the win–win solution. General mental abilities were not related to detecting the win–win solution in either version. The paradigm provides a way to extend research on cooperation and conflict and can thus be useful for research and training.

show abstract

mini-q: Intelligenzscreening in drei Minuten

Cited by 39 publications

References 14 publications

On the comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection of indirect questioning techniques

On the comprehensibility and perceived privacy protection of indirect questioning techniques

Brilliant: But What For? Meaning and Subjective Well-Being in the Lives of Intellectually Gifted and Academically High-Achieving Adults

The Bamberg Trucking Game: A Paradigm for Assessing the Detection of Win–Win Solutions in a Potential Conflict Scenario

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About