StarGateWars Forums

i took an IQ test yesterday and got distracted by the kids half way through so i just abandoned it and clicked finish.
i've only just decided to look and see what the score was out of interest and nearly fell off my seat!

[spoiler]Dear g,

Thank you for your interest in the test at IQTest.com.

Your general IQ score is: 110

You may login at http://www.iqtest.com/login.html at any time to view your score, purchase your Complete Personal Intelligence Profile or The Consciousness Exercises, or edit your account settings:

Login email:
Password:


Regards,
The Team at IQTest.com



Please do not reply to this email.
You can email us at support@iqtest.com.[/spoiler]



[spoiler]IQ Scores & Ratings

What is a good IQ score? What is a high IQ score? What is a low IQ score? These are common questions, particularly after someone finds out their score from an IQ test.

Lewis Terman (1916) developed the original notion of IQ and proposed this scale for classifying IQ scores:

*

Over 140 - Genius or near genius
*

120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence
*

110 - 119 - Superior intelligence
*

90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence
*

80 - 89 - Dullness
*

70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency
*

Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness

Normal Distribution & IQ Scores

The properties of the normal distribution apply to IQ scores:

*

50% of IQ scores fall between 90 and 110
*

70% of IQ scores fall between 85 and 115
*

95% of IQ scores fall between 70 and 130
*

99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140[/spoiler]



well, i've never thought of myself as especially bright or quick, but that's put a smile on my face

if i can be arsed to finish it tomorrow when the kids are at school, i'll finish it and post the results, would be VERY interested in seeing you guys IQ score

I took the Cambridge one 3 times, the last time with a psychologist and i got 190... I don't believe in that crap.

I've had one that came in around 180 once (some research company basically paid my school to tast all y9 students on some new test & scale so dont read much into it as I dont know the ins & outs of it)

&

one that came in at 136 (recognised standard scale)

EDIT: you shouldnt read much into the tests though, they dont mean much.

Oh I should probably point out these are all past scores, I havent taken any IQ test in years.

true, but still, i was expecting about 45 or so because i didn't finish it.

[spoiler]Guidelines for Interpreting IQ Scores

There are many popular misconceptions and misinterpretations of IQ scores. Some psychologists give IQ a "holy grail" status, whilst others see it as just another personality characteristic. In this sense, intelligence is just one of the many individual psychological differences. Nevertheless, intelligence remains arguably the single most critical characteristic which determines general psychological functioning across a variety of situation.

IQ testing has a history of being used for classifying and selecting people. As such IQ tables which give labels for various IQ scores are rules of thumb and controversial. Therefore, use these general guidelines to help interpret IQ scores:

1.

IQ does not indicate the 'value' of a person
2.

An IQ score reflects someone's level of performance on a standard set of tasks. These tasks are designed to be indicative of a general quality called 'intelligence', which is the capacity to observe, analyze, interpret and act adaptively on information.
3.

IQ scores obtained from a certain test should not be interpreted as absolute measures of intelligence, but rather as indicators of the probable range in which the 'true' IQ lies.
4.

Use such IQ classification tables to develop an intuitive sense of the level of intellectual functionality that people with different IQ scores are likely to have. Avoid relying on any one person's suggested IQ ratings -- instead try to "read across" several different guidelines.
5.

When measuring IQ, there is a degree of error (e.g., someone who gets an IQ score of 89 may be "normal", but just had a below par day when tested). Larger differences (e.g., greater than 10 points) are more meaningful and reliable. Also note that the younger a child is, the less reliable his/her IQ test scores will be.
6.

Interpretation of an IQ score should occur in the context of broader assessment, e.g., a case report based on behavior observation and interview by a psychologist or team of mental and medical health professionals.
7.

Although there is clearly some level of unreliability and invalidities in psychological testing, these tests generally provide a more accurate and reliable tool than ad hoc judgments.
8.

Remember, there is huge debate as to where "IQ" exists or whether it is better understood as consisting of sub-types of intelligence, e.g., musical intelligence, spatial intelligence, etc.
9.

Be wary that some scales may refer to "ratio IQ" (original way of calculating IQ) and other scales use "deviation IQ" (more recent and now used more widely). Ratio IQ is based on "mental age vs. chronological age". Deviation IQ scores deflate ratio IQ scores - they give someone an IQ based on their ranking, using a perfect bell curve distribution. Read more...
10.

IQ scores are not closely linked to other 'desirable' qualities such as career achievement and happiness.[/spoiler]

I'm currently searching the thread about IQs on forums, I took it and scored 122 or something, what caused me troubles was translation of some words I didn't know (fruits and things like that) and did a lower score than I should have.

Well Pops if you took one that uses english rather than french (which i'm assuming here is your first language) then you've done much better than some native english speakers.

Translation takes a fair bit of brain power, so your batting with a handicap

Kit-Fox wrote:Well Pops if you took one that uses english rather than french (which i'm assuming here is your first language) then you've done much better than some native english speakers.

Translation takes a fair bit of brain power, so your batting with a handicap

Annoying thing is I took it in 2007 then late 2008 and didn't do much better as I did mostly same mistakes as first time I took it! (my improve on english wasn't usefull on said questions)

I was aware about it and always like to be underestimated in such tests as it means it's probably better than what I score.

I'd argue that taking online IQ tests and the subsequent scoring is about as trustworthy as asking your next-door neighbour kid who likes to tinker with cars every once on a sunny Saturday to look at your car and see what's wrong with it. You'll get a decent impression, sure.. and you might even get accurate results. He might even fix the damn thing. However, without raining on anyone's parade, to get results you can work with reliably, you'll need to visit a professional. And that's not some random PhD who figures they know how to use SPSS and bought themselves a test they can take and retake and retake ad nauseam, to charge 'a few units of currency' for their trouble (in the end, that test will pay for itself using that principle anyway). By 'professional' I mean the real thing.




So, to pull the old white rabbit out of the hat; an over-used adage in regards to IQ tests and people mentioning their outcomes, is that to get their actual results, you have to take 2/3 of the number they give you. *grin* Now wouldn't that suck.

Oh my god I would be such an idiot then...
~122 x 2/3 (and it was an online test, but in english) ≈ 80.

Legendary Apophis wrote:Oh my god I would be such an idiot then...
~122 x 2/3 (and it was an online test, but in english) ≈ 80.

There are worse things in life.
Like not being able to breathe.
Can't think of much more though. Aside from scoring 79.

Radiance wrote:

Legendary Apophis wrote:Oh my god I would be such an idiot then...
~122 x 2/3 (and it was an online test, but in english) ≈ 80.

There are worse things in life.
Like not being able to breathe.
Can't think of much more though. Aside from scoring 79.

Haha obviously..

Radiance wrote:So, to pull the old white rabbit out of the hat; an over-used adage in regards to IQ tests and people mentioning their outcomes, is that to get their actual results, you have to take 2/3 of the number they give you. *grin* Now wouldn't that suck.

Heh not heard that in regards to IQ tests. Doesnt that just rain on everyones parade

How naïve, anyway.

"Intelligence" is an umbrella term. Simply put, it is the ability to draw connections. There are individuals who are more skilled at drawing connections in a given environment than in another, whilst another may be strong where the first was weak and vice versa. This creates different categories, or environments and variables that must be accounted for, not to mention the relevant question of how one must even go about quantifying and qualifying the ability to draw connections. Does the connection have to be reasonable? What is reasonable? How do you measure how reasonable a connection is? Etc.

I'm not stating that it's impossible to measure these things, only that they are complex to measure and that no IQ test I've seen has made a respectable attempt to account for all of them.

I hold that it's quite naïve to even use the expression "Intelligence Quotient" - outside quotation marks, of course. How can it be taken seriously in light of its distinct inability to measure what it claims to measure?

Ahh come on Radience & Pooky, treat it like a little fun Live a little, why dont you two do a test or post a score from a test you might have done in past either online or proper.

Kit-Fox wrote:Ahh come on Radience & Pooky, treat it like a little fun Live a litte, why dont you two do a test or post a score from a test you might have done in past either online or proper.

Over 140 I believe.