Talk:Johnson O'Connor

Operational Use of "Aptitude"

I take some issue with the last clause in the sentence: "Similarly, if one were to take two groups, one that possessed a high aptitude for finger dexterity and one that did not, with practice, both groups performance would improve, but the group that possessed the higher aptitude would continue to outperform the other despite identical training." The group with the higher aptitude might continue to outperform the group lower in that aptitude, but this is not a necessary condition. It may be that the aptitude has a relatively low "ceiling," that is, virtually everyone might "max out" on performance, given enough practice. However, if performance is related to an aptitude, the group higher in that aptitude would hit the ceiling (max out) faster than the other group. Therefore, the sentence as written is true for an aptitude with a high performance ceiling, but as written it suggests that low aptitude groups of individuals can never perform as well (on average) as high aptitude groups of individuals. While for some aptitudes that may be true, for other aptitudes those who are relatively high on that aptitude will master the work samples more rapidly than those with less aptitude. I suggest reconsidering the statement and, if the author agrees, revising the sentence accordingly.Drbb01 (talk) 05:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with it as written. I think you're missing the point. Aptitudes are innate. Training aside, high aptitude will outperform avg aptitude. Or am I misunderstanding you? Chris Heath (talk) 03:41, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Johnson O'Connor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070420150400/http://www.wordsmart.com/infopages/research.php to http://www.wordsmart.com/infopages/research.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)