IQ Test Results..

[Phynx]

Haha, 134. The government test however, whatever it is called, that our school let us volunteer for I scored a 141 on, I was 17 then lol. So yeah, standardized tests can't accurately depict ones brilliance due to the fact that everyone has far different thought processes than anyone else.

[Raveren]

Here's a new way of looking at what an IQ is (as told to me by merlinseras):

An IQ isn't a measure of intelligence, but actually one's ability to learn.

I really like that definition, "ability to learn". These tests don't try to measure how much you already know (ignoring a few mathematical figure questions), but gives you a new situation in which you must apply you're thinking to figure out a new path to the solution you haven't previously known.

[Risking]

134; Mental age of 22.75. Eh, seems about right.

[QuadDamage]

All in all I just think IQ Tests are fun little tests. Meh. About it.

[Raveren]

Originally Posted by QuadDamage

All in all I just think IQ Tests are fun little tests. Meh. About it.

But of course you would find solving calculus equations and figuring exactly how much work it takes to climb 5 flights of stairs a fun way to pass time

[NFD]

I'm still not even in Calculus, I'm going to Algebra II as a Sophomore, =D

[UserNameGoesHere]

Originally Posted by Raveren

Here's a new way of looking at what an IQ is (as told to me by merlinseras):

An IQ isn't a measure of intelligence, but actually one's ability to learn.

I really like that definition, "ability to learn". These tests don't try to measure how much you already know (ignoring a few mathematical figure questions), but gives you a new situation in which you must apply you're thinking to figure out a new path to the solution you haven't previously known.

That seems contradictory to me.

This probably has to do with the fact I equate intelligence and learning ability.

Things you already know would constitute knowledge. Knowledge is not intelligence. If anything it is more a product.

Think of it this way. The more intelligent you are, the faster you learn. The faster you learn, the more knowledge you gain. Someone who doesn't learn as quickly as you can still have more knowledge than you in some area he/she has spent more time in than you have. Additionally, if you have high intelligence but put absolutely no time into learning anything, you would end up being very ignorant.

Additionally, there are various measures of IQ and there are theories as to varying types of IQ in different areas and etc.

Intelligence is probably best thought of as potential. If you have high intelligence, you have high potential for success. You could still ultimately fail whereas someone with less potential succeeded.

It is always approximate and relative to everyone else.

[Anokorok]

The last IQ test I took said I had an IQ of 90, and I don't really disagree with it either. I think in pictures and am completely dumbfounded when faced with abstract concepts.

I don't even know my times tables past six. |:

[cry4eternity]

I've taken so many of these... I think I have taken this one too.

My results have had a very large span... Once I got 115 LOL. All the rest have been between 130 and 144. I got a 144 on the Facebook IQ Test.

Meh, IQ is stupid. It's just certain kinds of questions that people could be bad at, even if they are brilliant in another way. There is no good way to accurately measure intelligence, which I define as the ability to learn and understand.

I would say, however, that those who score below 100 on these are not quite as smart as those that score like 150+. There is a general trend, but any gap less than say 20 or 30 is hard to compare.

Also, since we're bragging about standardized tests... I got a 33 On my ACT this summer .

[omgitznpv]

Originally Posted by NFD

I'm still not even in Calculus, I'm going to Algebra II as a Sophomore, =D

I was in analysis as a freshman l0l

I'm 14, IQ of 129 from this. First IQ test taken.

[Shashakiro]

i love how almost everyone in this thread is 'in the top 1% of people' for IQ hehe

[Phynx]

Originally Posted by Shashakiro

i love how almost everyone in this thread is 'in the top 1% of people' for IQ hehe

So where does that leave you? You joining the bandwagon of brainiacs and/or liars? Haha, I'll be honest, IQ tests are for those only seeking something solid to rate their intelligence, regardless of how open the source is to the public's collective thinking processes, which individually are COMPLETELY different, rendering such said IQ test incapable of accurately telling a person their real IQ. A laughable trick to fool society.

EDIT - BTW, only playin' wiff ya' booday Snash.

Originally Posted by omgitznpv

I'm 14

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH......................... now I understand. BTW, this is TOTALLY unrelated to this thread. Just a personal inquiry that I was wondering the answer to.

[omgitznpv]

Originally Posted by Shashakiro

i love how almost everyone in this thread is 'in the top 1% of people' for IQ hehe

im 1 point from top 2.3% :<

[Plan_Bsk81127]

I got 120 just skimming through the questions, I bet I could get way higher if I concentrate on the question i am answering. XD

[x After Dawn x]

I once got 146 on an IQ test, I think it might've been this one, it's obvious BS.

[ieatyourlvllol]

Uhh...intelligence isn't just one thing (e.g. how fast it takes to learn)...

Intelligence, in the sense of the word as society has come to know it, is confined to the subjective perception of the effective synergetic application of mental processes to circumstantial demands. The relevant faculties include (but are not limited to) logic, reasoning, memory, judgment, creativity, emotion, intuition, and willpower. In any case, the nature of the mind's function is so vastly intricate that it is utterly unreliable to use objective metrics as a basis for absolute judgment. Consequently, IQ pertains to only the abilities covered by the assessment material, and it bears, at best, only a correlation to whatever other things a person may choose to connect it to (e.g. potential for success).

[CypherToorima]

got a 200 ******s get wrecked rofl.

[meno_rocks123]

Turned 16 2 days ago...
IQ test (the crap one) :: 143
highiqsociety :: 112
cbc :: 123
Language 10/12
memory 5/6
logic 12/12
visual memory 2/6
math 10/12
perception 11/12

I did all of these at 3am so I'll retry them tomorrow and see what I can get when I'm not tired and don't feel like my bladder is about to explode.

[-zeroSKILL-]

I got a 121 on the Test The Nation test.

I don't have my speakers hooked up so I had to guess on some of the vid questions XD

Language-------10/12
Memory---------6/6
Logic-----------11/12
Visual Memory---3/6 (vid questions XD)
Math-----------11/12
Perception------10/12

Got bored and took it real fast since I can't play FFR. Lags so often I can't get over a 100 combo on Sonic 1 Final Zone (autofail set to AAA). Already tried over 125 times =/

[Reach]

Originally Posted by ieatyourlvllol

Uhh...intelligence isn't just one thing (e.g. how fast it takes to learn)...

Intelligence, in the sense of the word as society has come to know it, is confined to the subjective perception of the effective synergetic application of mental processes to circumstantial demands. The relevant faculties include (but are not limited to) logic, reasoning, memory, judgment, creativity, emotion, intuition, and willpower. In any case, the nature of the mind's function is so vastly intricate that it is utterly unreliable to use objective metrics as a basis for absolute judgment. Consequently, IQ pertains to only the abilities covered by the assessment material, and it bears, at best, only a correlation to whatever other things a person may choose to connect it to (e.g. potential for success).

This is partially true, but it is a bit dependent on how you define intelligence.

Many psychologists would argue, and there has been much undeniable evidence as of late supporting to the point of leaving little doubt, the existence of g, the general intelligence factor that governs ability in all areas.

IQ tests attempt to measure g indirectly, since g cannot (yet) be directly measured. The idea of g is fairly logical, since it makes more sense in evolutionary terms than multiple intelligences. However, it really arose from the observation that all subtests of an IQ test are highly correlated with one another (e.g, your vocabulary predicts fairly accurately your score on spatial arrangement or sequences etc). Factor analysis can allow us to extract the portion of the subtest that can be attributed to a general factor influencing all subtest scores.

See:

Where you can think of the blue circles as subtests of an IQ test (vocabulary, memory, spatial arrangement, etc) in an attempt to get as close as possible to measuring the general intelligence factor.



As such, IQ tests don't necessarily pertain to only the things tested on the IQ test at all. Many meta analysis studies have shown that g applies to all mental tasks and effects them accordingly. For example, I'll quote one study from wikipedia:

"In 2005, Wendy Johnson and Thomas Bouchard investigated the structure of mental ability by administering 42 diverse tests of mental ability to 436 adults. The tests included "different uses" (generation of novel uses for specified objects), "object assembly" (reassembly of cut-up figures), "verbal—proverbs" (interpretation of proverbs) and "mechanical ability" (identification of mechanical principles and tools); factor analysis found a clear single higher order factor, g. In their report, published in the journal Intelligence, the study authors conclude:

In combination with our earlier findings regarding the consistency of general intelligence factors across test batteries, our results point unequivocally to the existence of a general intelligence factor contributing substantively to all aspects of intelligence."