Talk:Inductive reasoning aptitude

Research has been going on in the field of aptitides for 80 years or so. I believe that is is a study worthy of a Wikipedia article. Since no-one has written an article or articles in this area I am doing my best.

-- Jon Grover

I removed the unenecyclopedic tag because whoever put it up has not made ANY comment on the discussion page about why they believe it is unencyclopedic, as such, there seems to be no justification for having the tag up since Inductive reasoning aptitude is a real and relevant topic from psychology, cognition and intelligence related studies. A google search reveals 89,000 hits. --I 01:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is the Answer to the Question

Couldn't the answer be "D" since there's no vowels? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.45.165.122 (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is a terrible example as there are several correct answers. I also chose D because it was the only group of letters with no vowels. I briefly wondered if the author might consider y as a vowel, but then I thought that this must be a decoy because y is only considered a vowel in a few exceptional words. These groups of letters are not words, so this rule shouldn't apply. Some might disagree with this reasoning, but it is easy to raise the level of pedantry and claim that D must still be a correct answer because it is the only letter group that does not contain a letter that is always considered a vowel (y is only sometimes a vowel, wereas a,e,i,o, & u are never not vowels). At any rate, the point of my comment is that it must be possible to come up with a better example that is simple, succinct, and has one unambiguously, unarguably correct answer and thereby eliminate these quibbling objections that distract from the topic of this article. In fact, after going off on this tangent, I can't even remember what this article topic is about; what category I was in; or even what I was searching for in the first place. While it could be said that's my problem, not the fault of this article, I believe that the articles that represent the very best of Wikipedia are those that guide readers through unfamiliar knowledge while helping them avoid irrelevant distractions in order to keep them focused and stay on topic. Or have I completely misunderstood how Wikipedia works? NoahSpurrier (talk) 07:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I answered "B" because it's the only group that ends with a vowel, and this stood out more than the ordering of the letters (answer "A"). The other "correct" answer ("D") eluded me because I didn't know that the letter "y" isn't considered a vowel; it definitely is in my native tongue, so I had to double check the Wikipedia article y, which begins "Y or y is the 25th and penultimate letter of the ISO basic Latin alphabet and the sixth vowel letter of the modern English alphabet." The article could definitely do with a better example question! Unuphrio Muralto (talk) 00:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We need to know the answer to learn anything about aptitude from the question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.135.146 (talk) 05:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(a) is 4 consecutive letters, the others are all in the pattern 1243. (d) is the only one without a normal vowel. This is why I hate these questions, there's often more than one valid answer. Quite possibly you could find more by examining things like number of strokes, letter shape, etc. Rahulchandra (talk) 04:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. It's also culturally biased towards those using the Western alphabet, and as such, would unlikely be used in any (well-thought out) test of Intelligence.
- I changed answer C to conform to the pattern 1243. It was previously "hbkj," which made two possible answers- either A, because it's the only answer with four sequential letters, or C, which is the only answer without four normally-sequential letters in either sequential or non-sequential order. I think this makes the example less confusing, because it threw me for a loop at first.

Why would a highly inductive individual be counter productive for sales? If you can easily see someone's faults, you can also possibly exploit them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.111.228.195 (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an example: 1,6,5,6,9,6 Now find the next number 122.172.234.141 (talk) 14:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

13? Unuphrio Muralto (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]