Building a Pool Quotient (PQ) wann play?

[JoeW]

Some of the people who post here know that I am a psychologist by training. In fact I am a psychometrician (actually my specialty before my retirement was multivariate personality assessment specializing in forensics for those who know the field). This means I am one of the guys who makes IQ tests, diagnostic instruments, civil service exams and things of that nature. I have over 30 published computerized instruments and one commercial instrument I made from scratch (ASH II). In other words, I know the field for those who might need some assurances before continuing. OK so much for this is the real deal.

I think that I can make a Pool Quotient Test (PQ) that could have any of several uses. This would include the appropriate statistical analyses with preliminary norms that would be constructed in the generation of any test.

What I would like to know is
Are there others would be interested in collaborating (building the test)? Please PM me and post here.

Are there others who would be interested in contributing to the data base (anonymous submission of scores by email to help contruct norms)? Answer the poll above please.

Here is what is needed. First a description of the test contents (see below for a preliminary draft), the actual test construction process would be next. This would be followed by data collection from about 500 people (1,000 would be better). To collect the data I would publish the test on a special web site where people could download, complete and then upload their results. The results would be analyzed using standard approaches to test construction including some preliminary norms.

The whole thing would be free to anyone who wanted to use it - no strings attached.


Pool Quotient Contents by sub-test (ROUGH DRAFT)
Each subtest would have several items that ranged in difficulty from easy to nearly impossible.

Performance
Accuracy
Speed control
Position
Masse / swerve
Jumping
Banking
Kicking


Knowledge
Principles of mechanics (stance, stroke, bridging, aim)
Tangent Line
Deflection
Squirt
Position play
Jumping
Masse
Banking
Kicking

Performance would be assessed by specific shots. Test taker makes two attempts. Score 2 if made on both attempts, score 1 if made on second attempt. There would be a need for 7 -10 items in each sub-test. Each sub-test yields a standardized score with a standardized total performance score.

Knowledge would be assessed in a multiple choice format, similar to FAA exams with a possible pool of items. Here too there would be standardized sub-test scores and an overall score.

PQ would be some function of Performance and Knowledge.

 

[Gerry]

I think it sounds like a great idea.....kind of like in elementary school they tested us to see what our profession should be. Mine was brick layer!

Then we re-tested in high school before PSATs and I scored 148 on the IQ thing, and I'm 50/50 left right brain thing. Cool thing was Mensa sent me a letter...

Let me know when the test is ready....I'm in.

Gerry<<<bragging

 

[pooltchr]

It might be cool to set it up so someone (anyone) could take the test online and get a feedback form that would rate their skill and knowledge...70% on skill 55% on knowledge...something like that. I often ask my students to rate themselves prior to beginning lessons. Something like this might be a little more accurate as far as determining what areas a student needs the most help with.
I'm available to help as much as I can...but I give fair warning...I know more about pool than I do about computers.
Steve

 

[USACEMcCoy]

I would love to contribute any way possible, I kinda mentioned it over my shoulder here at the poolhall and several people would love to do it.

 

[rayjay]

Count me in. PM sent.

 

[BillPorter]

Sure, I'll help out if it doesn't involve too much time. My Ph.D. is in experimental psychology and I have taught psychometrics, so I may be able to contribute something.

 

[JoeW]

Looks like some real interest thanks. The project is worth doing.

I have a few PMs and will respond in the morning. The first thing is to decide on the content for each area. I have listed a draft above. If anyone has ideas for inclusions and exclusions that would be good.

Next we will need some shots for the Performance sub-test and some multiple choice items for the Knowledge section.

We will need a data collection form that includes some demographics such as age, years playing pool, current handicaps in various leagues. The items to be included should be related to PQ and need not include name etc. In the past I have included an honesty scale and used it to discard data collection forms that were unsuitable. I have found that asking people on a scale from 0 - 10 how honest they were in reporting that some people are willing to say they were not honest in their report ! Of course there will be some bad data but it is usually swamped out by the honest reports.

I will start putting together a web site for communication here and on the site. The intent would be to build the test and make it available for download. Users could then get as many people as possible to complete the test and submit the results on the web site. I will set up the data set for analysis with SPSS and will make it available to anyone who wants to work with it. The data set will of course not contain any data that could be used to identify any individual.

We will probably also need some help with getting some of the rooms owners to help, better players and pros to participate. Kick in wherever you want my email is Joe_Waldron at comcastdotnet.

From some other forums I have been on where I conducted some research for the forum I found that people do not have a problem submitting data to my email address when they know who I am. Being a retired Professor has some built in credibility. We will of course list all of the people who are participating in the test construction if they are willing to be listed. If you prefer an anonymous contribution that too will be respected.

More later.

 

[ShootingArts]

I don't think so

Joe,

You have a long record of objecting to anonymous posters on the forum in general. You are one of the last people I would care to give my e-mail address to by sending you an e since a reverse look up takes about fifteen seconds. I also haven't seen any indication that this study would be of any benefit to the participants. What purpose does it serve other than satisfying your curiosity?

I know or have known many professors including heads of departments. Just like the general public, some are good, some are bad, some are bright, some are amazingly stupid outside of their chosen field, some aren't real knowledgeable inside their field despite their PhD. Bottom line, professors are people just like everybody else. They have to earn my trust and respect just like anyone else. There is a certain amount of trust and respect given to any human being, from there interaction with them determines the level they receive. You haven't earned a level of my trust to make me confident you wouldn't use this opportunity to satisfy your personal curiosity about some people if they participate.

Hu

Looks like some real interest thanks. The project is worth doing.

I have a few PMs and will respond in the morning. The first thing is to decide on the content for each area. I have listed a draft above. If anyone has ideas for inclusions and exclusions that would be good.

Next we will need some shots for the Performance sub-test and some multiple choice items for the Knowledge section.

We will need a data collection form that includes some demographics such as age, years playing pool, current handicaps in various leagues. The items to be included should be related to PQ and need not include name etc. In the past I have included an honesty scale and used it to discard data collection forms that were unsuitable. I have found that asking people on a scale from 0 - 10 how honest they were in reporting that some people are willing to say they were not honest in their report ! Of course there will be some bad data but it is usually swamped out by the honest reports.

I will start putting together a web site for communication here and on the site. The intent would be to build the test and make it available for download. Users could then get as many people as possible to complete the test and submit the results on the web site. I will set up the data set for analysis with SPSS and will make it available to anyone who wants to work with it. The data set will of course not contain any data that could be used to identify any individual.

We will probably also need some help with getting some of the rooms owners to help, better players and pros to participate. Kick in wherever you want my email is Joe_Waldron at comcastdotnet.

From some other forums I have been on where I conducted some research for the forum I found that people do not have a problem submitting data to my email address when they know who I am. Being a retired Professor has some built in credibility. We will of course list all of the people who are participating in the test construction if they are willing to be listed. If you prefer an anonymous contribution that too will be respected.

More later.

 

[SoundWaves]

Joe,

You have a long record of objecting to anonymous posters on the forum in general. You are one of the last people I would care to give my e-mail address to by sending you an e since a reverse look up takes about fifteen seconds. I also haven't seen any indication that this study would be of any benefit to the participants. What purpose does it serve other than satisfying your curiosity?

I know or have known many professors including heads of departments. Just like the general public, some are good, some are bad, some are bright, some are amazingly stupid outside of their chosen field, some aren't real knowledgeable inside their field despite their PhD. Bottom line, professors are people just like everybody else. They have to earn my trust and respect just like anyone else. There is a certain amount of trust and respect given to any human being, from there interaction with them determines the level they receive. You haven't earned a level of my trust to make me confident you wouldn't use this opportunity to satisfy your personal curiosity about some people if they participate.

Hu

Well now I'm confused, what would he have to gain by knowing your email? Or knowing who you are and how you play? I don't disagree to your right to privacy and I don't see this turning our sport around, but when I read this post I saw it as a way to test your skills and compare it against others, not much more devious than that. Please explain the reason for your response.

 

[JoeW]

Joe,

You have a long record of objecting to anonymous posters on the forum in general. You are one of the last people I would care to give my e-mail address to by sending you an e since a reverse look up takes about fifteen seconds. I also haven't seen any indication that this study would be of any benefit to the participants. What purpose does it serve other than satisfying your curiosity?

I know or have known many professors including heads of departments. Just like the general public, some are good, some are bad, some are bright, some are amazingly stupid outside of their chosen field, some aren't real knowledgeable inside their field despite their PhD. Bottom line, professors are people just like everybody else. They have to earn my trust and respect just like anyone else. There is a certain amount of trust and respect given to any human being, from there interaction with them determines the level they receive. You haven't earned a level of my trust to make me confident you wouldn't use this opportunity to satisfy your personal curiosity about some people if they participate.

Hu

Best answer I can give you is to consider of what use are IQ tests, SAT exams, Grad Record Exams, etc. There are people who find them useful and those who don't. A few uses might include.

Pre/post testing to determine gain in some program.
Handicapping.
Self development in weak areas.
Self knowledge relative to a data base of players.
Diagnostic information for instructors.

A standarized instrument would assist with further study to determine if some skills are more important to some games and less important to others based on empirical evidence.

A value free evaluation of various programs for teaching and learning that could be used by programs.

Your opinions are interesting. My real world experience assisting other forums where people posted anonymously is different.

My intent is not to address my curiosity but to contribute to the sport. If I were to do this on contract it would cost several thousand dollars perhasps 20 - 50,000 to compensate me and my lab for expenses and effort. However, I am retired and simply enjoy these types of things. I have no expectation of a financial benefit from this endeavor. I do not expect to learn anything new as I have been constructing tests for many years and the procedures are fairly straight forward.

Your objections have been noted and addressed. Have you anything positive to contribute?

Thanks for your comments they are helpful in that I have a better understanding of some perceptions.

My opinions on the best ways to improve the internet and how I handle my social responsibilities are seperate matters. I will not attempt to change your mind and assume that you will proceed as you see fit. I would hope that your post is not intended to influence other posters on matters of which you have little to no knowledge with regard to my integrity. Your perception of professionals are noted and certainly have merit in some instances.

 

[ShootingArts]

past history

Well now I'm confused, what would he have to gain by knowing your email? Or knowing who you are and how you play? I don't disagree to your right to privacy and I don't see this turning our sport around, but when I read this post I saw it as a way to test your skills and compare it against others, not much more devious than that. Please explain the reason for your response.

You would have to know the past history with Joe to understand.

Giving someone who seems a bit obsessed with needless personal information about people a handle on me isn't going to happen. Anyone that has an e-mail can do a reverse search at many sites and get a name, often a phone number and physical address. Many of us for many different reasons choose to restrict this information to only the people we offer it to, not the public at large and not people that make an issue of "needing it" to satisfy their own curiosity. I suspect I am far better known as Hu than he is as JoeW which is all he usually signs however he has often made an issue of the value of having other people's personal information.

I don't give my personal information to satisfy people's idle curiosity or so they can place me in a pigeon hole they think I fit into simply as a matter of principle. Also I have been stalked both on the net and physically, sometimes by extremely dangerous people. I don't put myself or my family at risk needlessly. At any event or public place I am known as Hu just as I sign here so what more does anyone actually need to know? I could create a new account in the name of John Randolph Lee III PhD and no doubt make the folks that think a full name means something happy but their happiness isn't a major concern of mine.

Hu

 

[8ballEinstein]

You would have to know the past history with Joe to understand.

Giving someone who seems a bit obsessed with needless personal information about people a handle on me isn't going to happen. Anyone that has an e-mail can do a reverse search at many sites and get a name, often a phone number and physical address. Many of us for many different reasons choose to restrict this information to only the people we offer it to, not the public at large and not people that make an issue of "needing it" to satisfy their own curiosity. I suspect I am far better known as Hu than he is as JoeW which is all he usually signs however he has often made an issue of the value of having other people's personal information.

I don't give my personal information to satisfy people's idle curiosity or so they can place me in a pigeon hole they think I fit into simply as a matter of principle. Also I have been stalked both on the net and physically, sometimes by extremely dangerous people. I don't put myself or my family at risk needlessly. At any event or public place I am known as Hu just as I sign here so what more does anyone actually need to know? I could create a new account in the name of John Randolph Lee III PhD and no doubt make the folks that think a full name means something happy but their happiness isn't a major concern of mine.

Hu

I am also bothered by Joe's distain for anonymous posters on this forum. On another thread he mentioned that people who hide behind some internet screen name should be ignored!

In my case, I'm not concerned about being stalked, as Shooting Arts has mentioned. I have a screen name that has been my nickname in my local the pool scene for a long time. I have not given out my real name on this forum although several members know who I am.

Right now I am the lone member who put a NO vote on this poll. Joe has shown me what he is about. He and I will not be doing any kind of business.

 

[JoeW]

Just forget the whole thing.

There are you satisfied.

I have been in these flame wars before and not about to do it again. So you drove another poster away.

And the two of you make for me all the points I have tried to make about why people should be open, and above board.

Good bye.

In case you missed it, I just resigned from this board.

 

[8ballEinstein]

Just forget the whole thing.

There are you satisfied.

I have been in these flame wars before and not about to do it again. So you drove another poster away.

And the two of you make for me all the points I have tried to make about why people should be open, and above board.

Good bye.

In case you missed it, I just resigned from this board.

JoeW,

That's too bad you're leaving over this, instead of apologizing for previous comments that obviously rubbed folks around here, the wrong way. Many reasons were given for people wanting to stay anonymous and most were in no way harmful. I'm sure many forum members found your contributions here very interesting, including myself. I just can't understand why you couldn't accept all of the posters here, including those that decide to have a screen name instead of offering up their real name. Some of these folks are extremely interesting and I look forward to reading (nearly) EVERYONES comments, daily.

Good luck to you, sir.

 

[BillPorter]

Just wanted to say

Joe, as a fellow retired psychology professor, let me say that I understand the project your proposed and the effort and technical knowledge required to bring it to completion. While it is understandable that most posters on this forum would not appreciate the processes involved in establishing the reliability and validity of a test or the possible uses of the instrument, it's a shame that they chased you away before you could even start the project. A shame, but certainly not a surprise.

 

[recanizegame]

lol, this is funny.

 

[ShootingArts]

Joe's choices

Nobody ran Joe off or even shut down this project. Joe has to have things his way or he doesn't want to play. A simple website could be constructed to host the questions instead of requiring e-mails. Nobody said that Joe had to leave if he didn't get exactly his way with this project either.

A few years back I wanted to gather some empirical data from a wide group of people on the internet. I made a straight forward announcement that it was to satisfy my curiosity and that I would report the results for anyone else interested. Then I spent several hundred dollars out of my pocket and a hundred hours or so of my time to make it happen.

I'll be the first to admit that Joe and a few others ideas of a two tier society rub me the wrong way. I would have been much more inclined to play had you proposed the same study with no claim of a special status for yourself or anonymity for people using e-mail.

Several dozen people on these forums do have my personal information, my choice not someone else's.

Hu

Joe, as a fellow retired psychology professor, let me say that I understand the project your proposed and the effort and technical knowledge required to bring it to completion. While it is understandable that most posters on this forum would not appreciate the processes involved in establishing the reliability and validity of a test or the possible uses of the instrument, it's a shame that they chased you away before you could even start the project. A shame, but certainly not a surprise.

 

[DaveK]

..... it's a shame that they chased you away before you could even start the project. A shame, but certainly not a surprise.

Yikes, you sure seem to think Joe has thin skin ... if one objection 'chased (Joe) away' then I'm not so sure he was committed to the project in the first place. It seems to me that he just quit (the idea and the board ?????!!!!!) in the face of an objection. The truely amazing thing is that the poll suggests that 70 % would contibute, 'need more info' was a distant second, and only two people said "no" !

Just in case you are still with us Joe, I have one very general comment : your proposed test builds in a correlation between the PQ and technical/book/physics knowledge, and from my experiences there are many highly skilled pool players who would do poorly on that section. The result would be a systematic bias against those players. These are the folks who can play shots but not explain how they did it nor do they understand the physics behind the shot ... the ones who do not know what the word "tangent" means, but can play position with the best of them.

Dave

 

[JoeW]

I have seen enough of flaming to know how it works and I choose not to become involved. I can see the handwriting on the wall. There will be a site for people who register and are interested. The rest can go to hell.

I have built several things in the face of objections from others and have learned to go my own way. I am many things, thin skinned is not one of them. I never would have posted in the past. I simply have no need for jerks in my life, it is too short.

I will post a URL here for those who are interested. I read here but will seldom post anymore.

Shootinarts you are so transparent it is pathetic. If what you say is true why would I have posted and asked for comments? Why would I attempt to acknowledge everyone? Why would I be inclusive and attempt to incorporate suggestions? Why would I post as a DRAFT and ask for corrections. Yeah, get paranoid and you can come up with some off the wall, stupid comment. Well you and your friends have the board your way nd there are many others who no longer post here but you never address that. If you read my prior posts and were not looking for something to flame you would have read that while I have little respect for those who need to hide, and gave substantial reasons that have not been addressed, I understand their thinking, as evidenced by prior posts. I have accepted it. And I merely suggested and or agreed with others in an attempt to improve the net. Your rude, ignorant manner which suggests to me some sort of hidden agenda -- what do you have it in for psychologists -- means there is something else going on.

 

[DaveK]

I have seen enough of flaming to know how it works and I choose not to become involved. I can see the handwriting on the wall. There will be a site for people who register and are interested. The rest can go to hell.

I have built several things in the face of objections from others and have learned to go my own way. I am many things, thin skinned is not one of them. I never would have posted in the past. I simply have no need for jerks in my life, it is too short.

I will post a URL here for those who are interested.

This is a suprise after your post #13.

Dave