Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

movingthelimit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 145 posts

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#101

Post by Gareth321 »

p-e-w wrote: post #77
Gareth321 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, the estimated average IQ at Harvard is 142. IQ is highly associated with self-control and discipline.

> IQ is highly associated with self-control and discipline. I'd like to see a citation for that, especially for the idea that the self-control/discipline associated with high IQs transfers over to non-academic aspects of life, which is what's in question here.

Here you go: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2614657/

> Delay behavior in both sexes was also correlated positively with IQ and with Q-sort-derived indexes of ego resiliency and ego control. The relationship between ego control and delay behavior was particularly strong after both IQ and ego resiliency were partialled. These results were interpreted as reflecting the fundamental importance of both cognitive skillfulness and impulse control for adaptive delay behavior in situations that contain strong motivational inducements.

This study doesn’t measure academic related delayed gratification. I’m surprised to be asked for a source. This has been settled science for decades.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#102

Post by Gareth321 »

meindnoch wrote: post #94
Gareth321 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While true, the estimated average IQ at Harvard is 142. IQ is highly associated with self-control and discipline.

Estimated average IQ from SAT score . So it's bullshit. They just cram SAT prep non-stop with private tutors.

> So it's bullshit.

That’s quite the opinion. Do you have any evidence to back that up? Countless studies have found that SAT scores are highly correlated with intelligence. Both “g” and IQ, which are roughly equivalent for this context. For example: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=...

And here is another: http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/koening2008.pdf

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#103

Post by leksak »

complex_exp wrote: post #56
bruce511 wrote: post #20

Some are born with goals, some find their own goals, and some have goals thrust upon them. Being a smart kid can be hard. Parents, teachers and peers see that mythical attribute "potential" and push you in directions to reach it. Get A's in school? Gotta be a doctor or lawyer. (OK, that ages me, today they'd be pushing for programmer.) Graduating college with a degree you never wanted must be depressing for the perso…

> Ivy league students don't get there by themselves. A life-time of adults help you. See, this is what I do not get. I got without excessive effort into a top university in Europe. I never had to be taken care nearly this much. Learned calculus at 14-15 by buying an old book in a used book store. Learned programming at around the same age by reading C++ tutorials and doing programming competitions (ACM style, but eas…

I think part of the answer is found here:

The Power Company Podcast: Episode 64: Fixed vs. Growth Mindset with Trevor Ragan Starting from: 00:48:10

Episode webpage: https://powercompanyclimbing.podbean.com/e/episode-64-fixed-...

Media file: https://mcdn.podbean.com/mf/web/rrc4sv/Episode_64_Fixed_vs_G...

How, and what, budding minds are praised for early on matters a ton

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#104

Post by 411111111111111 »

Gareth321 wrote: post #102
meindnoch wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Estimated average IQ from SAT score . So it's bullshit. They just cram SAT prep non-stop with private tutors.

> So it's bullshit. That’s quite the opinion. Do you have any evidence to back that up? Countless studies have found that SAT scores are highly correlated with intelligence. Both “g” and IQ, which are roughly equivalent for this context. For example: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=... And here is another: http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/koening2008.pdf

I don't think anyone would argue otherwise, the controversy is that IQ test results can be increased significantly by training.

But that discussion ultimately boils down to what intelligence really is... You either subscribe to the believe that it's essentially something you're born with or something that can be improved by training.

IQ tests fundamentally cannot measure for the former definition, but I does a decent job for the latter.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#105

Post by inglor_cz »

noisy_boy wrote: post #55
cantrevealname wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gotta be a doctor or lawyer ... today they'd be pushing for programmer. Where are you getting that from? Parents and teachers still push for doctor or lawyer for smart kids. Only if doctor or lawyer is unattainable would they suggest programmer. Furthermore, everybody still perceives doctors and lawyers to have higher status than programmers. Just look at TV shows from the 80s vs recent years: The high prestige cha…

Forget about status, I would rather not subject my kid to the constant catchup treadmill; jquery then, SPA yesterday, AI today, god-knows-what tomorrow, its like a never ending thing - its not enough to be stressed by work all week long, now you need to spend the couple of days of break also on learning the next flavor of the month. Sure lawyers have to catchup with changing laws and doctors need to catchup with new…

I am 45 and I had to catch up on a lot of things. I started programming in 1995 and my language of choice was Pascal 5.5.

Catching up is hard, but it is also "gym for your brain". Plenty of people grow complacent and mentally lazy, because they do not face any additional demands over their careers. It is even possible that mental training postpones dementia.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#106

Post by noisy_boy »

inglor_cz wrote: post #105
noisy_boy wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget about status, I would rather not subject my kid to the constant catchup treadmill; jquery then, SPA yesterday, AI today, god-knows-what tomorrow, its like a never ending thing - its not enough to be stressed by work all week long, now you need to spend the couple of days of break also on learning the next flavor of the month. Sure lawyers have to catchup with changing laws and doctors need to catchup with new…

I am 45 and I had to catch up on a lot of things. I started programming in 1995 and my language of choice was Pascal 5.5. Catching up is hard, but it is also "gym for your brain". Plenty of people grow complacent and mentally lazy, because they do not face any additional demands over their careers. It is even possible that mental training postpones dementia.

> It is even possible that mental training postpones dementia.

Thats what I tell myself as the saving grace (sometimes it is indeed a lot of fun).

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#107

Post by Gareth321 »

411111111111111 wrote: post #104
Gareth321 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So it's bullshit. That’s quite the opinion. Do you have any evidence to back that up? Countless studies have found that SAT scores are highly correlated with intelligence. Both “g” and IQ, which are roughly equivalent for this context. For example: https://www.psychologicalscience.org/pdf/ps/Frey.pdf?origin=... And here is another: http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/koening2008.pdf

I don't think anyone would argue otherwise, the controversy is that IQ test results can be increased significantly by training. But that discussion ultimately boils down to what intelligence really is... You either subscribe to the believe that it's essentially something you're born with or something that can be improved by training. IQ tests fundamentally cannot measure for the former definition, but I does a decent…

The user I replied to is clearly arguing that SATs do not provide any correlation with IQ. They called the proposition “bullshit.”

As for your question, g is very difficult to improve through training. Almost impossible in adulthood. The only studies I am aware of which indicate an ability to improve IQ score over time are those which allow participants to repeatedly take similar IQ tests. This enables the respondents to practise the type of question and answer faster and more accurately. Obviously this would produce an inaccurate result, over-estimating the intelligence of the individual.

To draw parallels with the SAT, I see evidence that repeated attempts reveal gaps in one’s knowledge and skill, and these are prerequisites for the test. This permits the individual to study those areas and practise the kinds of skills required to improve their score. Given this, we should acknowledge that the SAT is not a perfect analogue for IQ tests, but in aggregate, they do yield striking correlation. To tie this to my premise above, it is highly likely that the average Harvard student has an above-average IQ.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#108

Post by throwawayadvsec »

compiler-guy wrote: post #53
throwawayadvsec wrote: post #9

Or maybe they realize that once there is "Ivy League" on your resume, you pretty much cannot fail at life and will always find a good job no matter what, so might as well have a good time, instead of spending all your free time studying in pursuit of prestige.

I didn’t go to an Ivy League school, but I did go to Stanford. I assure you there are many of my classmates who failed at life, don’t have good jobs, and are otherwise don’t fit that description. An elite education is like a golden ticket, to be sure, but it doesn’t guarantee anything at all. Plenty of folks screw it up. Twenty-plus years now after my degree and no one cares at all about where I graduated. If I don’t…

The problem is that going to Stanford is skewing your definition of what "failing at life" is and of what a "good job" is.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#109

Post by Xen9 »

soligern wrote: post #31
Xen9 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smart and talented people need to work. Wealthy people don't.

Obviously the angle the GP is talking about is that you’re so smart and talented that most work feels like child’s play and hence isn’t work

I haven't read everything here but Harvard students probably play signaling games where one might also want to signal that they are wealthy enough to not to work for money.

The wealthy raise their kids so that they will naturally signal this.

The university is more like a playground to meet connections and signaling that you are not focusing on work but socializing may be beneficial.

Re: Why do Ivy League students self-sabotage?

#110

Post by josh_fyi »

badrequest wrote: post #61
searealist wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You honestly believe that people who get into Harvard don't have more self-discipline on average that those who don't?

Not the GP, but emphatically and obviously yes. There's the "reads a new book once per week" type of discipline that the average ivy leaguer tends to have, and there's the "wakes up at 4AM to go to the job they don't like despite how much their back hurts" discipline that the working class are obligated to develop.

> reads a new book once per week" type of discipline that the average ivy leaguer tends to have

I got two degrees and spent five years at Harvard, and -- no, they don't.

Post reply on HN