IQ

[MrRubix]

I really dislike the highiqsociety test... too many repeats. The visual tests are too homogeneous ("Oh look another one where **** just shifts over one spot"), and there's too much reliance on random trivia that really shouldn't be indicative of one's ability to learn new information.

[Ice wolf]

Originally Posted by MrRubix

Reach's test was actually kinda fun, haha.

I completely agree. It was loads of fun.

But of course, I did no where near as good as you. I only got 130 with 4 or so questions unanswered.

[Tarrik]

On the www.iqtest.dk i managed a 128, which is pretty decent since i smoke pot pretty damn hard Lol..

[korny]

Dude. Do not associate pot smokers with low IQ's. Our habit does not prevent us from being as intelligent as the next man or even smarter for that matter.

[Tarrik]

Well the things is, 128 isn't all that low, and i don't consider myself too bright (Haven't in years, and wasn't too bright before smoking weed). Come to think of it, I'm a lot smarter when I'm high, i think deeply into **** i shouldn't too..Lol

Question is, am i high now? Well, yeah..I'm always high

[korny]

Haha I was somewhat joking anyway, but I feel the same way.

[Reach]

I should add, though, that I put forth an educated guess on #39. I couldn't quite understand that one fully.

Very nice score Rubix, though that isn't exactly surprising given your academic record. Ravens APM scores (i.e. the test you just took) are highly predictive of academic success, in particular math scores. A 145+ would statistically predict for you to score over the top on tests like the SAT (2400), which is what I'll assume you got on it.

(For #39, the shapes move horizontally from box to box and then change shape. E.g. If you had 3 squares on the left, they would move to the middle and become some other shape, like a triangle. However, very few people are capable of solving this problem. Less than 1 in ~10,000)

Though, you could try the TRI52 test I posted, which has a higher ceiling.

I recently retook the test in an attempt to get a perfect score and spent about an hour on it. I got a 960, though I'm not sure if higher is possible at my age range.



Also, with respect to someone that mentioned pot and IQ, regular smokers can experience hippocampal cell loss due to apoptosis, which can have an effect on decreasing scores on memory portions of IQ tests. However, it seems to have little effect on overall general intelligence.

[Nyokou]

I got 103 on the test that Reach posted. o__O

[MrRubix]

Reach: My SAT is 2390/2400 with about 4 other SAT2 800's, 36 ACT. I missed on the Verbal section. It still really bugs me even to this day.

Also, wtf @ #39, haha, that's nuts. Changing shapes AND shifting? Gross!

I'll have to check out that other test you mentioned.

What would you say needs to be present for an IQ test to be of any worth, and what do you think are the most important conclusions that you can draw from an IQ score?

[DossarLX ODI]

Originally Posted by MrRubix

What would you say needs to be present for an IQ test to be of any worth, and what do you think are the most important conclusions that you can draw from an IQ score?

You do bring up a good point, intelligence can be measured in different ways.

In Reach's link, the test is about using logic to determine what the missing figure would be formed by looking at the other shapes or patterns.

Since I don't really know what the appropriate word would be in this situation, I'll just say that the test Rubix got a 145 on was an "interpretation quiz." You don't have to know complex subjects such as chemistry to do a quiz that requires you to predict the next shape that would replace the missing slots.

In my opinion, knowing something like historical events is not intelligence. I think that is just memory; the test Reach linked to requires to realise patterns and/or unusual features.

[Reach]

Originally Posted by MrRubix

Reach: My SAT is 2390/2400 with about 4 other SAT2 800's, 36 ACT. I missed on the Verbal section. It still really bugs me even to this day.

Also, wtf @ #39, haha, that's nuts. Changing shapes AND shifting? Gross!

I'll have to check out that other test you mentioned.

What would you say needs to be present for an IQ test to be of any worth, and what do you think are the most important conclusions that you can draw from an IQ score?

What needs to be present are items that are highly g-loaded, or items that are highly predictive of your performance across a wide variety and mix of subjects. Ravens APM is a pretty good example of that; that is, if you perform well on this test you probably perform well on just about everything else as well.

Of course, it's not the best example of this because Ravens contains only spatially oriented questions, which can under predict performance of verbally oriented individuals, but still. That's the idea behind it all.


Conclusions you can draw depend on whether or not you're talking about the individual or a population. However, conclusions are always statistical in nature, or probabilistic, which important to note.

For example, for individuals, you can draw probabilistic conclusions about the persons academic aptitude (across the board - essentially all subjects), propensity to commit felony, speed of learning, propensity to make errors, overall job performance, overall health, among other things. The most important factors are probably academic aptitude and job performance, but those two things tie in a lot of the other factors.

They allow you to fairly accurately gauge at least a baseline of where someone should be able to perform in academic or job related environments. They can tell you about how easily someone will master a job, or how quickly they'll become bored with that type of work if the IQ is too high. As such, IQ scores can be useful to institutions. The US Military is a big proponent of IQ testing and always has been. They know all too well that IQ affects everything from the ability to aim to the likelihood of damaging one of their precious aircrafts :P Hell, even Wonderlic IQ scores are predictive of quarterback skill in football, where IQ is correlated at around r= 0.5 with successful throws and number of yards thrown.


With respect to populations, population IQs are related to crime rates, health care quality, GDP (IQ is actually the largest single factor predictor of a country's GDP o_O ), among other things.


As such, it's a very useful statistical tool. I think the problem that people tend to have with IQ though is that they perceive it to be something that it isn't; they perceive it to be some sort of magical one dimensional number that is supposed to tell you everything about your intellect and people don't want to be measured by a single number. No, it isn't a magical number; it doesn't tell you a lot of things, but that doesn't mean it's unimportant.

We also have to consider the limitations of something like an online test, which just gives you a number, vs an evaluation from a psychologist that could give you much more information. One is clearly superior to the other.

[Blue Bird]

Bah I got 130 on Reach's test. Began to get lost at the last 9 or so. I once took this other one which I thought was pretty OK, got 140. I guess I got dumber. lol

[~HentaiXXX~]

Originally Posted by ~HentaiXXX~

104 on the iqtest.dk

took it again just now, 110.

ok..I'm out of school, I guess that means less stress, so better score?

[MrRubix]

Thanks for the explanation, Reach

[GG_Guru]

Courtesy goes a long way.

[tofurox]

Originally Posted by Tarrik

On the www.iqtest.dk i managed a 128, which is pretty decent since i smoke pot pretty damn hard Lol..

Lol I got 107

[ieatyourlvllol]

Originally Posted by Reach

I recently retook the test in an attempt to get a perfect score and spent about an hour on it. I got a 960, though I'm not sure if higher is possible at my age range.

Haha...coincidence



The tile problems at the end are monstrous...rather than poring over them for several hours, I'm forced to make educated guesses in which I'm no more confident than if I had simply closed my eyes and randomly picked. : |

Originally Posted by Reach

I think the problem that people tend to have with IQ though is that they perceive it to be something that it isn't; they perceive it to be some sort of magical one dimensional number that is supposed to tell you everything about your intellect and people don't want to be measured by a single number. No, it isn't a magical number; it doesn't tell you a lot of things, but that doesn't mean it's unimportant.

QFT

it's one of the most misunderstood tools of all time

[A2P]

110 on Reach's test he posted earlier.

I BSed the last 6 questions. ;(

[ieatyourlvllol]

Originally Posted by Reach

verbally oriented individuals

devonin

[Reach]

The tile problems at the end are monstrous...rather than poring over them for several hours, I'm forced to make educated guesses in which I'm no more confident than if I had simply closed my eyes and randomly picked. : |

You're a very good guesser then, because as far as I can tell 960 is either the ceiling or 1 problem away from it. I noted which answers I was not confident about and pondered over them until I figured them out and my guesses were also correct, so I can't find any that I got wrong.

Making good educated guesses is a sign of high ability, and these types of questions are designed such that they can often be solved in this manner (i.e. they don't contain trick answers and most commonly picked wrong answers). This is why spending more time is not highly correlated with higher scores (~r=0.2), as more intelligent people figure the answer out quicker anyway even if through 'guessing' and less intelligent individuals eventually become overwhelmed and can't answer correctly above chance anymore regardless of time spent.

devonin

Yeah. I went back to the literature awhile ago and although very rare (Occurs in less than 1% of the population), there are individuals that can deviate in spatial/verbal scores by more than 2 standard deviations.

But it's ok - Devonin got the good end of the stick. The other way around (Extreme differences containing poor verbal and high spatial) is very common in criminals. That's probably because verbal ability is requisite for essentially everything, where as spatial ability is domain specific (Though interestingly, individuals in fields more spatially oriented, like engineering, on average outscore people on verbal tasks from more verbally oriented fields like English or History anyway, due to our good friend g and the higher than average IQs associated with engineers/physicists/chemists etc)