# Feelers and IQ



## doris88 (May 8, 2012)

I wonder if Feelers have statically the same scores in IQ test as Thinkers, or is IQ test in favour of thinking types? Or are we just... less intellectually able lol 

I ask because I've always considered myself IQtestwise very stupid. I was raised to believed I'm a smart person, being admitted to elite university should make me certain of it, but... When I was 16-teen I took unofficial IQ test (online or in a newspaper, I don't remember) and when I got a score, I probably cried, because it was the same score our class jerk got and he was really dumb as monkey. One year later or so I took the test again and my score was some 10-20 points higher, then I took it later again and again it was higher. I don't know if IQ detector stops working after a few trials and I'm really stupid, or I'm really smart and my first trial should not be taken into account.

Anyway, if it's the first thing, I was thinking if my presumably low IQ score could have anything to do with my INFPness. Maybe INFPs get lower scores because they dream in between during taking the test? xD So, let's share some opinions, if you're smart, feel free to boast, if it's oh so low, you can finally tell your secret without being taken for Forrest Gump


----------



## viva (Aug 13, 2010)

I don't believe there is a bias within IQ tests that would affect feelers.

I think the tests are more biased towards intuitives than anything else, if you had to pick a dichotomy.

And in terms of your low score being because you're an INFP-- that's doubtful. Maybe it was just because you spaced out during the test, but I'm xNFP and have always scored fairly high and know lots of NFs who have high IQ scores as well. Same with SATs. I don't think there is a correlation with personality.


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

as a person who has taken mucho IQ tests in years past, I can honestly say IQ tests are bullshit

there are plenty of types of intelligence around: emotional, aesthetic etc. and a high IQ doesn't guarantee having any of those

and I did meet people who probably couldn't cut it when faced with a tough IQ test but who are otherwise decent people, without any reservations

also, I met some smarmie MFers with high IQ scores who are utterly repulsive as people

I personally could not care less about taking any more IQ tests unless it was mandatory for something useful

forget IQ, it's pointless


----------



## Murnando (Dec 10, 2011)

Being good at an IQ test doesn't make you "intelligent", it makes you good at IQ tests. 

It's perfectly reasonable for your logical problem solving skills to be awful and still be very intelligent, and likewise your logical problem solving skills can be absolutely incredible whereas you're about as intelligent as an earthworm. It's the same as being one of those kids that's born amazing at maths.


----------



## KateMarie999 (Dec 20, 2011)

I don't test too well. In fact, I once tested as 107, which is below average. However, my boyfriend, who is an NT with an IQ in the 140s, says I'm extremely intelligent, not just because he loves me to death, but because he's noticed that my thought process is just different than what the IQ test measures. Plus, I have ADD. I have trouble with those kinds of tests anyway.

I think IQ tests are ridiculous. Someone with an extremely low IQ could be a genius and never even know it.


----------



## doris88 (May 8, 2012)

KateMarie999 said:


> I don't test too well. In fact, I once tested as 107, which is below average. However, my boyfriend, who is an NT with an IQ in the 140s, says I'm extremely intelligent, not just because he loves me to death, but because he's noticed that my thought process is just different than what the IQ test measures. Plus, I have ADD. I have trouble with those kinds of tests anyway.
> 
> I think IQ tests are ridiculous. Someone with an extremely low IQ could be a genius and never even know it.


The first time I tested 90, which is absurd, because I sort of thought people who have 90 don't even know what personality is, so I wouldn't be on this forum  I also remember scoring 120, which was more probable, but I'm not sure if it was my highest score or the middle one. I'm not taking this weird test anymore - what, you take it 20 times and you evolve from Al Bundy to mensa? It shouldn't work this way, it's not relevant at all.


----------



## Arrow (Mar 2, 2012)

KateMarie999 said:


> I don't test too well. In fact, I once tested as 107, which is below average.


107 isn't below average. 100 is the average IQ for people in general. As to the original question, my IQ ranges from 120-140 (I've been tested all threw out my life) and I am an INFP. I don't think feeling has anything to do with your IQ score or intelligence.


----------



## jeffbobs (Jan 27, 2012)

Just like what everyone else is saying really, IQ doesn't actually measure intelligence. 

I see it as more of a test of intuition, the questions are very intuitive, trying to connect of find things that are seeminglessly interconnected

If IQ was a test of intelligence then my IQ would indicate i shud be in a lab somewhere working on the cure for cancer or doing something worthwhile in my life. But infact the majority of people with really high IQ's do seem to be quite lazy and lack the get up and go attitude. 

Also if IQ was classed as intelligence, it would only be 1 type, and those scoring very high on it, would generally be really low on social intelligence.


----------



## amg7613 (May 15, 2012)

I think NF's tend to score high in emotional iq tests for sure....


----------



## Laguna (Mar 21, 2012)

I never took an IQ test. Where can I find a solid test?

I was always a great test taker- wether I studied the material or not. And quick test taker too. High on SATs. Curious what IQ would be- though in a way- I don't care (cuz I don't put much credence to IQ - else I probably would have taken it by now in my life.)  But would be fun I think.

I consider myself sharp and ditzy. Smart and clumsy.
I don't think you can be just "all that" like someone alluded to in this thread. We are all complex and have strengths and weaknesses. 

We have this need in society to measure the living crap out of everyone. Size everyone up. Put people UP and place people DOWN and in places in between.

One thing I will say though- my brain surgeon better be a major TJ. Just sayin.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

Makes me think only of the quote “Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.” 

Sometimes I can seem smart, sometimes I can appear idiotic. To call someone stupid is to dismiss the things that they are good at by focusing on their short comings. I would say that people like to learn in general, what they want to learn varies. How much effort they put into it would vary. Have a musician who can play anything, know all the theory but couldn't change a car tyre.
People are very capable of learning what ever we want, somethings we're naturally more interested in and better at, other things take more effort.​


----------



## Yomotsu Risouka (May 11, 2012)

...Really? There isn't a single person who will recognize that IQ tests strongly correlate with intelligence? They certainly aren't perfect, but they're far more accurate than this thread gives them credit for.

It's not like admitting some people are smarter than you is going to suddenly make you worth less as a person...


----------



## nolla (May 15, 2012)

IQ tests are overrated in my opinion. They don't tell how intelligent you are; rather, how good you are doing those tests. It's a pity that they are taken too seriously - I know many _(clever!)_ people who feel upset after taking the IQ test.


----------



## eternal_horizon (Apr 21, 2012)

doris88 said:


> I wonder if Feelers have statically the same scores in IQ test as Thinkers, or is IQ test in favour of thinking types? Or are we just... less intellectually able lol
> 
> I ask because I've always considered myself IQtestwise very stupid. I was raised to believed I'm a smart person, being admitted to elite university should make me certain of it, but... When I was 16-teen I took unofficial IQ test (online or in a newspaper, I don't remember) and when I got a score, I probably cried, because it was the same score our class jerk got and he was really dumb as monkey. One year later or so I took the test again and my score was some 10-20 points higher, then I took it later again and again it was higher. I don't know if IQ detector stops working after a few trials and I'm really stupid, or I'm really smart and my first trial should not be taken into account.
> 
> Anyway, if it's the first thing, I was thinking if my presumably low IQ score could have anything to do with my INFPness. Maybe INFPs get lower scores because they dream in between during taking the test? xD So, let's share some opinions, if you're smart, feel free to boast, if it's oh so low, you can finally tell your secret without being taken for Forrest Gump


Ha, I'm exactly the same, took an unofficial one earlier in the year scored so lowly I could have had a breakdown , but then I did one another day and it thought I was almost at genius level.
The point is, if they are unofficial they are in effect meaningless, and I have always been considered to be very intelligent growing up getting some of the best scores in all my exams without any study so the first test shocked me a bit.


----------



## saibot (May 21, 2012)

For what it's worth, in many profiles it is often said that INTJ have the highest collective IQ, closely followed by INTPs and INFJs.


----------



## Angra Mainyu1 (May 19, 2012)

Whenever someone asks me what my IQ is, I tell them "enough." I'm pretty sure I'm not giving them bad information, either.


----------



## daydr3am (Oct 20, 2010)

When I was 14, I took the official Stanford-Binet IQ test and scored 130. 130 is the lowest score possible in the gifted range. My INTJ BFF at the time had recently scored 141ish, putting her in a higher scale than mine. I'm sure I would have scored slightly higher if I knew anything about the government/how America works, because I remember not answering those questions and wishing I knew. I'm also sure that if I took the same test now, I would not score that high... lol.


----------



## jd_ (Feb 5, 2011)

A person who does well on the IQ test will think there is no bias, a person who doesn't do well will naturally think there is a bias. This is ego playing with you. 
There is no bias, it only is, it's one measure, and no it has nothing to do type.

Hi Daydream... are you sure they were telling you the truth, most of the scores are standardized by 5, so your final score would be 140, not 141 based on verbal/spatial. You know...teenagers can lie, and at that age, they probably shouldn't give you your score anyway. There wouldn't be one score anyway, but a verbal and spatial score, and each of those would have 6 dimensions or something.

So they would give your scores based on the current percent of everybody taking it, so a 130 should be the 98th percentile. So your score should actually read something like 130 +/- 5... or 130 +/- 6 ...depending on it, as issued by the Psychologist who evaluated you. The IQ (most forms) are on a Gaussian distribution and are normalized per population sets. So while you might not do well, they ARE putting you up against everybody else, and that *is* where you match up based on other people who took the test from that age range.

So if you actually KNOW you got the test at 130, in actuality according to the test... you are in the 125-135 range or 98th percentile range. 

Anybody giving some random # out, I would immediately call to question the validity of their statement, b/c that is not really how the tests are given.
They do this b/c they know the tests and stuff themselves aren't entirely accurate, but approximate, so they approximate it to the nearest 5 130/140/150... etc.

So I am not as familiar with S/B IQ... but it is modeled similarly, and this is how a Wechsler breaks down... you have 13 dimensions, 2 parts, 5 measure full scale, then you have 10 subsets. 

In evaluating, you have13 distinct sub-test divided into two scales - a Verbal Scale and a Performance Scale. The six Verbal Scale tests use language-based items, whereas the seven Performance Scales use visual-motor items that are less dependent on language. Five of the subtest in each scale produce scale-specific IQ'S, and the 10 sub-test scores produce a Full Scale IQ.

Each of the three IQ scales has an internal consistency reliability coefficient of .89 or above in the standardization group over the entire age range covered by the scale. Average internal consistency reliability coefficients, based on the 11 age groups, are .96 for the Full Scale IQ, .94 for the Verbal Scale IQ, and .90 for the Performance Scale IQ. 

These are repeated consistency standardizations, therefore, as I said above when they give you your number, it wouldn't be given as "141"... but yours, at 130, I wouldn't question.. you could have scored 133/132 ... or 128/129 ... you'd still be 130 +/- 5.

To put it in further perspective...they will normally give you a normative "mental age" during those years, and you should be able to peg a stat... so if you are 130, then only 1 out of 40 people score 130 or above and means you think quite differently... at JUST 135, would mean a 5 year gap in knowledge based on normative stats, and thus put you at 1 out of 1000 people... at 145 you are already in the 1 in 100,000 range, or 3000 people in the United States.

At the 130 range, you should already be as different mentally from the "normal' kids in the 85-115 range... as somebody who is mentally handicapped. The difference is THAT dramatic, supposedly. 

What I'm saying is, a *real* 130 score is pretty good, ~2 in 100 people. Which pretty much matches up about the amount who were in the gifted program in my middle school and high school...which at any point might have been 20-30 people total. Maybe And I'd question your friend getting 141... if that happens, the people are usually skipped 4-5 grades in advance, or start taking college courses when they are 12. Did your friend do that? They would be like whoa, wait a minute, what are we doing with this kid...they would have maxed out scores. So they would need some further tests done to them... So again, did your friend go through that procedure?

It is also possible you were given different versions, the L-M is a different version which measures extremes outside of the 98% range and would be more exactly the SB-IV or V is usually the starter ...that or the Wisc-III/R


----------



## pmj85 (Jul 31, 2010)

i scorred 126 bak when i waz 17 yrs old.

im' 26 nwo adn _fukken_ wel smart!!!!1!


----------



## ibage (May 5, 2012)

Tenebrae said:


> ...Really? There isn't a single person who will recognize that IQ tests strongly correlate with intelligence? They certainly aren't perfect, but they're far more accurate than this thread gives them credit for.
> 
> It's not like admitting some people are smarter than you is going to suddenly make you worth less as a person...


I think it's a completely relative opinion. My IQ is 136 and I view many people as more intelligent than I am. My younger brother's IQ is 124 and I consider him to be smarter than I am. I think some in this thread might view character as holding more value than intelligence so they place little stock in the actual test.

I personally think most, if not all IQ tests are utter bunk.


----------

