Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Naero]

I got a 72 in an IQ test, which I was pretty pleased about!

Incidentally, IQ tests are out of 100... right?

Still, it's better than my brother. He took an IQ test and managed to flunk it.

[JoshuaFH]

IQ tests are relative. 100 is average, and anything higher or lower is just there to show how much you deviate from the average.

That's how I understand it atleast.

[Jude]

Then again, as a psychologist said, if you're intelligent, you'll do well in everything, no matter how bad the test is.

That's the biggest load of bullshit I've ever heard; didn't we just discuss the modular and diverse nature of intelligence?

Thank you.  I was going to bring this up, but then I was too lazy/couldn't remember the reference.  SAT I is an IQ test.  SAT II is a rote knowledge test.  This makes sense because the SAT I and IQ tests were both created to test reasoning and, hence, probability to achieve in academic situations.

Dude, the SAT I is NOT an IQ test, or if it is, it's a mad shitty ones. They have ALL kinds of knowledge questions on there. Knowledge questions don't test your intelligence, they test whether or not you've learned a particular fact. Plus, they measure narrow categories of verbal and mathematical intelligence and that's it.

[Jakkarra]

Uh, unfortunately, IQ tests state that 60 is the line for mental retardation.

I think...

But who cares? they mean nothing!

[Apostolic Nihilist]

I had an IQ test in fifth grade, done by a 'professional'. Apparently because I actually listened in class and did work, they thought I might've had a high IQ.

(long post: summary of my experiences with IQ tests)

Being a test for fifth graders, it wasn't hard. I actually failed the long division part (mind went completely blank) but did well on exponents and the like. Vocabulary consisted of her saying a word and me pointing to one of four pictures which represented it.

The spatial test was fun, if I recall correctly. I'd be shown a picture of blocks aligned a certain way, some hidden, some not, and I'd need to recreate it with physical ones.

Short-term memory was an interesting test, too. I'd be told a string of numbers or letters, then asked to repeat them after a few seconds. After that there was a slight variation where I'd have to sort them alphabetically and by size. It gets to be quite difficult around 15 or so digits/letters.

There was another short-term memory (I think?) test where I was given 2 minutes, a 'key', and a test, which had symbols and a small space below them for the answers.. On the key there were symbols, below them numbers or letters. I was supposed to equate those symbols to the numbers/letters, and in the test. There were about 100 or so (maybe more) symbols on the test (some were repeats) and I think I only filled in 60 of them.

Reading comprehension was a mixture between the easiest and the most boring of them all. I'd read a short-story, she'd ask me questions, I'd answer. Repeat until we reached material I didn't understand.

It took about half an hour out of my day every day for a week, so it wasn't terribly difficult nor time consuming. Apparently, I passed (I think I still have the paper) with 147 or something. WISC-IV was the test.

So apparently I earned the right to enter the 'gifted' program, which meant being shuttled halfway across the city every day to attend school. Fun.

One of my friends was considered for the test, too, and apparently he took it. I think he said he scored 115 or something which surprised me as he was one of the more intelligent students in the class. (It was around here I began to realize that IQ tests are bollocks)

I mean, IQ tests aren't a terrible measure of general knowledge/reasoning/etc, they just aren't specific enough. No matter how you spin it, 100 is the average, and scoring higher or lower than that does at least somewhat correspond to you being better than others at the subjects outlined in the test.

[Cthulhu]

115 is still quite a bit higher than average, and hard work and diligence can also help you even with an average IQ.

That's the big one there, I don't know how many "140+ IQ but no motivation" people there are on the internet, but they're like stamps on a tramp.

That's not actually a very good analogy, but it rhymes.  My original was "like dingos on a baby"

[Naero]

When I took my test, the examiner told me that 72 isn't necessarily my actual IQ. He explained that there's a standard deviation of 15 points thereabouts, so my actual IQ might be closer to 57. That's when he started calling me a retard...

[Dwarf]

I got a 72 in an IQ test, which I was pretty pleased about!

Incidentally, IQ tests are out of 100... right?

Still, it's better than my brother. He took an IQ test and managed to flunk it.

Dude, I hope that was sarcastic and will pretend it is.

[HideousBeing]

Mine was in the 150's somewhere when I was in elementary. No idea if it has anything to do with intelligence, but I do believe that hard work is at least as important as intelligence in most situations.

Mozart was a brilliant composer who wrote instant masterpieces in his mind. Beethoven kept a sketchbook and worked on his pieces over long periods of time. Both are regarded as the best of their time.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

I have never taken an IQ test, nor do I intend to.

[Muz]

Then again, as a psychologist said, if you're intelligent, you'll do well in everything, no matter how bad the test is.

That's the biggest load of bullshit I've ever heard; didn't we just discuss the modular and diverse nature of intelligence?

This is the interesting thing. IQ tests are basically "can you read my mind" tests. It's a horrible method. But... smart people will always find a way there.

Among some of the smartest people I know - CEOs, self-made tycoons, Harvard postgraduates, national advisors, modern inventors, freelancing hackers - all of them have the same thing in common. They work hard. They can think differently and are quite open minded; they don't run away when they see something they don't want to believe. This open mindedness could be that correlation between intelligence and insanity someone suggested earlier.

IQ tests worked at one time because there's no "expected solution". With a knowledge based test, anyone who knew/memorized the right answer has a huge advantage. But generally, smart people will figure out a way to get the answer no matter what. IQ tests are partly about perseverance too.

Stupid people would give up before looking. Think of the most stupid people you know. Chances are they never finished their homework. Lack of wisdom comes with lack of patience. The petty thief, the crack dealer, the knocked up teenager, gambler, /b/tard. They will score low IQs, because when they look at a IQ test, they go "wtf is this?"

You can have a horribly designed test, and a truly smart person will score at it. Some would score at 110, some at 130, 150, but it doesn't matter, they still score above average statistically. Heck, give a man a test on say, anthropology, geography, or Russian linguistics, and the smarter man will score higher than the dumb one, even if neither of them studied.

True story: My dad had to take a test in Japanese to get a scholarship (to Japan). No potential scholars knew Japanese. All, but two people left the room without answering anything. He and the other person took random guesses at it, basically just filling in their name, age, "yes/no". Both of them got the scholarship.

True story 2: A game development company has to find capable programmers, but none of the local colleges actually teach programming. Most colleges test their students entirely on their ability to memorize the textbooks and helpfiles, and many can't even answer questions from the first chapter of C++ for Dummies. The company decides to pick people by interview. The ones who became the best programmers (after training) were the ones with the highest grades. Even though the grading system was completely retarded.


tl;dr: IQ tests are badly designed, but an indicator. They're an inaccurate indicator of intelligence, but still an indicator.

[Maggarg - Eater of chicke]

I don't like the idea of a y/n or multiple choice IQ test. Any test where there are only a limited number of options that are already set out for you is deeply flawed. All you need to get a good score on such a test is a bit of general knowledge and good luck as you randomly tick boxes.

[Jreengus]

A willingness to take random guesses is in no way a indicator of intelligence, you even get some tests which penalise you for getting the wrong answer in multiple choice questions to discourage this attitude.

[JoshuaFH]

Tests which penalize you for not getting the right answer?

You don't say...

[Jreengus]

It's common for you? Normally the tests I've taken simply don't reward you.