What's your IQ?

[Nintendo]

Intelligence Quotient


The last time I did an official IQ Test was many years back and to be honest with you all...I received a very disappointingly low score of 70 or something like that (I can't remember the exact figure?).

An intelligence quotient, or IQ, is a score derived from one of several different standardized tests designed to assess intelligence. The term "IQ" comes from the German Intelligenz-Quotient. When modern IQ tests are constructed the median score is set to 100 and a standard deviation to 15. Today almost all IQ tests adhere to the assignment of 15 IQ points to each standard deviation but this has not been the case historically. Approximately 95% of the population have scores within two standard deviations of the mean. If one SD is 15 points, then 95% of the population are within a range of 70 to 130.
IQ scores have been shown to be associated with such factors as morbidity and mortality, parental social status,[1] and, to a substantial degree, parental IQ. While the heritability of IQ has been investigated for nearly a century, controversy remains regarding the significance of heritability estimates, and the mechanisms of inheritance are still a matter of some debate.


IQ scores are used in many contexts: as predictors of educational achievement or special needs, by social scientists who study the distribution of IQ scores in populations and the relationships between IQ score and other variables, and as predictors of job performance and income.


The average IQ scores for many populations have been rising at an average rate of three points per decade since the early 20th century, a phenomenon called the Flynn effect. It is disputed whether these changes in scores reflect real changes in intellectual abilities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient


Have you done an official IQ Test lately? If so, what did you get?

 

[Exophase]

I really doubt your IQ is 70 (I expect it's much higher), and more likely the test was poorly administered or something prevented you from taking it correctly. Was it an online test? Those probably aren't that reliable..

 

[Nintendo]

1. You'd be surprised.


2. It was a TV one, as in it was aired on TV in 1997.

 

[Exophase]

I think you should get it taken again, and it should really be administered directly by a trained professional. A score of 70 is two standard deviations off from the mean, which would put you in the bottom 5% of testers. I don't expect someone in the bottom 5% to be especially technologically adept, unless they have autism or are a savant and the measurement is somewhat eschewed/non-representative of focused skill-sets.


If it means anything, I've scored something like 20 points varying on official tests.. but that was probably largely impacted by not getting anything resembling proper rest before one of them.

 

[sebt3]

I really doubt your IQ is 70 (I expect it's much higher),

+1


(well I like the autism idea you indroduced in you later post, but I'm unsure that true )

 

[TitanUranus]

I did one at university about 15 years ago, and was disappoint to score 132. Then I was told that that was a very good score since the average is 100 - glad they didn't take knowledge of how IQ tests are scored into account or I'd be classed as a d-head. I think there's a level below which a person is considered retarded (by law) and therefore less responsible for themselves and their actions. 70 would seem to me a low score (and in your case an inaccurate one), though perhaps you could be eligible for some care benefits from the government if you can consistently prove your low IQ. Otherwise, I'll give you 30 points from my IQ score, then you can be average and I'll be just above. It's all pretty meaningless anyway, so as long as you function well in society I'd ignore this kind of highly subjective and deeply flawed way of rating people. On the other hand, a score of 70 could be useful should you decide to murder someone and need a good excuse.


I'm frightened to imagine what I'd score now. Though I'm far more wise and much better informed than I was 15 years ago, I'm on medication which slows my wits and clouds my thinking. Having said that, I used to drink heavily and was most likely pissed when I sat the IQ test 15 years ago.

 

[Timstertoo]

I did one at university about 15 years ago, and was disappoint to score 132. Then I was told that that was a very good score since the average is 100 - glad they didn't take knowledge of how IQ tests are scored into account or I'd be classed as a d-head. I think there's a level below which a person is considered retarded (by law) and therefore less responsible for themselves and their actions. 70 would seem to me a low score (and in your case an inaccurate one), though perhaps you could be eligible for some care benefits from the government if you can consistently prove your low IQ. Otherwise, I'll give you 30 points from my IQ score, then you can be average and I'll be just above. It's all pretty meaningless anyway, so as long as you function well in society I'd ignore this kind of highly subjective and deeply flawed way of rating people. On the other hand, a score of 70 could be useful should you decide to murder someone and need a good excuse.


I'm frightened to imagine what I'd score now. Though I'm far more wise and much better informed than I was 15 years ago, I'm on medication which slows my wits and clouds my thinking. Having said that, I used to drink heavily and was most likely pissed when I sat the IQ test 15 years ago.

Every online test I did when I was younger (can't be arsed now) I scored much much better when heavily intoxicated then when I was trying to do it seriously the next day to see what the difference is.


I did the only rational thing I could do based on those results, I went into the bar-restaurant business.

 

[chosen]

It's been a long while, so I had a go. That was a bit of fun :lol:


I think IQ tests actually measure how good you are at IQ tests.

 

[Christoph.Krn]

(well I like the autism idea you indroduced in you later post, but I'm unsure that true )

• "Ex-Hacker Adrian Lamo Institutionalized for Asperger’s" on Wired
  
• Autism-Spectrum Quotient test on Wired
  

-----


In psychology, there are several "religions", and nothing is quite accurate. Even worse yet, while psychology and neurology can both be used for creating coherent models of something, these models sometimes can't be connected to each other (or won't be simply because of aforementioned "religions"). This already makes IQ tests appear questionable, but more importantly, displaying "intelligence" through an integer is simply not possible because (these days), you cannot define intelligence using a single word. The only way of finding out what a person is good at is to find out what that person is good at; You usually won't find out whether someone is an emapthic genius by looking at an IQ score. IQs /can/ be an indication of /something/, but should never be relied upon at all.


Be informed that I'm not a psychologist or neurologist. But I do find psychology and neurology quite interesting - especially /because/ psychology is so vague, there are so many things that can be connected to each other.

 

[ZXDunny]

Back when I left school (more than 20 years ago now!) I was tested by an employer in a day-long session, and scored 163 with aptitude for logical problem-solving. I have no idea what it will be now, as IQ tends to drop off sharply as you age.


D.

 

[Eridger]

I think I got around 115-120, but I didn't really take it seriously. I heard the test loses accuracy the further up the scale you go. The scores are meaningless.

 

[Epimethee]

Well, IQ doesn't mean anything without the scale: There are many scales to test IQ but they're note same.


For example: I've got 140 on the W-3 scale, but i'm over 150 with the Mensa test, or with Official US tests.


Then, let's know that IQ doesn't say anything. Let's compare it to a D&D character sheet. I've 14Strenght, 22Endurance, 16 Agility, 6Intel, 4 Wisdom and 8 Charisma. Well, telling your IQ score is like saying: I've got 70 points! (


14+16+22+8+6+4).


Let's take my own example. I suck at space geometry (an item in IQ tests). It means I won't ever have good skills at drawing, or to solve a Rubik's cube. But I'm good at Logical, solving problems, associate ideas, explaining things...


If the IQ est is done by a professionnal, il could really be accurate. I tryed to fight that but still can't solve a Rubik's cube. I sux at scrabble too for that reason, even if my vocabulary is at a higher level.


IQ is the sum, but it doesn't mean anything.


The soft limit of these tests is 130/140. So 156 or 135 or 184, is pretty the same.


We've all got our weaknesses and strenghts.


A last example:


Let's say IQ stands for 10 items: The average joe gets 10/20 on all tests, and so has he 100IQ.


Let's take a smartass, the brilliant math-guy at school. will have 19/20 on maths, but maybe 4/20 on other skills. So he got 100 IQ too.


Then, another random guy: Good at maths. will have 16/20 on math stuff, ant then 10, 11 or 12 on other stuff. Well, he'll have 120IQ.


Who's the most intelligent? It depends


It looks like choosing a general in Advance Wars: Andy the balanced one, Max with great powers but also great weaknesses, or the yellow one, just a little above others in all ways.


Please excuse my bad spelling, I should improve my english.


Good night, i'm very tired now, 3 AM here

 

[hailrazer]

Also bear in mind that IQ tests online are complete and utter Bull Crap.


Everyone scores at least 20-30 points higher online than with an IQ test administered by a Professional.

 

[darfgarf]

according to my last it was about 150, but then again according to similar things i'm autistic, so who knows how accurate that is


surprising that only a few places have an average of over 100, surely in the uk the massive proportion of chavs and suchlikes would drag it down

 

[Tam Toucan]

What's interesting is no-one can agree what it measures. The average score has been steadily increasing for decades, does that mean everyone is getting smarter? Also it means if you went back to the 40s and 50s the average person should have been scoring what is classed as retarded and unable to be held accountable for their actions.


It measures something certainly, but what I'm not sure. Also, it might drop with age, but other forms of "intelligence" (experience and being able to apply it) I'd say increase with age.

 

[bzar]

I've got a mensa test book that gave me something like 170, but I wouldn't trust that result one bit . I've been meaning to take an official test at some point, but I've always got something more interesting going on (or I'm subconciously afraid of knowing the result ).

 

[darfgarf]

(or I'm subconciously afraid of knowing the result ).

Dir sir or Madam,


we have the results of your test and it shows that you are legally an idiot, you may now do whatever you like and claim that you don't understand it

 

[bzar]

^ Yay! I'm free! :lol:

 

[Lethargy]

Lethargy no function beer well without....


(with apologies to Homer Simpson)

 

[TitanUranus]

Personally, I think the most intelligent people would find a good way to cheat at IQ tests, and have enormous scores in the 1,000's. My latest IQ score is 26,304 - but that blatantly made up score was hampered by my false modesty.