IQ

Juliet · 06-23-2004, 02:49 PM

You can't go anywhere in these forums without seeing the ad...Have any of you taken the tickle.com IQ test? It says my IQ is 135, and that I'm a "visual mathematician."

What do you think about the IQ system in general? I'm a little leery--it only measures a few specific areas of intelligence while putting all else aside.

[ June 24, 2004, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Juliet ]

Princess Zelda of Hyrule · 06-23-2004, 02:58 PM

I took one of those awhile ago. There's no way I'm as smart as they say I am. Those things are just ego-boosters.

But I did take a professional-ish IQ test when I was a little kid. They said I had an IQ of 40. If that were true, wouldn't I be dead or something?
One thing I remember about that test is drinking a lot of water and going to the bathroom every five minutes, which drove the instructors up the wall. They were really scary, and I wanted whatever excuse I could to leave the room and be alone.
They thought my sister was half-blind.

[ June 23, 2004, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: Princess Zelda of Hyrule: God Bless ]

Juliet · 06-23-2004, 03:03 PM

I'm going to take the test again and try to get a reading of "0"...

ocarinagirl · 06-23-2004, 03:44 PM

^ [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

Or better yet: -10

I took the free one online and got a 122 or something around there.

I'm a wordsmith, apparently. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Juliet · 06-23-2004, 04:10 PM

Dang...I answered all the questions wrong on purpose, and it gave me a 72.

Princess Zelda of Hyrule · 06-23-2004, 05:54 PM

Goes to show how much they inflate scores.

El Barto · 06-24-2004, 12:25 AM

140. Yeah, right.

[sage] · 06-24-2004, 02:40 AM

I don't know my actual IQ, but according to some test i took online, it's 128.

KirbyKing · 06-24-2004, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Juliet:
Dang...I answered all the questions wrong on purpose, and it gave me a 72.

Perhaps there are some answers that are not as wrong as others? [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

I took the damned test. Then it told me I had to register. Well **** that, I thought. I'm not registering for anything just to get an IQ score, even if I did just waste my time taking it.

***CaptHayfever*** · 06-24-2004, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Princess Zelda of Hyrule: God Bless:
But I did take a professional-ish IQ test when I was a little kid. They said I had an IQ of 40. If that were true, wouldn't I be dead or something?

You wouldn't be able to spell 'professional', that's for sure. And you definitely wouldn't be able to read these forums. The bathroom breaks might've affected the score somehow.

My real-life IQ score (at age 4) was 145. My Tickle-fraud IQ score (at age 16) was 165.

And remember, "I'm-a Luigi, number one!"

Juliet · 06-24-2004, 02:19 PM

I guess that makes you a borderline genius, CHF. I don't know what my real IQ is, but I can rest assured of two things: I'm not a genius and I'm not mentally retarded.

But never trust a learning center's claims as to what your IQ is--they'll pretend you have a learning disability so your parents will want to enroll you. $$$.

Quote:

I took the damned test. Then it told me I had to register. Well **** that, I thought. I'm not registering for anything just to get an IQ score, even if I did just waste my time taking it.

Registration's free. I even made up a fake e-mail address for my "retard" character.

[ June 24, 2004, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: Juliet ]

Ditto McCloaker · 06-24-2004, 05:02 PM

As a psych major who's studied IQ, I'm forced to label the entire system, as it's generally regarded today, as... balderdash.

That's right.

Let me give you a little background:

The original IQ test was developed by a French psychologist early last century by a fellow named Binet (as in Stanford-Binet), and was used to test the cognitive development of French children.

The test tested them on several types of cognitive thought (not really applicable now, as it was based on primitive theories of mental ability of the time), but the general purpose was to evaluate French schoolchildren very early, and, get this, to enable teachers to focus on cognitive areas in which they were lacking in order to improve them.

Note that, today, it is generally claimed that IQ is more or less determined by birth and early mental stimulation, and is stable throughout life, supposedly a measure of where you stand, intellectually.

Psychologists also don't actually have a set definition for 'intelligence.' It may be 'problem solving ability.' Or 'capability of complicated or deep thought.' Others say it's a measure of learning speed.

At any rate, IQ scores are re-calibrated every two generations, if I recall correctly. Basically, hundreds of people are tested, and the average score is relabled as '100.' From then on, statistical analysis is used to label other levels of performace as above average, below average, gifted, etc, based on standard deviations from the average.

The modern Stanford-Binet IQ test consists of *thinks* about 15 different tests, give or take (it's been a couple years). Tests measure skill in solving various kinds of problems, for example: Recreating visual patterns from colored building blocks, pointing out problems in pictures, analogies, mental rotation and manipulation of 3-D shapes and objects, and other things. One test, I recall, involves attempting to draw a shape without being able to look down at the paper; instead, you look up at a mirror pointed down at the paper, so you have to reverse your hand movements (women supposedly do better at this one, and likely because of their experience in putting on makeup).

Correct responses on tests, time taken, and age are taken into account in determining scores for each individual test. These are then averaged, with some other factors, to determine a single number which is supposed to accurately represent your intellectual capacity.

I don't think I have to explain the flaws in this idea. Not only is the idea of rating individuals on a single spectrum of ability a rather simplistic notion, it's uninformative at best, and elitist at worst.

It also ignores the original intention of IQ testing, which was to identify areas of lagging ability and correcting them with extra emphasis. It's my theory that much 'ability' is accounted for by mere 'interest' and susceptibility to 'stimulation' (as, it appears, 'intelligent' people are more prone to excitability or deep interest to begin with). I mean, don't you learn subjects best that interest you? I also theorize that, in the absence of actual mental retardation or damage, most people can improve their cognitive ability with specialized training. In fact, that would appear to be the system taken by educational enhancement institutions like Sylvan.

The improvement of the understanding of intelligence was what I planned to devote my career to, but then I learned there are competent psychologists out there already leading the charge, so I felt it was in good enough hands to leave Psychology.

But that's where I stand.

Parrakarry · 06-25-2004, 04:50 PM

Ugh. IQ tests. DON'T get me started. According to an "official" book test thing which was purchased from a bargain bin at a book store, my IQ's about 27, my brother's is 163, and my parents' are about 90.

I am NOT kidding at ALL.

According to online ones, I'm anywhere from 120 to 170... it's all fake anyway.

Prince Toad · 06-25-2004, 05:04 PM

Hehe, I got well over 200 on some stupid online IQ test.

I don't think I ever knew mine, but it's pretty high. I aer teh smart

Eagle Eye · 06-25-2004, 09:59 PM

I took some dumb IQ test and it gave me a 50...
A 50 can u believe it?
Me a 50?

I'm more like a 10

Sim Kid · 06-25-2004, 10:46 PM

No one will tell me what my IQ is, but it's supposedly "More than Okay".

One online test I took gave me a 38, then I took it again 20 minutes later, then I got a 116. How could my IQ be multiplied by 3.05 in just 20 minutes? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Another time, I answered "I don't know" for EVERY question on a different test and got a 280. [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img]

[ June 25, 2004, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Digi ]

***Cosmonautical*** · 06-26-2004, 12:43 AM

Best measure of intelligence: How long does it take the individual to quit this pointless test?

Parrakarry · 06-26-2004, 06:23 AM

^Well, I answered three questions on this one before I got bored and quit... does that mean my IQ's three hundred?

Wyborn · 06-26-2004, 12:54 PM

I don't tend to trust IQ tests....the lowest I ever got was a 160 because the first IQ test I took didn't go above that. I can't remember the highest I ever got. My dad's scored anywhere between a 140 and a 180 depending on which test he takes (none of them online). Dunno how my mom did. My brother's smarter than I am, his IQ tests probably reflect it - the little bastard. Dunno about my sister, either.

AJ Middleton · 06-26-2004, 09:35 PM

IQ is inaccurate folks...

06-23-2004, 02:49 PM	#1
Juliet Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The Vinkus Posts: 1,238 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	You can't go anywhere in these forums without seeing the ad...Have any of you taken the tickle.com IQ test? It says my IQ is 135, and that I'm a "visual mathematician." What do you think about the IQ system in general? I'm a little leery--it only measures a few specific areas of intelligence while putting all else aside. [ June 24, 2004, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Juliet ]

06-23-2004, 02:58 PM	#2
Princess Zelda of Hyrule Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Hyrule Castle Gender: Posts: 6,128 Thanks: 35 Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts	I took one of those awhile ago. There's no way I'm as smart as they say I am. Those things are just ego-boosters. But I did take a professional-ish IQ test when I was a little kid. They said I had an IQ of 40. If that were true, wouldn't I be dead or something? One thing I remember about that test is drinking a lot of water and going to the bathroom every five minutes, which drove the instructors up the wall. They were really scary, and I wanted whatever excuse I could to leave the room and be alone. They thought my sister was half-blind. [ June 23, 2004, 03:10 PM: Message edited by: Princess Zelda of Hyrule: God Bless ]

06-23-2004, 03:03 PM	#3
Juliet Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The Vinkus Posts: 1,238 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I'm going to take the test again and try to get a reading of "0"...

06-23-2004, 03:44 PM	#4
ocarinagirl Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Ehhh? What? Where am I?! Gender: Posts: 3,010 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	^ [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img] Or better yet: -10 I took the free one online and got a 122 or something around there. I'm a wordsmith, apparently. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

06-23-2004, 04:10 PM	#5
Juliet Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The Vinkus Posts: 1,238 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Dang...I answered all the questions wrong on purpose, and it gave me a 72.

06-23-2004, 05:54 PM	#6
Princess Zelda of Hyrule Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Hyrule Castle Gender: Posts: 6,128 Thanks: 35 Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts	Goes to show how much they inflate scores.

06-24-2004, 12:25 AM	#7
El Barto Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,721 Thanks: 1 Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts	140. Yeah, right.

06-24-2004, 02:40 AM	#8
[sage] Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Florida Gender: Posts: 18,304 Thanks: 1 Thanked 13 Times in 10 Posts	I don't know my actual IQ, but according to some test i took online, it's 128.

06-24-2004, 05:02 PM	#12
Ditto McCloaker Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: SimCity Posts: 3,246 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	As a psych major who's studied IQ, I'm forced to label the entire system, as it's generally regarded today, as... balderdash. That's right. Let me give you a little background: The original IQ test was developed by a French psychologist early last century by a fellow named Binet (as in Stanford-Binet), and was used to test the cognitive development of French children. The test tested them on several types of cognitive thought (not really applicable now, as it was based on primitive theories of mental ability of the time), but the general purpose was to evaluate French schoolchildren very early, and, get this, to enable teachers to focus on cognitive areas in which they were lacking in order to improve them. Note that, today, it is generally claimed that IQ is more or less determined by birth and early mental stimulation, and is stable throughout life, supposedly a measure of where you stand, intellectually. Psychologists also don't actually have a set definition for 'intelligence.' It may be 'problem solving ability.' Or 'capability of complicated or deep thought.' Others say it's a measure of learning speed. At any rate, IQ scores are re-calibrated every two generations, if I recall correctly. Basically, hundreds of people are tested, and the average score is relabled as '100.' From then on, statistical analysis is used to label other levels of performace as above average, below average, gifted, etc, based on standard deviations from the average. The modern Stanford-Binet IQ test consists of thinks about 15 different tests, give or take (it's been a couple years). Tests measure skill in solving various kinds of problems, for example: Recreating visual patterns from colored building blocks, pointing out problems in pictures, analogies, mental rotation and manipulation of 3-D shapes and objects, and other things. One test, I recall, involves attempting to draw a shape without being able to look down at the paper; instead, you look up at a mirror pointed down at the paper, so you have to reverse your hand movements (women supposedly do better at this one, and likely because of their experience in putting on makeup). Correct responses on tests, time taken, and age are taken into account in determining scores for each individual test. These are then averaged, with some other factors, to determine a single number which is supposed to accurately represent your intellectual capacity. I don't think I have to explain the flaws in this idea. Not only is the idea of rating individuals on a single spectrum of ability a rather simplistic notion, it's uninformative at best, and elitist at worst. It also ignores the original intention of IQ testing, which was to identify areas of lagging ability and correcting them with extra emphasis. It's my theory that much 'ability' is accounted for by mere 'interest' and susceptibility to 'stimulation' (as, it appears, 'intelligent' people are more prone to excitability or deep interest to begin with). I mean, don't you learn subjects best that interest you? I also theorize that, in the absence of actual mental retardation or damage, most people can improve their cognitive ability with specialized training. In fact, that would appear to be the system taken by educational enhancement institutions like Sylvan. The improvement of the understanding of intelligence was what I planned to devote my career to, but then I learned there are competent psychologists out there already leading the charge, so I felt it was in good enough hands to leave Psychology. But that's where I stand.

06-25-2004, 04:50 PM	#13
Parrakarry Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 10,685 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Ugh. IQ tests. DON'T get me started. According to an "official" book test thing which was purchased from a bargain bin at a book store, my IQ's about 27, my brother's is 163, and my parents' are about 90. I am NOT kidding at ALL. According to online ones, I'm anywhere from 120 to 170... it's all fake anyway.

06-25-2004, 05:04 PM	#14
Prince Toad Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Rookery Gender: Posts: 11,720 Thanks: 50 Thanked 65 Times in 56 Posts	Hehe, I got well over 200 on some stupid online IQ test. I don't think I ever knew mine, but it's pretty high. I aer teh smart

06-25-2004, 09:59 PM	#15
Eagle Eye Diddy bops Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Birmingham, AL Gender: Posts: 15,014 Thanks: 1,616 Thanked 1,084 Times in 597 Posts	I took some dumb IQ test and it gave me a 50... A 50 can u believe it? Me a 50? I'm more like a 10

06-25-2004, 10:46 PM	#16
Sim Kid Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: The state of Denial Gender: Posts: 8,884 Thanks: 80 Thanked 198 Times in 122 Posts	No one will tell me what my IQ is, but it's supposedly "More than Okay". One online test I took gave me a 38, then I took it again 20 minutes later, then I got a 116. How could my IQ be multiplied by 3.05 in just 20 minutes? [img]tongue.gif[/img] Another time, I answered "I don't know" for EVERY question on a different test and got a 280. [img]graemlins/lol.gif[/img] [ June 25, 2004, 10:48 PM: Message edited by: Digi ]

06-26-2004, 12:43 AM	#17
*Cosmonautical* Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: I rub my tilde all over your asterisk Gender: Posts: 28,100 Thanks: 2,156 Thanked 5,338 Times in 2,433 Posts	Best measure of intelligence: How long does it take the individual to quit this pointless test?

06-26-2004, 06:23 AM	#18
Parrakarry Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 10,685 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	^Well, I answered three questions on this one before I got bored and quit... does that mean my IQ's three hundred?

06-26-2004, 12:54 PM	#19
Wyborn Zelda Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: All over the place Gender: Posts: 12,388 Thanks: 87 Thanked 469 Times in 281 Posts	I don't tend to trust IQ tests....the lowest I ever got was a 160 because the first IQ test I took didn't go above that. I can't remember the highest I ever got. My dad's scored anywhere between a 140 and a 180 depending on which test he takes (none of them online). Dunno how my mom did. My brother's smarter than I am, his IQ tests probably reflect it - the little bastard. Dunno about my sister, either.

06-26-2004, 09:35 PM	#20
AJ Middleton Banned Join Date: Dec 1969 Posts: 0 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	IQ is inaccurate folks...