# Culturally Unbiased IQ Test



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Well, that makes me feel slightly better. IMO, you're quite brilliant.
> 
> However, the logic on the harder questions seemed like some sort of foreign language I couldn't decipher. I just got frustrated trying to figure it out, due to my own lack of confidence in myself. And for some reason, I seem to work more slowly at things than other people. I can't figure out whether it's anxiety or a latent learning disability.
> 
> And I have a hard time believing that my IQ is below average (as I said, I guessed on a lot of them, so my score would be realistically in the 90s). School was pretty easy for me. I was tied for third in my graduating high school class, and that's mostly because the valedictorian and salutatorian took more AP classes than I did. I was part of the gifted & talented program. (Which really didn't do much after elementary school, lol.) I believe I took an IQ test to get into that in the 3rd grade, but I never knew my score.


Then you're probably quite intelligent so stop worrying about what an IQ test that only tests visual-spatial intelligence tells you about your mental capacity because it's probably not even close to being accurate as there are numerous other types of intelligence tested on a professionally administered IQ test.


----------



## Dark Romantic

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Well, that makes me feel slightly better. IMO, you're quite brilliant.
> 
> However, the logic on the harder questions seemed like some sort of foreign language I couldn't decipher. I just got frustrated trying to figure it out, due to my own lack of confidence in myself. And for some reason, I seem to work more slowly at things than other people. I can't figure out whether it's anxiety or a latent learning disability.
> 
> And I have a hard time believing that my IQ is below average (as I said, I guessed on a lot of them, so my score would be realistically in the 90s). School was pretty easy for me. I was tied for third in my graduating high school class, and that's mostly because the valedictorian and salutatorian took more AP classes than I did. I was part of the gifted & talented program. (Which really didn't do much after elementary school, lol.) I believe I took an IQ test to get into that in the 3rd grade, but I never knew my score.


You probably don't have a low IQ, since this is only measuring IQ on one scale. A professional test would give you questions to test your verbal intelligence as well, so your score would probably be higher if that came into play.


----------



## sprinkles

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Well, that makes me feel slightly better. IMO, you're quite brilliant.
> 
> However, the logic on the harder questions seemed like some sort of foreign language I couldn't decipher. I just got frustrated trying to figure it out, due to my own lack of confidence in myself. And for some reason, I seem to work more slowly at things than other people. I can't figure out whether it's anxiety or a latent learning disability.
> 
> And I have a hard time believing that my IQ is below average (as I said, I guessed on a lot of them, so my score would be realistically in the 90s). School was pretty easy for me. I was tied for third in my graduating high school class, and that's mostly because the valedictorian and salutatorian took more AP classes than I did. I was part of the gifted & talented program. (Which really didn't do much after elementary school, lol.) I believe I took an IQ test to get into that in the 3rd grade, but I never knew my score.
> 
> 
> I took this at night with the TV volume turned down. Tiredness may have factored, since my sleep schedule has been out of whack for a long time.


Don't feel bad, IQ is usually way over stated. Something like 90% of people are within two standard deviations, and you are within one standard deviation - you are normal. Even 90 is normal or average (I doubt you'd not be higher than that though)

For comparison, bright college graduates who could be technical professionals might be around 112 or higher. That's like pretty smart but not genius. A PhD holder in physics or neuroscience or whatever might be 120's and are a smaller percentage of the population. Not everyone is going to be that, and I admittedly don't have what it takes for a PhD in physics.

But even at 90 (if you are that) you are 'normal' which in reality is pretty smart, considering that most people you meet will not be that far off from you. So there's no need to put yourself down.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> Then you're probably quite intelligent so stop worrying about what an IQ test that only tests visual-spatial intelligence tells you about your mental capacity because it's probably not even close to being accurate as there are numerous other types of intelligence tested on a professionally administered IQ test.


But what if I'm just a hard working person and only did well because the public school system is crap, especially in my state? There is the matter of that test I took in 3rd grade. I'm rather curious about how I did on that.

I'm very insecure about my intelligence, since I built up my self-esteem on that. And I could easily dismiss this as being another crappy online IQ test but it's from Mensa...


----------



## Ember

Taken at 5:45 in the morning. :crying:


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> But what if I'm just a hard working person and only did well because the public school system is crap, especially in my state? There is the matter of that test I took in 3rd grade. I'm rather curious about how I did on that.
> 
> I'm very insecure about my intelligence, since I built up my self-esteem on that. And I could easily dismiss this as being another crappy online IQ test but it's from MENSA...


Try the MENSA International workout exam then. It's much more comprehensive than the Dutch exam. You have to remember that visual-spatial intelligence is a very specialized form of intelligence and IQ tests themselves only measure a small portion of a person's cognitive capability. It doesn't measure anything like artistic ability or kinesthetic talent or even how sociable a person is.

So yeah, try this one: Mensa Workout | Mensa International


----------



## Alaya

107 

I was expecting a bit lower since I just guessed on the last ones. Cool test, though.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro

l've seen it but have never taken it.

I am n o t a visual thinker, I guess that means I'm retarded


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> Try the MENSA International workout exam then. It's much more comprehensive than the Dutch exam. You have to remember that visual-spatial intelligence is a very specialized form of intelligence and IQ tests themselves only measure a small portion of a person's cognitive capability. It doesn't measure anything like artistic ability or kinesthetic talent or even how sociable a person is.
> 
> So yeah, try this one: Mensa Workout | Mensa International


Yeah I took that one afterward. 22/30. However, I missed one because I missed a detail on the flower pattern thing. So 23/30. Also, there a few problems I could have done with pencil and paper, but I didn't because I thought thought that would be a restriction. EDIT: And I think I made a few silly mistakes too.

Also, I found the person that was in charge of the gifted program in the phone book. I was told I had to have had a 119+ IQ to have gotten in. So now I feel better. ^_^U


----------



## Subtle Murder

I know that I am pretty terrible when it comes to visual/spatial stuff, so I can't really believe I scored 107 (which, as you guys mentioned, is probably not accurate given that I guessed some). Those last few questions were...  My brain pretty much looked at them, imploded, and then I just guessed whatever looked right. XD;;


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

Oh and more about the Mensa workout thing: I did a lot of stupid things. For example, I skipped one question about the distance between two men going in opposite directions. I had seen a question like this before on other tests, but I never got it correct. After looking at this again, I realized it was because once I got to the part where they both make a turn, I always forgot that left for one person would be right for the other. (Not that I could have figured out even if I did do it correctly. I might have been stuck after that.) Another thing was misinterpreting questions. For example, I got the one about prime numbers wrong because I was expecting it to be an arithmetic series.

...I feel like I'm just making excuses for myself now. ^_^U


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Oh and more about the Mensa workout thing: I did a lot of stupid things. For example, I skipped one question about the distance between two men going in opposite directions. I had seen a question like this before on other tests, but I never got it correct. After looking at this again, I realized it was because once I got to the part where they both make a turn, I always forgot that left for one person would be right for the other. Another thing was misinterpreting questions. For example, I got the one about prime numbers wrong because I was expecting it to be an arithmetic series.
> 
> ...I feel like I'm just making excuses for myself now. ^_^U


It could have been that the first test hurt your confidence in yourself and undermined your ability to take the International test. Sounds silly but being self-confident in your own ability is a test-taking skill and harming that confidence can make someone second guess their own responses and ability to answer correctly.

Not saying that's what happened in your case, but it's a possibility.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> It could have been that the first test hurt your confidence in yourself and undermined your ability to take the International test. Sounds silly but being self-confident in your own ability is a test-taking skill and harming that confidence can make someone second guess their own responses and ability to answer correctly.
> 
> Not saying that's what happened in your case, but it's a possibility.


Thanks. Also...is there any way to do the age question without algebra? My first thought was to create a system of equations and solve it that way, but there's no way I could do that stuff in my head...


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Thanks. Also...is there any way to do the age question without algebra? My first thought was to create a system of equations and solve it that way, but there's no way I could do that stuff in my head...


You _could_ I guess but that's too sophisticated for me. XD

Guess-and-check and knowing that a four year difference making that much of a difference in the age multiple must mean both people are fairly young. That cuts down on the number of combinations to guess-and-check.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> You _could_ I guess but that's too sophisticated for me. XD
> 
> Guess-and-check and knowing that a four year difference making that much of a difference in the age multiple must mean both people are fairly young. That cuts down on the number of combinations to guess-and-check.


That would take a while and you only have 30 minutes...unless you cheat. XD


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> That would take a while and you only have 30 minutes...unless you cheat. XD


No way, it would take less time than trying to come up with a SOE. You're krazy.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> No way, it would take less time than trying to come up with a SOE. You're krazy.


:crazy: ...Yeah, you're right. I kept trying to solve it using a system of equations, but I found that it was impossible to account for the change in age for both people at the same time. I think it's because the age ratio increases exponentially or something...


----------



## Stufreddy

Engh 112. It was an interesting test, but I think intelligence is too broad to measure with a quotient.


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> :crazy: ...Yeah, you're right. I kept trying to solve it using a system of equations, but I found that it was impossible to account for the change in age for both people at the same time. I think it's because the age ratio increases exponentially or something...


Yes...?



Hahaha don't mind me, I'm just tired :tongue:


----------



## Ziwosa

I love how almost *everyone *is protecting their ego.


----------



## Friday

I got 106, but I tried not to "cheat" by using process of elimination using a "Sudoku" type system to solve some of the patterns. I just tried to manipulate the geometry using raw brain power only.

Like some others, the difficulty did seem to "spike". Seemed like standard progression from 1-25, but from 25-35 some were immediately apparent, or at least so it seemed. From 35 and on, the 5 to 7 layer, puzzles were nearly impossible for me.

But, without knowing the answers and which ones were right/wrong, I guess ill never know. For all I know, I got 1-21 correct, which makes me a little "above average" but I got everything from 22-40 wrong... and I just thought some of the ones from 25-35 were obvious... haha.


----------



## infinitewisdom

Reicheru said:


> "you'll have 40 minutes..." </beef>


I saw that too. I was not about to waste 40 minutes of my time. My goal was to finish it within ten. I looked quickly for the patterns and picked an answer without caring if it was right or wrong. I just did not care about my IQ. I finished the test in 6 minutes and my IQ was 99. I really am beneath average unless I put effort into anything. This test has a bias favoring sensors


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


> Yes...?
> 
> 
> 
> Hahaha don't mind me, I'm just tired :tongue:


Actually, I came up with a very simple guess-and-check way to do this while lying in bed: Generate fractions that can reduce to 3/4, subtract 8 from the numerator and the denominator and see if it the result reduces to 1/2. Now tell me...WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THIS DURING THE TEST?!?!? *facepalm*



Ziwosa said:


> I love how almost *everyone *is protecting their ego.


It may be funny for you, but this is a serious problem for me. While it's very unlikely that I would actually carry it out because I'm very averse to pain, _I have had suicidal thoughts because I've felt inadequate. _It's torture having thoughts like that when you are afraid to die, dislike pain, and have to stay alive because someone needs you.


----------



## MNiS

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> It may be funny for you, but this is a serious problem for me. While it's very unlikely that I would actually carry it out because I'm very averse to pain, _I have had suicidal thoughts because I've felt inadequate. _It's torture having thoughts like that when you are afraid to die, dislike pain, and have to stay alive because someone needs you.


Well in that case...



> Actually, I came up with a very simple guess-and-check way to do this while lying in bed: Generate fractions that can reduce to 3/4, subtract 8 from the numerator and the denominator and see if it the result reduces to 1/2. Now tell me...WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THIS DURING THE TEST?!?!? *facepalm*


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

MNiS said:


>


Ni doesn't work for me while taking IQ tests, apparently. 

Sorry, that post just hit a sore spot with me. I don't think @Ziwosa meant anything by it. It was just something I had to get out...


----------



## Reicheru

re: everyone protecting their ego (can't find the quote...) i typically score between 139 to 160+ on untimed IQ tests. on timed IQ tests i have scored anything from 115ish to less than 50 due to great distraction. i highly doubt this is an 'ego' problem and more a test validity/bias/this-method-is-shit one, considering that's the ONLY thing that causes me to dip so heinously.


----------



## Friday

Reicheru said:


> re: everyone protecting their ego (can't find the quote...) i typically score between 139 to 160+ on untimed IQ tests. on timed IQ tests i have scored anything from 115ish to less than 50 due to great distraction. i highly doubt this is an 'ego' problem and more a test validity/bias/this-method-is-shit one, considering that's the ONLY thing that causes me to dip so heinously.


Please humor us with which test you took that you scored over 145.


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

Reicheru said:


> re: everyone protecting their ego (can't find the quote...) i typically score between 139 to 160+ on untimed IQ tests. on timed IQ tests i have scored anything from 115ish to less than 50 due to great distraction. i highly doubt this is an 'ego' problem and more a test validity/bias/this-method-is-shit one, considering that's the ONLY thing that causes me to dip so heinously.


The reason tests are timed is for standardization purposes. Conditions have to be the same for everyone, or otherwise the results aren't valid. ...But yes, timed tests are a bitch. D:


----------



## Reicheru

Friday said:


> Please humor us with which test you took that you scored over 145.


considering it was in 2009 when i had a different computer, i'm pretty sure i didn't scramble to save the little "your IQ is ___" graphic nor the URL of my results just in case a stranger online wanted me to 'humour' them with it 3 years into the future and i desperately wanted to make absolutely sure they believed me. so apologies but no, i have neither anymore.


----------



## Friday

Reicheru said:


> considering it was in 2009 when i had a different computer, i'm pretty sure i didn't scramble to save the little "your IQ is ___" graphic nor the URL of my results just in case a stranger online wanted me to 'humour' them with it 3 years into the future and i desperately wanted to make absolutely sure they believed me. so apologies but no, i have neither anymore.


1) Standard tests of intelligence cannot accurately measure IQ's over 135.
2) You cannot take legitimate tests of exceptional intelligence on your computer.
3) A person of standard intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of exceptional intelligence will probably score "retarded".
4) A person of exceptional intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of normal intelligence may score abnormally high or low.


----------



## Reicheru

Friday said:


> 1) Standard tests of intelligence cannot accurately measure IQ's over 135.
> 2) You cannot take legitimate tests of exceptional intelligence on your computer.
> 3) A person of standard intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of exceptional intelligence will probably score "retarded".
> 4) A person of exceptional intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of normal intelligence may score abnormally high or low.
> 5) Every time a claim of over 140 is made, they become the laughingstock of the internet because none of them ever seem to know, or remember what test they took.


1. i know. however, many exist, claiming to do just that. IQ tests are inaccurate on the whole, as none of them take into account other forms of intelligence - emotional intelligence, for example. they're flawed to begin with.
2. yes. i know. i was reporting what i scored. considering the massive differences in scores even between two untimed tests, this just serves to enunciate how inaccurate online tests are in the first place (although i cannot speak for official MENSA tests as i have never taken one).
3. & 4. ... okay?
5. gee whiz, really? i'm INTERNET FAMOUS! <3


----------



## DMack

118 with a couple of beers in me. I know I suck at the 3x3 problems. I'm usually in the 140s on most tests, so I assume the booze got to me. That or I'm very culterally biased.


----------



## Friday

Reicheru said:


> 1. i know. however, many exist, claiming to do just that. IQ tests are inaccurate on the whole, as none of them take into account other forms of intelligence - emotional intelligence, for example. they're flawed to begin with.
> 2. yes. i know. i was reporting what i scored. considering the massive differences in scores even between two untimed tests, this just serves to enunciate how inaccurate online tests are in the first place (although i cannot speak for official MENSA tests as i have never taken one).
> 3. & 4. ... okay?
> 5. gee whiz, really? i'm INTERNET FAMOUS! <3


Sorry buddy. Wrong again.

Mensa does not have tests for those of exceptional intelligence, at least, not in the last 5 years. You will have to join a real high IQ society for that, and you will have to take those tests in person. You will likely already be a Mensan, or you will not even have bothered with Mensa altogether.

But, w/e floats your boat. Believe that you're 210 if you want. I took a test on the back of a magazine once, said my IQ was 412.


----------



## Reicheru

Friday said:


> Sorry buddy. Wrong again.
> 
> Mensa does not have tests for those of exceptional intelligence, at least, not in the last 5 years. You will have to join a real high IQ society for that, and you will have to take those tests in person. You will likely already be a Mensan, or you will not even have bothered with Mensa altogether.
> 
> But, w/e floats your boat. Believe that you're 210 if you want. I took a test on the back of a magazine once, said my IQ was 412.


uh, i didn't say MENSA had an IQ test for exceptional intelligence. i simply said online tests (as in ALL online IQ tests) are wholly inaccurate, but that i could not speak for MENSA tests, as i have never taken one. so please, don't put words in my mouth again, "buddy." i do not appreciate being misquoted.

i don't, personally, believe IQ tests hold much water at all, if that wasn't clear enough. maybe it can point you in a vague direction - but it's a very hazy one at that. IQ tests are inaccurate. that's why i can score under 50 on one and "160+" (accurate huh?) on another and my points always waver horribly - and i'm sure many others' do, too.

210. lol. wow. again, i'd like to know where exactly i said that. please don't post to me again if all you're going to do is make petty, scathing assumptions over something as ridiculous as IQ tests.


----------



## Ziwosa

Reicheru said:


> i highly doubt this is an 'ego' problem and more a test validity/bias/this-method-is-shit one


Looking at reactions of everyone on any sort of IQ test in any situation or place, so not just this thread, I'm always observing the same kind of behavior from almost everyone.


----------



## Ziwosa

DMack said:


> 118 with a couple of beers in me. I know I suck at the 3x3 problems. I'm usually in the 140s on most tests, so I assume the booze got to me. That or I'm very culterally biased.


Actually, I read some study somewhere that demonstrated that a certain level of alcohol makes you smarter. But of course, if you go way beyond that level ...


----------



## Reicheru

Ziwosa said:


> Looking at reactions of everyone on any sort of IQ test in any situation or place, so not just this thread, I'm always seeing the same kind of behavior from almost everyone.


fair do's. IQ is a pretty delicate topic for most people, i think, by how much it appears to reflect (albeit superficially).


----------



## Friday

Reicheru said:


> uh, i didn't say MENSA had an IQ test for exceptional intelligence. i simply said online tests (as in ALL online IQ tests) are wholly inaccurate, but that i could not speak for MENSA tests, as i have never taken one. so please, don't put words in my mouth again, "buddy." i do not appreciate being misquoted.
> 
> i don't, personally, believe IQ tests hold much water at all, if that wasn't clear enough. maybe it can point you in a vague direction - but it's a very hazy one at that. IQ tests are inaccurate. that's why i can score under 50 on one and "160+" (accurate huh?) on another and my points always waver horribly - and i'm sure many others' do, too.
> 
> 210. lol. wow. again, i'd like to know where exactly i said that. please don't post to me again if all you're going to do is make petty, scathing assumptions over something as ridiculous as IQ tests.


All I wanted to make you do was completely backtrack on everything you've said about IQ's, specifically, the claim of being measured at "160+" which is absolutely laughable. I would not even have ever said that I measured over 160 because that is just silly, no matter which way you spin it.

The thing about "210" was merely satirical. It was alluding to your overly inflated number (which you could have completely left out, btw) and was intended at competing for the "who's is bigger" and "what can we use to measure" challenge.

IQ tests are more or less "accurate", but they are not absolute. You just have to take a real one. They always come in several parts to get the best sample as possible. If you max out the Mensa exam (pre-2001) you can qualify for the exceptional intelligence societies.


----------



## Ziwosa

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> It may be funny for you, but this is a serious problem for me.


I just like finding patterns and connections. And this one got confirmed once again.



Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Sorry, that post just hit a sore spot with me. I don't think @Ziwosa meant anything by it. It was just something I had to get out...


You're right that I didn't mean anything personal with it.

Anything about such subjects that comes out, is a good thing


----------



## Inguz

Friday said:


> I got 106, but I tried not to "cheat" by using process of elimination using a "Sudoku" type system to solve some of the patterns. I just tried to manipulate the geometry using raw brain power only.
> 
> Like some others, the difficulty did seem to "spike". Seemed like standard progression from 1-25, but from 25-35 some were immediately apparent, or at least so it seemed. From 35 and on, the 5 to 7 layer, puzzles were nearly impossible for me.
> 
> But, without knowing the answers and which ones were right/wrong, I guess ill never know. For all I know, I got 1-21 correct, which makes me a little "above average" but I got everything from 22-40 wrong... and I just thought some of the ones from 25-35 were obvious... haha.


Is this what I did? But I think that may just have been my preferred method when doing this, why should I "expect" when the patterns already are there? lol, maybe it's me being lazy that is amplifying my IQ score by cutting corners.


----------



## Reicheru

@Friday sure, it probably is 'absolutely laughable,' but that's what the result was, even if it is bogus. what i score is not necessarily right.

yes, i am well aware of your "who is bigger competition," which i find interesting. i'm sorry if my absolutely laughable result threatened you so much that you felt the need to try and one-up me, but that, Friday, is your own problem. i have already asked you to stop posting to me and as you have blatantly disregarded my request, i am going to put you on ignore.

in your opinion IQ tests are more of less "accurate." in mine, on the whole they are not. don't bother replying please.


----------



## Friday

Inguz said:


> Is this what I did? But I think that may just have been my preferred method when doing this, why should I "expect" when the patterns already are there? lol, maybe it's me being lazy that is amplifying my IQ score by cutting corners.


That way works for smaller matrices, like 3x3, and 4x4. So, you're not "wrong" for doing it, I just didnt do it that way out of the best interest of the test. Once you get to larger matrices, like a 5x5 or... a whopping 7x7, those methods are almost rendered ineffective. If you're a master at 8x8, then fuck it, play chess. LOL

There are arbitrary time limits on these "low level" tests to discourage the use of "cheating" by not using raw brain power itself. It's why many legit IQ tests do not have time limits, and sometimes dont even have multiple choice, because you will not be able to "cheat" and will only be able to rely on your intellectual prowess.

Since I mentioned chess earlier, some low level "find mate in 5" type exercises can be found by process of elimination, by performing all the logical moves. A high level chess exercises like "force the draw in 13" cannot. I hope that makes sense.


----------



## DMack

Ziwosa said:


> Actually, I read some study somewhere that demonstrated that a certain level of alcohol makes you smarter. But of course, if you go way beyond that level ...


It unlocks the creative perseptive side of your brain, but shuts down the logical sequential side.


----------



## Ziwosa

DMack said:


> It unlocks the creative perseptive side of your brain, but shuts down the logical sequential side.


And creativity allows you to find new ways to discover logical patterns.


----------



## Friday

Ziwosa said:


> And creativity allows you to find new ways to discover logical patterns.


Sort of like how my poker chips always show a similar relationship to the amount of alcohol I consumed.


----------



## MNiS

Friday said:


> 1) Standard tests of intelligence cannot accurately measure IQ's over 135.
> 2) You cannot take legitimate tests of exceptional intelligence on your computer.
> 3) A person of standard intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of exceptional intelligence will probably score "retarded".
> 4) A person of exceptional intelligence attempting to take a test designed for those of normal intelligence may score abnormally high or low.


Try this one:

Classical IQ Test

The maximum score is 155. You have to pay to receive a score though, I didn't want to do that but I got one question wrong. It's an internet test so the scores are more than likely inflated because I'm not even close to being super intelligent.


----------



## chasingdreams

lol, I didn't have 40 minutes for this test. I quickly went through it, and randomly clicked the ones that I felt were right. That took me around 5 minutes, and I got 96. I could probably do better if I used all of my 40 minutes, but whatever. I'm actually quite surprised at my results, considering the fact that I completed the test in just 5 minutes.


----------



## Laney

I got 104. Yay for average!


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

chasingdreams said:


> lol, I didn't have 40 minutes for this test. I quickly went through it, and randomly clicked the ones that I felt were right. That took me around 5 minutes, and I got 96. I could probably do better if I used all of my 40 minutes, but whatever. I'm actually quite surprised at my results, considering the fact that I completed the test in just 5 minutes.


I lol'd. XD


----------



## Swordsman of Mana

I only got 115. my ego is crushed :sad:


----------



## babayaga94

130 fffuuuu ziwosa noob.


----------



## Ziwosa

babayaga94 said:


> 130 fffuuuu ziwosa noob.


mwhahaha, you're going to fail at life! So long sucker!


----------



## babayaga94

Ziwosa said:


> mwhahaha, you're going to fail at life! So long sucker!


Yea I know life is more complicated than that stupid test. People just dont realize how complicated life is and that makes it not so complicated for them.


----------



## Ziwosa

@babayaga94, You do realize I was being sarcastic right?


----------



## babayaga94

Ziwosa said:


> @_babayaga94_, You do realize I was being sarcastic right?


Yes I do, but I was not very sarcastic


----------



## babayaga94

But It got me thinking;
Even tho the test is "culturally unbiased" because it does not include verbal stuff and general knowledge you whould normally find in an iq test. It still was much easier for me to see the patterns if I read it from left to right then went down to the next line, sooa for someone who is japaneese for example, I still think it will be harder for them because they are used to reading it from right to left.


----------



## Friday

babayaga94 said:


> But It got me thinking;
> Even tho the test is "culturally unbiased" because it does not include verbal stuff and general knowledge you whould normally find in an iq test. It still was much easier for me to see the patterns if I read it from left to right then went down to the next line, sooa for someone who is japaneese for example, I still think it will be harder for them because they are used to reading it from right to left.


Well, many accepted standardized tests of intelligence are not culturally biased. Some of them are, like SAT/ACT. However, many of them are not. I really dont think cultural bias is an acceptable excuse anymore because there are multiple facets in which a person may test themselves if they think one may not be as fair as the other.

For me, most of the tests ive taken require only a basic "mastery" of the English language. I took some type of general aptitude test once that had questions requiring graphical knowledge of the immediate area. That was bizarre. I think most tests now are beyond that and that is a small step for man... giant leap for humankind or w/e the saying is.


----------



## sprinkles

babayaga94 said:


> But It got me thinking;
> Even tho the test is "culturally unbiased" because it does not include verbal stuff and general knowledge you whould normally find in an iq test. It still was much easier for me to see the patterns if I read it from left to right then went down to the next line, sooa for someone who is japaneese for example, I still think it will be harder for them because they are used to reading it from right to left.


Figuring out which way to read it would presumably be part of the test. Assuming that they are all meant to be read in one direction and that it isn't going to be changed up is thinking rather vertically as opposed to laterally.


----------



## WamphyriThrall

I scored 110, which is strange considering I've taken the exact test before and scored slightly higher, with the original score closer to that of @sprinkles. I was sure I'd do better this time.. And while I don't trust online IQ tests, I do think this one is a lot more honest than others floating around, where anyone can get 150+ with little effort. 

What's curious is that the perceiving types so far seem to be scoring higher than the judging types. I have a hard time believing it's coincidence.


----------



## Ashneversleeps

WamphyriThrall said:


> *I scored 110, which is strange considering I've taken the exact test before and scored slightly higher,* with the original score closer to that of @_sprinkles_. I was sure I'd do better this time.. And while I don't trust online IQ tests, I do think this one is a lot more honest than others floating around, where anyone can get 150+ with little effort.
> 
> What's curious is that the perceiving types so far seem to be scoring higher than the judging types. I have a hard time believing it's coincidence.


Hrm, I remember taking this test a year or so ago and I got 115ish. Today I got 106 :dry:. Glad to know I'm not the only one with an apparent troll brain.

Interesting note about perceiving types/judging types; I hadn't noticed that.


----------



## Ziwosa

WamphyriThrall said:


> What's curious is that the perceiving types so far seem to be scoring higher than the judging types. I have a hard time believing it's coincidence.


From what I've read, NT's have the highest chance to score well on intelligence tests like the one in this thread.
E/I and J/P did not seem to make any difference. I can't quote the source though.


----------



## Seahawk

I got a 130


----------



## Ziwosa

Seahawk said:


> View attachment 39060
> 
> 
> I got a 130


Trying to spare bandwidth?


----------



## KneeSeekerArrow

137 am I smart now?


----------



## Seahawk

I'm trying to be courteous to my cyber-friends, no one likes a bandwidth hog . haha.


----------



## Ziwosa

Seahawk said:


> no one likes a bandwidth hog . haha.


But I do


----------



## Seahawk

Ziwosa said:


> But I do


My apologies.


----------



## babayaga94

sprinkles said:


> Figuring out which way to read it would presumably be part of the test. Assuming that they are all meant to be read in one direction and that it isn't going to be changed up is thinking rather vertically as opposed to laterally.


Many of the options are like 1+1=2 when you read from left to right.
And if you read from right to left it is 2=1+1, that gets kinda harder. But you have to admit someone who is used to "western" languages reads it correct just naturally without even thinking about the fact that he is maybe not reading it correct.
And someone who is japaneese who forgets to think about the fact that he is maybe not reading it correct when he is reading it naturally therfore comes out with a disadvantage.


----------



## Ziwosa

babayaga94 said:


> Many of the options are like 1+1=2 when you read from left to right.
> And if you read from right to left it is 2=1+1, that gets kinda harder. But you have to admit someone who is used to "western" languages reads it correct just naturally without even thinking about the fact that he is maybe not reading it correct.
> And someone who is japaneese who forgets to think about the fact that he is maybe not reading it correct when he is reading it naturally therfore comes out with a disadvantage.


On this high degree of pattern searching, swapping from direction is stupid easy compared to the other patterns that need to be found.


----------



## babayaga94

Ziwosa said:


> On this high degree of pattern searching, swapping from direction is stupid easy compared to the other patterns that need to be found.


I did not say this with mensa level people in mind.


----------



## Reicheru

meh... i got bored.









:tongue:


----------



## nottie

Jeez, this thing felt long. I started panicking and rushing half way through before I realized I had 30 some minutes left, not spent. But then, my sense of time sucks ass.


----------



## Stelmaria

Does anyone know how this test was normed? They say it is based on 250,000 samples, but give no indications on what sort of sample this was.


----------



## Doctor von Science

I got 135. On most standard (American) IQ Tests I have scored between 145 and 150. Interesting how an "unbiased" test affects that score.

There were a couple near the end that I just could not figure out (The checkerboard one and the one with the Xs, Os, and ▲s). Anyone notice the pattern and want to explain? I'm really curious now...


----------



## Jewl

By question 22, my brain started dying. It seems my IQ varies from test to test from anywhere between 80-100. This one scored me as 98, but I never got past question 22, and I still had time left. XD I hate IQ tests. Those sorts of questions always make me go _insane_. Thinking in that manner is definitely not my strong point. In fact, it's my weak point. 

I will restrain myself from going on a long tangent about the narrowness of IQ.


----------



## Pre

122... lol 
10char


----------



## Pre

Reicheru said:


> meh... i got bored.
> 
> View attachment 39064
> 
> 
> :tongue:


That certainly is believable


----------



## BeauGarcon

115, I feel bad to see people scoring higher than me... Thanks for ruining my day. Personally for me: I don't care, I never wanted to be an engineer or mathematician (there is correlation between matrix reasoning test score - this test - and being an engineer).

Anyway, my verbal iq would probably be higher anyway (knowledge, associations; has to do with the ability to make abstractions, comprehension, etc).


----------



## Reicheru

Pre said:


> That certainly is believable


... thank you? i think? lol! i haven't seen you around before. welcome to PerC!

@BeauGarcon and anyone else in the same position - don't worry about it. IQ is (in my opinion) not as objective as it's made out to be at all. intelligence isn't completely definable. sure, i might score higher than average on one of these tests, but it doesn't help me much in real life - i'm still as dithering, absent-minded, scatterbrained, clumsy, volatile, forgetful and socially inappropriate as i was before. we all have our weaknesses, and i have many.

there's always someone better at something than you are, many of them holding much greater gravity than an online test. don't let this thing tell you who you are or should be. (i have absolutely no plans to become an engineer - that kinda stuff's way over my head...)

besides, remember... there'll be lots of people scoring lower than you, as well! comparing yourself to others, whether it be for looks or IQ never works. just skews your perspective on things and makes you feel bad. please don't take it to heart. <3


----------



## KeroPanda

Dark Romantic said:


> It only measures nonverbal intelligence, though. Also, if neither getting the correct answers or completing it in a certain amount of time will affect your result, what does?


Non-verbal tests are a good way of measuring IQ in the realm of psychology. Generally it'll have a boosting effect on the other types of intelligences that a person can do well on.

My score seems to be around 110-115, but I've taken it several times. I've scored higher, but there are studies basically suggesting that practice can increase the score by around 10 points (so, real score is around 110).

Didn't even see how old this post was.


----------



## saturnne

That was physically grueling (panting) - 133. I've scored 138-147 on regular IQ tests before, but these are ALL not official.


----------



## saturnne

Doctor von Science said:


> I got 135. On most standard (American) IQ Tests I have scored between 145 and 150. Interesting how an "unbiased" test affects that score.
> 
> There were a couple near the end that I just could not figure out (The checkerboard one and the one with the Xs, Os, and ▲s). Anyone notice the pattern and want to explain? I'm really curious now...


Me too! Eh


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

KeroKai said:


> Non-verbal tests are a good way of measuring IQ in the realm of psychology. Generally it'll have a boosting effect on the other types of intelligences that a person can do well on.


Then explain to me why I was able to get into the gifted program in my school while doing less than stellar on this? (It took 119+ to get into that, just as a reminder everyone.)


----------



## Doctor von Science

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Then explain to me why I was able to get into the gifted program in my school while doing less than stellar on this. (It took 119+ to get into that, just as a reminder everyone.)


Because the test to get into the gifted program was a properly administered, official test that focused on more than just nonverbal intelligence and was evaluated by a licensed professional whereas this was an internet-based test focusing simply on nonverbal pattern recognition? Just a guess...

While nonverbal intelligence CAN help boost aptitude in other areas, it is not a strictly necessary component of having a higher-than-average IQ.


----------



## KeroPanda

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> Then explain to me why I was able to get into the gifted program in my school while doing less than stellar on this? (It took 119+ to get into that, just as a reminder everyone.)


Let me read up more on the difference between non-verbal and verbal IQ tests. I'm just pretty sure that non-verbal IQ tests are a good predictor of general intelligence more so than other test types. That's not to say that a person can't excel in another type of intelligence.

But generally I think people are more likely to perform worse online than in real life since they aren't compelled to dedicate all their time to solving these puzzles? Did you use up the full 40 minutes?

Anyhow looks like I might have been wrong. 
They both seem to have equal loading on general intelligence. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir

KeroKai said:


> But generally I think people are more likely to perform worse online than in real life since they aren't compelled to dedicate all their time to solving these puzzles? Did you use up the full 40 minutes?


I saw the "retake the test again" thing before you changed it.  ...I did retake it a couple of days ago and ended up getting 112, but it could have very much been remembering the answers to the easy questions (thus giving me more time) and luck. 

Both times, I was very close to run out of time. Perhaps a few minutes or so? ...I'm honestly starting to think that there's something wrong with me. I'm not sure if I could have ADD that hasn't been diagnosed or if I have a processing problem. It always took me longer to my work in my high school calculus class, for example. However, I understood the concepts/how to do the problems just as well as anyone else in that class. Teachers would also give me extra time to finish tests too. I did double-check my work a lot, but I don't think that's the issue since there would be questions I hadn't gotten to by the time the next period started.


----------



## CataclysmSolace

Gnothi Seauton said:


> 107
> 
> I was expecting a bit lower since I just guessed on the last ones. Cool test, though.


 Same for me, felt a bit insulted when I got it though. Also, from what I remember, most IQ tests suck, I don't know about this one though. Anyways, how good is 107? LOL…


----------



## mushr00m

I got 104, is that supposed to be good/mediocre/bad?


----------



## KeroPanda

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> I saw the "retake the test again" thing before you changed it.  ...I did retake it a couple of days ago and ended up getting 112, but it could have very much been remembering the answers to the easy questions (thus giving me more time) and luck.
> 
> Both times, I was very close to run out of time. Perhaps a few minutes or so? ...I'm honestly starting to think that there's something wrong with me. I'm not sure if I could have ADD that hasn't been diagnosed or if I have a processing problem. It always took me longer to my work in my high school calculus class, for example. However, I understood the concepts/how to do the problems just as well as anyone else in that class. Teachers would also give me extra time to finish tests too. I did double-check my work a lot, but I don't think that's the issue since there would be questions I hadn't gotten to by the time the next period started.


Yeah. I do know what you mean about the time limit thing.
The test seems to give the impression it's not about processing speed but ability to process. I guess 40 minute is placed there to stop the thing from lasting forever.


----------



## Bear987

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> The reason tests are timed is for standardization purposes. Conditions have to be the same for everyone, or otherwise the results aren't valid.


I was of the impression that, especially IQ tests are timed to keep track of how fast you work out a series of problems. The faster your brain works, the higher the score. In this way, IQ tests favor fast brains over slow ones.

In my experience, IQ tests are more about how fast your brain works than anything else. The flexibility of your brain is put to the test by making you do a series of entirely different sort of problems / questions. It seems to me that IQ tests aren't interested in measuring how much you know about how many different topics. For this reason, I think IQ tests scores are overrated - especially the higher ones, that for some reason give rise to bragging.


----------



## Obsidean

I got 114. Kinda disappointed, one off a standard deviation, but overall I can't complain.


----------



## KeroPanda

Bear987 said:


> I was of the impression that, especially IQ tests are timed to keep track of how fast you work out a series of problems. The faster your brain works, the higher the score. In this way, IQ tests favor fast brains over slow ones.
> 
> In my experience, IQ tests are more about how fast your brain works than anything else. The flexibility of your brain is put to the test by making you do a series of entirely different sort of problems / questions. It seems to me that IQ tests aren't interested in measuring how much you know about how many different topics. For this reason, I think IQ tests scores are overrated - especially the higher ones, that for some reason give rise to bragging.


From what I've seen, there are also tests for processing speed while testing for IQ. You get a whole load of people with learning disabilities that are caused by slow processing speed even if they are capable of solving the issues given enough time.

It's a little like the dyslexic/dysgraphia issue about whether these individuals should receive extra time during examination. With people arguing that all students would benefit from extra time, while others arguing that extra time would not significantly change the score of those that don't have learning disabilities.


----------



## Wakachi

Would it be better to use reaction rates as another companion to IQ tests?

I got 126 but I don't know how long I spent on it.


----------



## StellarTwirl

My score was 133.

Once you get a general sense of the pattern, you can immediately narrow down your options to what's possible. Then it's easier to choose among those. 

It's only testing a specific form of pattern recognition. And if you want to get more literal, it tests the ability to select icons over the internet. The list of skills I'd rather have would pretty much be a list of every skill. : P


----------



## Anonymousss

I realize this thread is about a year old, but I was curious about this topic and Google led me to this page.

About timed vs untimed tests in relation to IQ, I am inclined to believe that speed both is and is not a facet of intelligence. Some people have the ability to process relatively simple patterns/problems quickly (Group-A), whereas others can process exceedingly complex problems when untimed (Group-B).

One of the smartest people I have ever known only had a 1260 on his SAT. And another friend I have from college had grades consisting of mostly B-/B's, yet he was the only one in my accelerated organic chemistry class who solved a complex problem that the teacher gave us all class to do. Grades do generally correlate with intelligence, but it's a fact that some of the smartest people only do above average in school.

Exams like the SAT (math section) assess whether you can answer very simple problems quickly (Group-A). It's likely that some very intelligent people also have high processing speed (justifying their high SAT scores), but one's intellectual **ceiling** is actually entirely independent of speed. In other words, just because someone can solve ten easy to moderate-difficulty probability problems faster than someone else doesn't mean he or she can solve a single complex number problem, relative to that other person, when untimed.

For instance, I fall into Group-B. I only got a 1290 on my SAT (out of 1600), but I've beaten friends of mine on math Olympiads who scored in the 1500s. Math Olympiads are six-question tests that you have two hours to complete. The problems are usually extremely difficult (in general, answering 3/6 per form is really good; most people get zero, one or two correct; getting five is very rare; six almost never occurs), but because time is not a factor, you can comfortably reason through to the solutions.

In high school, those of us in accelerated math completed ~15 Olympiads over the course of the year. I would usually get 3s or 4s, and an occasional 2 or 5, however I hadn't particularly inquired as to how other people had performed. I thought the Olympiads were just for fun because they became extra-credit points on our tests. But at the end of the year, at the awards ceremony, they called up the top three scorers: I recall specifically that the third- and second-place scorers had 1560 & 1530 on their SATs, respectively. The second-place guy was also our class valedictorian and everyone knew him as being exceptionally brilliant. I remember making silent guesses as to which other high-achiever in our class was going to get first place, and then when they called the winner...*drumroll*... it was I. I was absolutely shocked. Stunned to say the least. As were some other people probably. I had *never* been a particularly strong student in any regard (finished in the top-20% of my class). But at the same time, my entire life I had felt that my performance in school never matched my intelligence. I always assumed that it was a self-preservation mechanism to believe that we're smarter than we really are just because there's nothing we can do about it, and although that's likely true to a degree, when I won that math competition, I realized that no standardized system nor test can possibly be sensitive enough to identify all intelligent people.

Why am I writing this story?

I recently just took an official Mensa qualifying test because the online practice version said I would likely get in. Mensa administers the Cattell and Culture Fair-III back-to-back. You gain admission if you score >98%tile on either. The Cattell was absolutely idiotic and essentially the same as the PSAT. It had vocabulary on it. Some of it I simply didn't know and I was making random guesses, well aware of the fact that I wasn't performing well. Now let me make a point: I'm in medical school, and I spend 8-10 hrs/day studying science-related stuff. Are you really trying to tell me that if I instead spend my time reading literature and a dictionary that I'd magically become more intelligent? The Cattell is bogus. It's not an intelligence test; it's an English proficiency test. Then there's the Culture Fair-III. Based on Mensa's online pre-test, I knew the Culture Fair might be a fast test, but I didn't realize it would be that fast. The problems/patterns were absurdly simple, but I simply did not have enough time to finish them. The test is 50 questions in 12.5 minutes! Anyway, I just found out that I did not qualify for Mensa via either of the tests. I was disappointed initially and went searching online for articles (to feel better about myself) justifying that intelligent people might not perform well under timed conditions. One article I encountered mentioned a study of 160 high school students and found that increased problem complexity and IQ demonstrated a higher relative correlation when subjects were untimed vs timed. Then I remembered the math Olympiad and realized that timed tests are merely just one way of measuring an individual's abilities. After all, IQ is supposed to reflect our ceiling isn't it? I've read online that the new edition of the Stanford-Binet and WAIS have moved toward including more untimed elements (gee, I wonder why). I'm curious as to how I'd do on either of those. As for Mensa, it's "smart" that they'd use the Culture Fair-III as their qualifying test because it's the fastest one out there; their employees couldn't be bothered to sit around all day ;-)


----------



## Psithurism

I got 126, but I didn't answer 7 questions. I kinda forgot it was timed and because I have this slight OCD (I have to revise my answer even though I'm sure it's the answer just to be even more sure, sometimes more than once). I didn't ''guess'' any questions though, all my answers were logical in my head. I guess I could re-do it and choose the first answers fast now that they are memorized.


----------



## Constant

I got a 101.


----------



## chibiidol

104.... I want to be a computer programmer. 
oh well, i refuse to give up. But based on this i have my work cut out for me


----------



## zyxwvut

I got a 135

I've always been good at these types of things though.


----------



## vellocent

110 This must be a more accurate test than most online, because I generally score between 10-30 points higher than that. The last question was killer, I was twisting them around in my head and thinking of what it possibly could be, I eventually gave up and guessed.


----------



## Belzy

What's the max score anyway?


----------



## xlr8r

Aenye said:


> Could somebody enlighten me on the logic of those 'sticks'? I always hated them.


No problem. Your cat making pizza is probably the nicest thing of this forum.


----------



## Aenye

xlr8r said:


> No problem. Your cat making pizza is probably the nicest thing of this forum.


And more useful than sticks! (I actually have a cat that in a way acts as chef assistant)

Explanation, please, enlighten us all; what are these about? 










*Sticks*: 


I will never do these tests again, but I'd like to know what is this about and then have a nice life.


----------



## tangosthenes

* *






Aenye said:


> And more useful than sticks! (I actually have a cat that in a way acts as chef assistant)
> 
> Explanation, please, enlighten us all; what are these about?
> 
> 
> *Symbols move one to the right and X->O, Δ->X,O->Δ. If it goes off the edge, it comes back on the next row left-most box. If it falls off the bottom right it comes back in the top-left.*
> 
> 
> *No damn clue.*
> 
> 
> 
> *Dunno this one either*
> *Sticks*:
> 
> 
> *Each line segment between the dots rotates clockwise 45 degrees per instance. If it goes off the screen it rotates around the centerpoint, and comes all the way around to the closest dot on the same side.(Answer is A)*
> 
> I will never do these tests again, but I'd like to know what is this about and then have a nice life.






I explained two of them in the spoiler.


----------



## xlr8r

36 has same number of colored pieces

37 dots move forward and squares appear

I did that long ago and scored 135 if I well remember.


----------



## Carmine Ermine

Any test will have an element of that famous picture of different animals being tested by their aptitude of climbing a tree. This applies to athletics competitions as well as IQ tests, but are there people asking for a "culturally unbiased" 100 m sprint?


----------



## Aenye

xlr8r said:


> 36 has same number of colored pieces
> 
> 37 dots move forward and squares appear
> 
> I did that long ago and scored 135 if I well remember.




I think I see it now! So, 36 would be E?

As for 37 I can't quite figure out the pattern (logic).

But nvm that. Thank you.


----------



## xlr8r

Aenye said:


> I think I see it now! So, 36 would be E?
> 
> As for 37 I can't quite figure out the pattern (logic).
> 
> But nvm that. Thank you.


No F :tongue: the lines go up left and right the missing is F.

37 H The dots move to right and are covered by the squares. They change full/empty.


----------



## Aenye

xlr8r said:


> 37 H The dots move to right and are covered by the squares. They change full/empty.












I don't know who you are, but I'll find you, take out your brains and put them in my head.

Seriously, dunno why, but I had such a good laugh (hadn't had a laugh at all for months actually) <Thanks for this too.


----------



## Kingpin

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf
> 
> EDIT: My finger slipped before I could finish the post and it somehow was submitted. Could a mod take away the quotation mark? (I was going to put quotation marks around "culturally unbiased" but that seems rather pointless now.)
> 
> Anyway, I got bored and searched for an online IQ test to take. The strange thing about this test is that it only had one type of question: finding patterns. The first few were easy enough, but some of the harder ones broke my brain. Some of the "patterns" seemed random in organization. I guessed on a good number of them and scored 106. Thus, my real score was likely lower. Now, I would discredit this if it weren't for the fact that the Danish branch of Mensa seemed to be involved it.
> 
> ...I feel utterly retarded. :crying:


106 is average 
most people get between 100 and 110


----------



## DiamondDays

saintmalo said:


> I had to take an IQ test for a research study recently and scored 141. Wasn't sure if that was average, high, low or whatever. I didn't want to ask or look it up incase it was bad haha. But I took this one because it's Mensa and online test thingies are fun. Why not!
> When I found it was just going to be spatial stuff I knew I wasn't going to fare well though. I got 126.


I hope you are aware that an IQ of 126 is pretty fucking good?


----------



## Coonsy

Got a 122, but I guessed on the last one and one other one...still had 12 minutes left over, but was bored with trying to figure it out lol


----------



## an absurd man

126


----------



## Praying Mantis

126 with a deviation of 15. Guess that would compensate for the amount of guessing I did, especially at the last several items. I'd guess the score means that my visual-spatial intelligence is my Waterloo.


----------



## xlr8r

DiamondDays said:


> I hope you are aware that an IQ of 126 is pretty fucking good?


:tongue:

Well seeing this thread it seems just average.

Must be this site attracts the brightest brains.


----------



## DiamondDays

xlr8r said:


> :tongue:
> 
> Well seeing this thread it seems just average.
> 
> Must be this site attracts the brightest brains.


It is better than something like 90% of people.


----------



## DiamondDays

Praying Mantis said:


> 126 with a deviation of 15. Guess that would compensate for the amount of guessing I did, especially at the last several items. I'd guess the score means that my visual-spatial intelligence is my Waterloo.


Again. 126 is good.


----------



## Swede

xlr8r said:


> :tongue:
> 
> Well seeing this thread it seems just average.
> 
> Must be this site attracts the brightest brains.


I assume that people who normally score high on IQ tests are more likely to take this test and people who scored high on this test are more likely to post their score here. Not very strange.


----------



## Praying Mantis

It's a blatant example of "Who's got the biggest stick?" It's a pissing contest. It's an ego booster (and who could be the most competent engineer). @Swede


----------



## Swede

Praying Mantis said:


> It's a blatant example of "Who's got the biggest stick?" It's a pissing contest. It's an ego booster (and who could be the most competent engineer). @_Swede_


Yep exactly. Reminds me of the thread where members post their heights and weights. According to that thread we are unusually slender too... :kitteh:


----------



## xlr8r

Praying Mantis said:


> It's a blatant example of "Who's got the biggest stick?" It's a pissing contest. It's an ego booster (and who could be the most competent engineer).


Well in the other IQ thread I asked how super intelligent people use their IQ, but my question did not meet much success.

And in the thread about the super intimidating INTJ women, I asked the same thing and no answer too.

I tried.


----------



## Swede

xlr8r said:


> And in the thread about the super intimidating INTJ women, I asked the same thing and no answer too.


We point out the obviously skewed results in this thread... :wink:


----------



## xlr8r

Swede said:


> We point out the obviously skewed results in this thread... :wink:


Does this mean INTJ women are not so really intelligent?

But I think they are, sincerely.

Problem is, I read on the Internet women decide if they will go to bed with a man in the first 3 seconds after meeting him (more or less unconsciously).

So, the sole way I see to appeal to the intelligence of an INTJ woman in 3 seconds is write E=mc^2 on a napkin and giving it to her.


----------



## Husgark

I got 138 on that test. I have taken a similar test before with just figures, patterns etc. where I got 143, which is pretty close.


----------



## Reicheru

Aenye said:


> Yes. Intelligence is about solving new challenges as fast as possible. The more efficient you are time and solution-wise, the better you are. It's not the same if sb gets an answer right in 20 sec and sb who takes 20 minutes for it.
> 
> Let's just deal with it.


i love how you cherry-picked my post to leave out the actual meat of it lol. k but u wrong doe.

timed tests put people under pressure. someone who doesn't handle that kind of pressure well could be cleverer than anyone else in the exam room and not even manage to finish it because of nerves. meaning the test reflects anxiety under pressure much more than intelligence, skewing the results.

there's really nothing to "just deal with." it's a valid criticism.


----------



## marsec

Pretty sure I bombed on 34/37/39, everything else was fun to figure out. Wasn't sure I'd find my brain in the vat of college alcohol I've been keeping it in


----------



## VoodooDolls

i got 105 but i didn't answered the last 10 questions, i mean i answered them but i got tired and choose randomly so maybe i was lucky and choose them correctly or i'm just a normal person.


----------



## JTHearts

I'm not going to take it because I have slow processing speed and I know I'm an idiot so why should I even try?


----------



## DualGnosis

I can only dream of becoming a genius T__T

Only 126. :crying: I bring the INTP name to shame.


----------



## AddictiveMuse

the thing with this is, it doesn't give you an option to post your age
so i think scores would vary because of age
..would it not?


----------



## idoh

i got 133 ><


----------



## AddictiveMuse

idoh said:


> i got 133 ><


looks like it's MENSA for you


----------



## zazara

100

I am completely normal. Right on the dot. 

How boring. If I can't be smart, at least put me in the double digits. :dry:


----------



## Moonrise

xlr8r said:


> Well in the other IQ thread I asked how super intelligent people use their IQ, but my question did not meet much success.
> 
> And in the thread about the super intimidating INTJ women, I asked the same thing and no answer too.
> 
> I tried.


I have an IQ somewhere over 140 (not sure how high, exactly- never given the precise result, only told I was gifted, later learned what that meant. It may be just 140, or quite a lot higher. I was tested professionally).

I am an advertisement for the people that claim IQ has nothing to do with success. I piss away intelligence thinking about religion and nature and spirituality. I don't like the idea of being stringent and detail-oriented, and I really, utterly despise school and hard work. I don't do badly, I get between low As and Bs without fail, but I could, and maybe should, be getting high As in everything.

I'm also not so sure I'll change much. I'm hoping to study psychology in college, and if I love that, I'd be delighted. Otherwise, I fear I'll disappoint my parents and fail to earn millions of euros each year. To be honest, I hate my high IQ. It's useful being smart, but overall the only thing it does is raise expectations of me to a point where fulfilling them causes me unhappiness. I want to find a peaceful, low-stress job, and while away my "intelligence" reading, writing, and playing with animals.

Another thing worth noting is that I've found that more naturally intelligent people (whether IQ measures that correctly, I'm not sure) seem to have more problems than less. My most intelligent friends struggle all the time to find a place or a calling, and some of them are getting into bad crutches. They all feel really bad about not liking westernism and societal expectations and all that sort of thingg. My less academic friends have an easier time just following the traditional narrative of born-work-marriage-retire. I myself have struggled all my life with anxiety, and am transgender (still figuring it out).

For what it's worth, the people with the highest IQs I know of are all lazy and mediocre academically, though are extremely good in their skills of choice (languages, computers, writing, etc.)

I'm sorry if this post seemed like some humble-boast, heck, I'm sorry if it was, but I felt like writing anything and yours was the first post I saw that I felt like I had anything of note to reply with. I hope it wasn't a completely useless read.


----------



## AddictiveMuse

i think IQ is just another stupid necessity we have created to give others a reason to consider themselves higher than the other


----------



## bearlybreathing

104. Fuck, I'm average. :sad:


----------



## VoodooDolls

did it again 110 this time i did try.


----------



## Sporadic Aura

132. I'm just good at this type of test though, it's fun. Have no idea what my real IQ is anymore, nor do I care.


----------



## Sporadic Aura

AddictiveMuse said:


> the thing with this is, it doesn't give you an option to post your age
> so i think scores would vary because of age
> ..would it not?





AddictiveMuse said:


> looks like it's MENSA for you





AddictiveMuse said:


> i think IQ is just another stupid necessity we have created to give others a reason to consider themselves higher than the other


Translation: got a low score and is now upset.

I kid... :tongue:


----------



## Dosto Yevsky

me sCOrd 52 dussit meen me sMArt??

me leettl woRrIEd ovr dis dUNNin rugER dang... mebBe me just lyIN?


----------



## Kazoo The Kid

This isn't a real IQ test. Real IQ test must be given by psychologist and measure more then just pattern recongization. They have verbal intelligence, working memory, and 2 other subtest to get a better score that captures intelligence in a superior way.

Also sometimes the questions are read for you and the measure you score in a much more eloborate formula that works on a 100 score average with a standard deviation of 15. So if you got a 106 that's average.

It also measures individual scores in different intelligences. I got a 131 in Verbal reasoning, but 86 in working memory. The test was like an hour. And this was only one of the various IQ test. I think I took the Welscher one. 

Also real ones cost a lot of money. I got one for free for placement purposes and its a lot more complicated and in depth then this test. And test like this frankly make IQ testing look bad and seem trivial. They are a lot more helpful than you would think.


----------



## Dr Wahwee

iahve onlee Got 126. ah wood Pat Maself on tha Bak, butt... Evrywan ahn da Inernet iz a Gene yes.


----------



## Psychophant

Kazoo said:


> This isn't a real IQ test. Real IQ test must be given by psychologist and measure more then just pattern recongization. They have verbal intelligence, working memory, and 2 other subtest to get a better score that captures intelligence in a superior way.
> 
> Also sometimes the questions are read for you and the measure you score in a much more eloborate formula that works on a 100 score average with a standard deviation of 15. So if you got a 106 that's average.
> 
> It also measures individual scores in different intelligences. I got a 131 in Verbal reasoning, but 86 in working memory. The test was like an hour. And this was only one of the various IQ test. I think I took the Welscher one.
> 
> Also real ones cost a lot of money. I got one for free for placement purposes and its a lot more complicated and in depth then this test. And test like this frankly make IQ testing look bad and seem trivial. They are a lot more helpful than you would think.


That's not totally true. Raven's Progressive Matrices tests have been administered for over fifty years as a "culturally unbaised" form of intelligence testing, and Mensa accepts them as valid. Granted, this is a specific facet of intelligence, but it does happen to correlate most strongly to general intelligence test scores. Also, it doesn't matter how the test is conducted; any test of this nature can be perfected to have a mean score of 100 and standard deviation of 15 points as long as the distribution is gaussian. Granted, this test likely isn't super accurate, but that is because of calibration issues, not the type of test.


----------



## Sporadic Aura

I think Ti-users are really well suited for this test. Breaking down the patterns to find the logic behind it is something I really associate with Ti. I got 136 this time, an improvement from 132 I got last time. Dunno what my real IQ is. 

I bet Ti-users do better on this test than Te-users though.


----------



## xisnotx

culture and intelligence seem inseparably linked


----------



## EternalFrost

107 : D my head hurts


----------



## stargazing grasshopper

Sporadic Aura said:


> I think Ti-users are really well suited for this test. Breaking down the patterns to find the logic behind it is something I really associate with Ti. I got 136 this time, an improvement from 132 I got last time. Dunno what my real IQ is.
> 
> I bet Ti-users do better on this test than Te-users though.


Te user, my results were 140, 138 & 143.
I don't play video games, I prefer logic puzzles & games of strategy.
I gave up attempting to figure out which problem that I still answered incorrectly.


----------



## Sporadic Aura

stargazing grasshopper said:


> Te user, my results were 140, 138 & 143.
> I don't play video games, I prefer logic puzzles & games of strategy.
> I gave up attempting to figure out which problem that I still answered incorrectly.


I'm pretty sure I got #26 wrong. It was the only one that I literally couldn't find any pattern to. For all the others I thought I found some type of patterns. Which is weird because it wasn't even supposed to be a tough one.

I wish there was an answer page that explained the reasoning behind these.


----------



## Yeezus

138


----------



## Yeezus

Sporadic Aura said:


> I'm pretty sure I got #26 wrong. It was the only one that I literally couldn't find any pattern to. For all the others I thought I found some type of patterns. Which is weird because it wasn't even supposed to be a tough one.
> 
> I wish there was an answer page that explained the reasoning behind these.


For 26, all the lines just move clockwise one position, and when the little lines finish their cycle facing bottom, the re-appear again facing the top, and repeat.


----------



## MNiS

I just realized I never took this test. 140 for me.


----------



## Death Persuades

I had taken this before, but I went to my previous post and the image is no longer available. I retook it. I got 107.


----------



## Yeezus

For those interested Free IQ Test I found a harder test based on the same format.


----------



## Snakecharmer

Someone posted that test in the INTP forum recently.

By the time I decided to take it, the thread had been closed.

I got 135. I will admit I was a little jealous because @Bugs (my bf) scored 138. lol


----------



## Sporadic Aura

sporadic aura said:


> i got 136 this time
> .





snakecharmer said:


> i got 135.


IN YOUR FACE!! =p


----------



## Snakecharmer

Sporadic Aura said:


> IN YOUR FACE!! =p


:laughing:

:tongue:

I like puzzles and those kinds of tests. I've never been able to score higher than the 135 range, though.


----------



## He's a Superhero!

Angelic Gardevoir said:


> ...I feel utterly retarded. :crying:


Awww... *hugs*


An authentically culturally unbiased IQ test would be nice, but I would still feel like it's exclusive - you see there are many types of "intelligence", and someone could still score horribly on that test but be very intelligent in something different. Would the test cover all the different learning styles?
Also, I heard about a group that will only accept members who are past a certain number in the IQ test (culturally biased version), which just horrified me. No matter how high I score on that test I would never want to join that group.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar

Shit, got 108. Now I officially joined the ranks of the mentally retarded. I think I haven't even finished it. IIRC I got to question 35 before time ran out. Only filled out the ones I solved. Wasn't doing guesses. Couldn't do the last several or something and I bypassed most of them.

So, in primary school I had very high intelligence, in high school above average, now upper average, a.k.a. retarded. It's no wonder I can't learn anything. Guess I got really badly fucked up by the attacks in 2005 and the filthy subhuman social Darwinist terrorists trying to starve me during last decade.

I have severe learning difficulties since the attacks and the world is just making it worse by trying to starve me because of them:crying:. It's so sick, it's unbearable!


----------



## Razorsharp

122 but I did not do the last 7 questions. I did the test at work and had to answer a call for 7-8 minutes so I had no time to do the last questions. I guess this is quite accurate though. I normally score 125-140.

IQ-measurements though are quite irrelevant in my opinion. This is a test of pattern recognition. One can score high on it and still be a douche.

Having said that I am happy with my result.


----------



## Razorsharp

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> Shit, got 108. Now I officially joined the ranks of the mentally retarded. I think I haven't even finished it. IIRC I got to question 35 before time ran out. Only filled out the ones I solved. Wasn't doing guesses. Couldn't do the last several or something and I bypassed most of them.
> 
> So, in primary school I had very high intelligence, in high school above average, now upper average, a.k.a. retarded. It's no wonder I can't learn anything. Guess I got really badly fucked up by the attacks in 2005 and the filthy subhuman social Darwinist terrorists trying to starve me during last decade.
> 
> I have severe learning difficulties since the attacks and the world is just making it worse by trying to starve me because of them:crying:. It's so sick, it's unbearable!


No problem being average intelligence. I am sure you can aspire to do something related to Crafts, I hear they have such programs to keep the mentally challenged occupied. And since your intelligence is decreasing over time I would suggest finding something to do as soon as possible, put it in muscle memory and VOILA! There is something even you can contribute with! 

Say it "I am average and proud!"

I'm sorry dude, but your post was so funny I could not help but to agree and pile on. Dont judge me too hard. :wink:


----------



## Madman

Shiver said:


> Where's the rest of the test?


What do mean?


----------



## warxzawa

they have to do shorter test, i got bored at 22


----------

