# What's your IQ?



## sly

Staffan said:


> He was seriously into religion and the occult, way more than mere convention: Isaac Newton's occult studies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I think he was INTP.


I think he was a weird fuck.


----------



## psychswot

Hmm a normal distribution centring around 130-140... the Flynn effect has really taken hold these days! XD


----------



## Staffan

psychswot said:


> Hmm a normal distribution centring around 130-140... the Flynn effect has really taken hold these days! XD


It's probably because those with high IQs are more likely to respond and that people in this forum are more intelligent than the average. Also, online tests may be flattering.

I think it was Eysenck who claimed that anything above 120 is of little importance. From there on other factors like personality and special abilities become more important. And yet people like to brag about IQ. No one says, "sure, I have only 115 but I am very conscientious".


----------



## Staffan

sly said:


> I think he was a weird fuck.


INTP, weird fuck - tomato, tomahto.


----------



## sly

Staffan said:


> INTP, weird fuck - tomato, tomahto.


But I do wonder though, does religious and secret societal stuff make him an INTP instead of INTJ?


----------



## Scruffy

I suppose being able to manipulate presented data is useful, but ultimately it is a flat skill. No room for passion, and no room for creativity, I find that the IQ score is little more than firm hand wrapped around the phallus of one's ego. 

I don't know why you bother posting results from an online test, the actual IQ tests are standardized. The online ones are someone's interpretation of the IQ, not the IQ. The tests should not call themselves a measure of IQ, because they measure an opinion of what an IQ is.


----------



## Staffan

Scruffy said:


> I suppose being able to manipulate presented data is useful, but ultimately it is a flat skill. No room for passion, and no room for creativity, I find that the IQ score is little more than firm hand wrapped around the phallus of one's ego.
> 
> I don't know why you bother posting results from an online test, the actual IQ tests are standardized. The online ones are someone's interpretation of the IQ, not the IQ. The tests should not call themselves a measure of IQ, because they measure an opinion of what an IQ is.


Online tests are probably not very reliable or valid. But whatever IQ measures it correlates to income and education. It's like one researcher in the field, Linda Gottfredson, said, when intelligent people dismiss IQ, it's like when rich people say that money doesn't matter.


----------



## Staffan

sly said:


> But I do wonder though, does religious and secret societal stuff make him an INTP instead of INTJ?


I think so. I'm an old school jungian so to me INTP reads introverted intuitive, secondary function thinking, and INTJ as having thinking as primary function and intuition as secondary. Jung puts a lot of emphasis on the primary function and Ni creates a person who connects ideas rather than thinking in terms of cause and effect, like a thinker. He mentions "mystical dreamer" as one of the introverted intuitive's guises.


----------



## Humaning

Staffan said:


> He was seriously into religion and the occult, way more than mere convention: Isaac Newton's occult studies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I think he was INTP.


Neither intjs or intps are described as conventional. He could be a an intp, but the intj stick figure fits my mental representation of him better.


----------



## Spades

...........
Biased results are biased.

Average is supposed to be 100. Internet tests are bullshit. The last one I did said 172 or so. Looking at the above, the "average" looks to be about 130, so if you normalize that to 100 and recalculate...


----------



## electricky

alice144 said:


> If you don't know, guess from your favorite internet test!


You'll have to be a really good guesser if you rely on internet tests. I've scored anywhere from 85 to 155 on those. My "real IQ" was between 110 and 120 (with my subtest scores all over the place). 

LOL @ only one person below 100 and most of us between 120 and 150. What an interesting bell curve.....


----------



## Toru Okada

"I got IQ #>120, but I don't think it matters/IQ tests are unreliable but I'm posting my big IQ in spite of me saying that lololol"


----------



## Impavida

155 on the Cattell III B

I applied for Mensa once upon a time, but I never joined after taking the test.


----------



## FillInTheBlank

Dont mind me, but I think these poll results are complete bull. How likely is it that 7 out of 78 voters would score over 150 on their IQ test while only ONE person out of the 78 would score in the below 100 range? There are some pretty smart people on this site, but if you ever looked at the distribution of average IQ scores among people, the ranges this poll suggests here are too unlikely to really happen. (where the average IQ in this poll seems to hover around 130)


----------



## timeless

FillInTheBlank said:


> Dont mind me, but I think these poll results are complete bull. How likely is it that 7 out of 78 voters would score over 150 on their IQ test while only ONE person out of the 78 would score in the below 100 range? There are some pretty smart people on this site, but if you ever looked at the distribution of average IQ scores among people, the ranges this poll suggests here are too unlikely to really happen. (where the average IQ in this poll seems to hover around 130)


Online IQ tests are skewed to giving results that are too high.


----------



## FillInTheBlank

Online IQ tests are just inaccurate. In many ways besides scoring too.


----------



## alice144

aw come on you guys, quit bitching. like i have the resources to pay a bunch of you to take a pen and paper iq test.

i'm sure that most of you have a pretty decent idea of what your iq is. i'm also sure that you are smart enough to deduce which internet tests are reliable, and which are not.

and yes, it's highly likely that perc members are a standard deviation or so above the general population. i know a lot of dumb people. you guys aren't dumb.

peace.


----------



## Staffan

alice144 said:


> aw come on you guys, quit bitching. like i have the resources to pay a bunch of you to take a pen and paper iq test.
> 
> i'm sure that most of you have a pretty decent idea of what your iq is.
> 
> and yes, it's highly likely that perc members are a standard deviation or so above the general population. i know a lot of dumb people. you guys aren't dumb.
> 
> peace.


Yes, people here are smart, the average must be way above 100. I did military service with a few low IQ guys. They accidentally fired their weapons on four occasions in just a few weeks. One of them missed his own head by an inch. And none of them were retarded, just normal low intelligence. Someone like that would never be interested in a forum like this.


----------



## Utensils

Just took the test online and got 158... 

Fuckity-doo. That was not expected. :3


----------



## Traum

I almost always score 154, including one official test.

It's between 149 and 156 always on internet tests, but my official is 154 and it's usually exactly that on the internet tests, too...

I am such a geek. :tongue:


----------



## KneeSeekerArrow

1% of this population is below average IQ!


----------



## HandiAce

My official IQ is 100. I have perceptual reasoning that is 120-130 caliber, but slow processing speed which is close to borderline so my IQ balances out in unbalanced ways.


----------



## Staffan

HandiAce said:


> My official IQ is 100. I have perceptual reasoning that is 120-130 caliber, but slow processing speed which is close to borderline so my IQ balances out in unbalanced ways.


Introverted sensors are disadvantaged by the tests because of the narrow time limit. In real life there is usually more time and more value in thinking slower and more meticulous. Hard to understand the fixation with speed.


----------



## HandiAce

Staffan said:


> Introverted sensors are disadvantaged by the tests because of the narrow time limit. In real life there is usually more time and more value in thinking slower and more meticulous. Hard to understand the fixation with speed.


You know, I can see that. When it comes to problem solving, I value certainty so I always am careful when it comes to such a thing; I want to do the best job I can. It's important to note that when I was given time, I always got my answers correct.


----------



## heartturnedtoporcelain

You know one of the best things about figuring out that you have a learning disability? You realize that you're not completely stupid for having a low IQ* because _so much_ the test deals with things that your mind just cannot process properly. Having dyscalculia means that numbers and some other things are almost nonsense to me.


*at least I assume I do - I always start those IQ tests and give up pretty quickly because I realize it's just not happening. I did have some kind of intelligence test when I was a kid that put me in the gifted zone, but I imagine they didn't do standard IQ stuff or else it would have turned out completely differently


----------



## Shades of Gray

I usually get in the 140s or 150s on the internet tests. I went conservative (of course) and selected 140-150.


----------



## sly

Shades of Gray said:


> I usually get in the 140s or 150s on the internet tests. I went conservative (of course) and selected 140-150.


Title should be changed to:

''What's your internet IQ?''


----------



## Peter

Liontiger said:


> Last time I took an internet test, it was 136. Obviously, I can't be sure if that's accurate lol.


if you really do have an IQ of 136, you should be sure. :laughing:


----------



## Borrowed Lunacy

sly said:


> Title should be changed to:
> 
> ''What's your internet IQ?''


Or how long is your e-penis?


----------



## Staffan

sly said:


> Title should be changed to:
> 
> ''What's your internet IQ?''


I don't know why people don't use their aptitude tests instead if they (like me) haven't taken an IQ test. They correlate 0.8 with IQ.


----------



## Liontiger

Peter said:


> if you really do have an IQ of 136, you should be sure. :laughing:


I mean, it doesn't really affect my life either way I suppose...


----------



## LibertyPrime

Imo, there are too many smart people in the poll. People didn't respond properly and really...making a poll like this is useful at best for fun *_*.

My real IQ is somewhere between 126 and 131 compared to my age. I got the assessment when I went to collage. Depends on some factors like coffee, eating 1 hour before the test and good nights sleep.

*Tests used:*

Raven's Progressive Matrices
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)


----------



## Dark Romantic

A test I took as a kid put me in the 99th percentile... so, 135 or higher.


----------



## Shades of Gray

sly said:


> Title should be changed to:
> 
> ''What's your internet IQ?''


My ACT score from a couple years back correlates with a 143, I took a Wonderlic cold once and my score on that correlated to a 146. I score a bit higher on internet tests, which is expected.

I have no reason to brag about being more intelligent than I really am to a bunch of strangers on the internet. IQ doesn't necessarily correlate with intelligence anyway.


----------



## ingenii anima

I've never been tested, but the "smartest" person I know was tested at 145 and I can easily speak circles around him in any subject, so I should imagine somewhere in the 145 to 160 level.


----------



## TJSeabury

I generally score around 163 on tests so I picked 140-150. Partly because I didn't want to seem like I was bragging and part because I.Q. doesn't take into account what _KIND_ of intelligent you are...

Does anyone have a good test?





Dark Romantic said:


> A test I took as a kid put me in the 99th percentile... so, 135 or higher.


I was also tested as a kid to be in the 99th percentile.



Anyways I'm much more in favor of Gardner's nine multiple intelligences.


----------



## Dark Romantic

Eos said:


> I was also tested as a kid to be in the 99th percentile.


Did anyone ever tell you exactly what IQ it represents? I found one source saying 135+, but I'm loath to go by it, when I haven't heard that number from anywhere else.


----------



## TJSeabury

Dark Romantic said:


> Did anyone ever tell you exactly what IQ it represents? I found one source saying 135+, but I'm loath to go by it, when I haven't heard that number from anywhere else.


Nope, I was never told. I assume its because they didn't want me as a child to get a big head as it were. lololol


----------



## xoea

Honestly, I tend to get around 110 or a bit less whenever I do little tests online. xD


----------



## jadedtortoise

Internet IQ tests are extremely basic compared to the official tests. Based on Internet testing I'm 130, but I don't feel its accurate. It could be higher or lower.


----------



## jeffbobs

I tested 144 about 2 years ago, dunno how reliable the test was or anything else. Was annoyed thou at the same time, as genius level was classed as 147.....3 god dam points away. 

Althou tbh i would guess around the 110-120 mark right about now, copious amounts of cannabis and lack of general care will have made it dive bomb I am guessing


----------



## Boxter9

Hey look guys it's almost like a Bell Curve! <3 I'm proud.


----------



## King_Moonracer

My IQ is 260.

naaahh im just screwin with ya, i have no idea. IQ tests are biased anyway. I suck at algebra, but i am a genius when it comes to geometry and angles and stuff like...i wonder why.


----------



## Peter

Boxter9 said:


> Hey look guys it's almost like a Bell Curve! <3 I'm proud.


And what does that say about the poll/participants in this forum?


----------



## Boxter9

Peter said:


> And what does that say about the poll/participants in this forum?


Provided the sample is an accurate or close-to-accurate representation of the forum population and that self-reported IQs are not substantially skewed in a positive direction (hahaha), the mean IQ of PerC is at least two standard deviations above the mean IQ of the rest of the world, so roughly half of PerC members could be considered "intellectually gifted." (In the sense that intellectual giftedness begins at the 95th percentile of test-taking ability.) Intriguing but not wholly shocking


----------



## SuperKillNinjaAssassin69

"I'm _obviously_ higher than your test measures, I *clearly* have an IQ of over 130."

Shut the fuck up, you're average.


----------



## sly

Boxter9 said:


> Provided the sample is an accurate or close-to-accurate representation of the forum population and that self-reported IQs are not substantially skewed in a positive direction (hahaha), the mean IQ of PerC is at least two standard deviations above the mean IQ of the rest of the world, so roughly half of PerC members could be considered "intellectually gifted." (In the sense that intellectual giftedness begins at the 95th percentile of test-taking ability.) Intriguing but not wholly shocking


We need more ESFJs in this forum, to balance it all out :3


----------



## TheOwl

I took an IQ test once, and it told me I'm retarded or have Alzheimer's. I'm 17 years old.


----------



## bubbamamma

I've been officially tested multiple times, receiving a score well over 150 each time.


----------



## thor odinson

MonieJ said:


> Over 9,000!!
> 
> hm 120-130 on one of those lame IQ test.


What 9000, no way!!!!!!!!!! That can be right! Caaannn it?!?!?!?!

I think it's right, after all I have been trained in the art of kaioken.

I find it disturbing that this reference was unknown to others posters on this thread or even worse ignored if it was known so I felt the need to rectify the situation and respond


----------



## Death Persuades

I got 121.


----------



## dagnytaggart

My Idiocy Quotient qualifies me for Densa. <3


----------



## Shameka Robinson

136 - formally tested years ago


----------



## doucette

The results does not follow of Gaussian distribution.
Why it is so intelligent people here?


----------



## Flatlander

I got somewhere over 150 back in middle school, when tested professionally.

Internet tests routinely give me 125-140 these days. 

I could be slipping, the tests could suck, the tests could be using a different scoring method, I sometimes have too much I take into consideration in the tests (I second-guess myself more now than ever), I could be too distracted, and so on. I don't know my number.



doucette said:


> The results does not follow of Gaussian distribution.
> Why it is so intelligent people here?


This is internet forum land, where some people will probably misreport themselves. Though generally, a higher-IQ population on a site where people routinely discuss abstract topics would seem fitting. I haven't done my research into IQ testing, but abstract understanding seems crucially involved with how IQ tests work.


----------



## OddOneOwt

146, formally tested. But IQ is not a measure of one's worth. It's what you do with whatever gifts you have that determine how people see you.


----------



## Grunfur

I never did an IQ test and probably never will. They're quite ridiculous. And I hate that everyone always links IQ to intelligence, which is pretty funny. Gardner's theory I agree is most valid. Plus I've known some guy who got pretty high on his and he couldn't critical think for shit. Seriously, no matter how hard I tried to get him to argue he'd always just ignore it when the NTs debated unless some small detail came up, which he tried to debunk. It would be mean to call him stupid, but it wouldn't be fair to call him intelligent either.


----------



## Noisey

I've gotten results everywhere from 138-142


----------



## KneeSeekerArrow

doucette said:


> The results does not follow of Gaussian distribution.
> Why it is so intelligent people here?


Actually it looks quite Gaussian. Just the mean/median/mode is not 100 but rather 127-ish. 

It's probably due to effects in sampling.


----------



## doucette

KneeSeekerArrow said:


> Actually it looks quite Gaussian. Just the mean/median/mode is not 100 but rather 127-ish.
> 
> It's probably due to effects in sampling.


You are right, at now it looks about Gaussian (when I wrote my answer, there was less of answers, so it didn´t look like that Gaussian). But yes, when median is not something around 100, it doesn´t look like "normal" IQ Gaussian distripution.


----------



## RayStormX

On their site they mention that members of mensa come from all walks of life, so you would certainly encounter someone like that eventually. 
@misstheground
having a high IQ does not necessarily mean that one is capable of doing the things you listed. I think that if they are in a position to do so, perhaps they should, if they value being a productive member of society. To each his own though.


----------



## Stelmaria

King_Moonracer said:


> ...but at least im good at math right?


It could be worse, you could have an IQ of ~200 and not be great at math. (I won't mention the example that comes to my mind) :wink:



Nackle1 said:


> you guys do realize the average IQ is just 100 right? So eiether everyone commenting is really freaking smart, or everyone is probably just full of crap


Maybe we're all basing it on a test scale that was last normalised in 1916. :tongue:


----------



## jeffbobs

My IQ last time i tested it was at around 447, althou coming to think about it, that test might of been about how many brain cells i have left that are actually working.....


----------



## RayStormX

iIQ Admin said:


> Hello
> We'd like to invite you to My-iIQ.isdigital.com to try our new dynamic IQ exam.
> If you have any questions or comments please email iiq.exam'at'hotmail.com
> 
> Thank you for your participation.


 tsk. It's made in Flash and I can't access it on any of my mobile devices.....guess I gotta go to my pc ><
@iIQ Admin
well i finished the 1st part......twice. the first time it seemed to get stuck on the screen so i logged out and logged back in, only to find that the test was still going and it only saved my progress up to the 2nd question so i had to finish it a 2nd time. If time is a factor in your test, the results might not be as accurate due to that technicality.


----------



## Worriedfunction

RayStormX said:


> in all seriousness though I would think that many people join Mensa so that they can relate to others who share the same level of intellect. Some are in jobs that don't really paint the picture of an arrogant snob genius. I read about one guy who's in Mensa who's a truck driver :3
> even if the reason for joining is stupid, it sure does feel nice to belong to a group that you can relate to, right?


Well in fairness I was just being a wind-up merchant hawking his wares.


----------



## misstheground

RayStormX said:


> @misstheground
> having a high IQ does not necessarily mean that one is capable of doing the things you listed. I think that if they are in a position to do so, perhaps they should, if they value being a productive member of society. To each his own though.


I mean, I understand that not everyone with a high IQ chooses to/is able to do everything equally well. 
It's more of a conflict with my personal ideals and why I wouldn't consider joining than an effort to impose the ideals on others. 
It would be nice to have a solution-focused high-IQ society, though. Hm. The wheels in my brain are turning. 



Nackle1 said:


> you guys do realize the average IQ is just 100 right? So eiether everyone commenting is really freaking smart, or everyone is probably just full of crap


I think that the type of people on PerC probably self-select a bit. A person who would be interested in this site would often have a slightly higher than average IQ.


----------



## RayStormX

@misstheground
unfortunately, being able to influence the world in a powerful and positive way requires money and power, things that many Mensa members individually do not have. I wonder if they get funding though. well they do give scholarships and do volunteer activities so they're at least doing somehing useful for society :3
Mensa seems to be more of a social club where the requirement is a high IQ, rather than some elite organization. at least, thats what it seems like to me, based solely off their website information.

if you were to create a high iq solution based society, perhaps your prerequisites for IQ might need to be a few points lower so you can snag the people who are a few points below the mensa cutoff yet are highly affluent and successful persons, capable of funding or designing unique solutions to solve the problems of society.


----------



## Nackle1

@misstheground I think I hear what your saying, but a "slightly higher than average IQ" would be in the 110-120 range. Even just an IQ of 130 is within the 95th percentile. So yes then, I'm complaining, but this poll really is kinda garbage....It says alot more about how people percieve themselves rather than their actuall abilities.


----------



## misstheground

@RayStormX
That, and add a supplementary application requirement and give people incentive to actually _join_. Hmm. . . 
I mean, I'm not actually going to do this because I'm am both a minor and too busy. But it's an idea.

@Nackle1
I mean, online tests also suck.
They happened to be quite accurate for me, I got 139 on an online and 141 with a psychologist. But I don't think that's true for everyone.


----------



## Nackle1

@ misstheground Very true, that basically sums up the internet in a nutshell


----------



## RayStormX

i had my friends take the same iq test that i did and they scored 130+
.....
it's the 1st one in the google search result when you search for "iq test"


----------



## misstheground

Actually, different people have different google results because of tracking cookies but that is wildly off topic.


----------



## Ikari_T

I rather trust MENSA than all the garbage on the internet. At least they are official. 

I remember getting around 130s as my IQ results and as low as 90 on a ridiculously insane test of patterns. 

I took a MENSA sample test and got 120. <--I think that's more credible. Still, it's not official enough. 

I'd rather go as far as wasting $15 of gas money and $40 for the official test to find the truth of my IQ. After that, I'll lie on the couch like a potato and pretend the whole journey never happened. That is satisfaction.


----------



## CCCXXIX

According to this over half of the people on personality cafe qualify for Mensa.... The numbers don't add up.


----------



## misstheground

CCCXXIX said:


> According to this over half of the people on personality cafe qualify for Mensa.... The numbers don't add up.


Again, people with higher IQs are more likely to report as well as the people on PerC probably having a slightly higher IQ than average.


----------



## hydrogen

I don't know what my IQ is. And I don't really have much care for it - it's not an achievement, or a benefit, or anything knowing what your IQ is. In fact, it can be a hinderence, if anything - if you have a lower IQ, it might knock on your self esteem; if you have a higher, IQ, you might become a bit of a snob who looks down on everyone.
I took a CAT (Cognitive Ability Test) 5 years ago when I started my secondary school, and to this day I have never received the results and they're pretty much under lock and key. A few months ago I was told by one of my science teachers that my IQ was higher than his - and I was like, how the hell do you know what my IQ is when I don't even know - and he said that he couldn't tell me how he knew that. So I came to the conclusion that either a) he was lying to make me feel flattered for some reason or another or b) he was referring to that mysterious CAT test.
I have taken online tests, but I conclude that they're completely made-up. I normally get results in the range of 120 - 150. (I've also been presented with a big fat 77 before, but we don't need to mention that, do we?) That is a big range. IQ is _supposed_ to be rather unchanging. Also, on one website, I took the test four times in a row. The first time, I got 120. The second, 127. The third, 139. The fourth, 143. The fact that I increased my score each time I took a new test goes to show that the test could be 'practiced' pretty easily. You cannot 'practice'/build on IQ so easily.
I do know that I perform better in visual pattern tests than number pattern though. Much better.


----------



## Extraverted Delusion

misstheground said:


> Again, people with higher IQs are more likely to report as well as the people on PerC probably having a slightly higher IQ than average.


^^

As if piqued interests have "nothing" to do with relative IQ and/or personality type (debatable, but credible to an extent). The forum crowd tends to be a little more detached from reality and theoretical for the most part.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis

I don't know. My verbal is around 99 or something. My nonverbal is supposedly awful.


----------



## RayStormX

@hydrogen
I subscribe to the idea that IQ is fluid and there is a certain range that your IQ can reach or deteriote to. 
Let's say that there are two twins, Johnny and Bobby, who are seperated at birth. They have the same DNA. Johnny is raised in an environment that encourages his cognitive abilities while Bobby's only cognitive stimulation was a tv that played reruns of bad soap operas. 
They take an IQ test and Johnny scores 116, while Bobby scores 100.



blahblahblah. Just some stuff that I picked up in Psychology101, though admittedly I slept through some lectures. anyone more knowledgable on this can feel free to expand or correct me on this one, because I'm just picking this up from my first semester of college.


----------



## hydrogen

RayStormX said:


> @_hydrogen_
> I subscribe to the idea that IQ is fluid and there is a certain range that your IQ can reach or deteriote to.
> Let's say that there are two twins, Johnny and Bobby, who are seperated at birth. They have the same DNA. Johnny is raised in an environment that encourages his cognitive abilities while Bobby's only cognitive stimulation was a tv that played reruns of bad soap operas.
> They take an IQ test and Johnny scores 116, while Bobby scores 100.
> 
> 
> 
> blahblahblah. Just some stuff that I picked up in Psychology101, though admittedly I slept through some lectures. anyone more knowledgable on this can feel free to expand or correct me on this one, because I'm just picking this up from my first semester of college.


Thanks - that was interesting. I'm gonna read up some more on IQ.


----------



## countrygirl90

Mine is 130 when I last tested it may be I need to do it again ......


----------



## LibertyPrime

DiamondDays said:


> LOL! Here, something like 9% of the responders have an iq of 150! For it to be statistically likely for us to find 40 of that IQ IRL we would have to assemble almost 100.000 people.
> 
> And thing is, i don't doubt this is pretty close to truth about the PersC community. It's why i like it so much.


This may also be so because of online tests. I took Raven's Progressive Matrices in collage first year and second year. I couldn't go above 135 compared to my age in either try. One time at the psychologist under stress & in about 17 minutes I scored 118. In online tests I go above 145 LOL...which I find odd. 

I reasoned that my IQ is between 120 & 130 depending on how much sleep I get, what my anxiety level is when I do the test & how much chokolate I eat beforehand. It tends to fluctuate about 9 points. We could reason that in order to be interested in something like the MBTI on a deeper level one would need an IQ above 100. Considering what we tend to discuss & do here on the forums I'd say almost everyone here has high to very high or above intelligence, but for so many to be above 150...its a little hard to believe.


----------



## DiamondDays

FreeBeer said:


> This may also be so because of online tests. I took Raven's Progressive Matrices in collage first year and second year. I couldn't go above 135 compared to my age in either try. One time at the psychologist under stress & in about 17 minutes I scored 118. In online tests I go above 145 LOL...which I find odd.
> 
> I reasoned that my IQ is between 120 & 130 depending on how much sleep I get, what my anxiety level is when I do the test & how much chokolate I eat beforehand. It tends to fluctuate about 9 points. We could reason that in order to be interested in something like the MBTI on a deeper level one would need an IQ above 100. Considering what we tend to discuss & do here on the forums I'd say almost everyone here has high to very high or above intelligence, but for so many to be above 150...its a little hard to believe.


It would be interesting to see what all these geniuses could perform in a real test yes. I did a mensa administered test that i think was pretty much the same as raven. It didn't measure to more than 135, so that's what i've got. I really feel that measuring above 130 or so is kind of pointless. I mean it's 2 std away from mean, it's pretty much. Who cares about the last point, we're all smart enough to master any academic subject.


----------



## SuburbanLurker

I challenge anyone claiming to have a 135+ IQ to take this test and post a screenshot of your results. The reasons I like this particular one are a: It's impossible to cheat and can't be learned, and b: it's actually standardized with a 100 mean IQ using accumulated results. I get 144/129 on that test, which is still in the 96th-97th percentile, but damn, you'd think I'm below average judging by the pool of geniuses we have here.

I doubt a single person who's voted in this poll could get above 150 (Stanford-binet scale), much less 40, considering 150 is in the 99.96th percentile....


----------



## tanstaafl28

I was tested when I was 27 and it was 128. Just smart enough to be too clever for my own good.


----------



## SnowFairy

I always score within the 120-135 range. I've found that my mood usually has an effect on how well I score. I always do better when my overall state of mind is positive, as negative moods affect my ability to focus.


----------



## Moon Pix

I did the High IQ society one (you have to pay for it but you can have 3 goes at it for about $10) and I scored 114 on it. I did GIQ one that you also have to pay a small fee for and got 129 on it even though it does say that it the average score on it is 10 points higher than proffessionally administered test.

All in all I would say that I have an IQ somewhere around 115 or one standard deviation above the average. I can't see it being any higher or lower than that to be of significance.


----------



## Ramblin

135 was what i was in high school when tested almost 8 years ago. I've always questioned the actual relevance of IQ test though.


----------



## auburnstar

Yay for being a minority! Oh the joy. Haha just kiddin IQ means nothing folks.


----------



## LQ9

good job on that bell curve, guys


----------



## Elveni

My uninformed guess is 110-120. I figure it may be higher, but it certainly isn't lower.

When I've completed intelligence inventories in the past my impressive verbal and logical reasoning scores were masked by my inability to spatially/mathematically reason.


----------



## datMBTIguy

Internet tests have told me 140 and 133 but I don't think that's right. I've had family estimate me at around 124-130 range. Haven't been tested really though, other than a few online tests


----------



## Arya

I don't want to know. I suck at doing those types of tests, especially since they are all timed. I mean sure, if I can do it at my leisure I might do ok....


----------



## SoulScream

A while ago took the mensa test (which was a huge disappointment) which showed IQ of 127-129 (I am quoting it xD). I agree being somewhere around there.


----------



## Aquamarine

I took this test and got 105.

Your IQ Is 105


Your Logical Intelligence is Average


Your Verbal Intelligence is Genius


Your Mathematical Intelligence is Exceptional


Your General Knowledge is Average

A Quick and Dirty IQ Test


Disappointing, as I was expecting 110 to 115.


----------



## Aquamarine

datMBTIguy said:


> Internet tests have told me 140 and 133 but I don't think that's right. I've had family estimate me at around 124-130 range. Haven't been tested really though, other than a few online tests


Try this test, it's not timed.
A Quick and Dirty IQ Test


----------



## milti

We did psychological tests (multiple intelligence) in Psychology practicals. In General IQ I was 120 - 90th percentile in my class - but I sucked so bad at Mechanical ability and Spatial. Lolll - I got like 30th percentile in each.


----------



## chibiidol

I dont know what my IQ is. i have a feeling its considerably low based on my previous experience with internet IQ tests. They are too difficult and tedious for me to even complete...


----------



## Elodin

SuburbanLurker said:


> I challenge anyone claiming to have a 135+ IQ to take this test and post a screenshot of your results. The reasons I like this particular one are a: It's impossible to cheat and can't be learned, and b: it's actually standardized with a 100 mean IQ using accumulated results. I get 144/129 on that test, which is still in the 96th-97th percentile, but damn, you'd think I'm below average judging by the pool of geniuses we have here.
> 
> I doubt a single person who's voted in this poll could get above 150 (Stanford-binet scale), much less 40, considering 150 is in the 99.96th percentile....


Standardizing an online IQ test to the standard for in-person IQ tests makes for a woefully inaccurate scaling. What type of people are going to take an online IQ test? 

Most people do not give a damn about IQ and as such will not take the test. While a large number of people have taken the online test, it is not a randomly selected sample. As such the results cannot be considered overly accurate. Would you take an online IQ test if you thought you were "stupid"? I doubt most people would. It certainly wouldn't be a confidence booster. People generally only want to know how good they are at something, not how bad they are. I think it would be safe to say that the average person taking an online IQ test would have an above average IQ. 

You also would have to consider the population of this website. Compared to what would exist in a random sample, INTxs are greatly over-represented. I'm not sure about the other personality types, as I tend to lurk the NT forums primarily, but if I had to guess I would say that the introverted personality types would tend to be somewhat over-represented on PersonalityCafe. 

So the population the poll samples is far from a random sample of the normal population. 


By changing a few parts of the poll(all of my past statistics professors would be spitting fire if they read this) I got the average to be roughly 132. For a single person to score that high they would be about two standard deviations from the mean. Unlikely though very possible. For a sample of 476 people to average at 132, the Z score would be outrageously high. 

From that we can conclude that either 
A.) The polled sample is not a random sample of the normal population. 
B.) The responses were inaccurate.
C.) Both A and B. 

We already know that the sample is not a random sample from normal population. And If I had to guess, I would also say that people are responding with inaccurate information. Perhaps they are answering with what they estimate their IQ to be, or perhaps they are responding with what a free internet-based IQ test told them. Both would skew the data. 

So I agree in part with you. I believe it is likely that the poll is negatively skewed. However I do not believe that inaccurate responses are the only discrepancy between the two different means. I would guess that the population of PersonalityCafe has an above average mean IQ, but I will not presume to claim that the average is a specific number, or even a range.

But yeah, claiming that the poll is inaccurate merely because the average response IQ is about 132 when the average of a normal population is 100 is not valid reasoning. We are not a normal population, and as such statistics standardized to a normal population will not necessarily be applicable. 


Also, the IQ test you listed tests only for mathematical, logical, and spatial intelligence. It does not test for all of the facets that most IQ tests test for.



Off-Topic, but one of my older sisters has taken the Stanford-Binet IQ test three times and received a 160 each time. I would kill to have her brain.

Edit:
I'm aware I made a few assumptions in this post, but I have rational reasons for each one. If you'd like to know why I think X or Y just let me know.


----------



## clay

I took the official raven test and got 120


----------



## dragthewaters

I think some people may be lying about their IQs, but most probably aren't. It's probably a self-selecting bias on many fronts. Intelligent people are more likely to be on the internet, for a variety of reasons. This forum is very abstract-discussion-oriented (this also explains the high percentage of intuitives on the forum) and is therefore more likely to attract intelligent people. Also intelligent people are more likely to go to college, which is where most people encounter the MBTI exam (either then or when looking for a job later on in fields that require a college degree). Also, as others have pointed out, if your IQ was low you'd probably be less likely to vote in the poll. While the people with high IQs are like "hey, look how high my score is!"


----------



## SuburbanLurker

thismustbetheplace said:


> I think some people may be lying about their IQs, but most probably aren't. It's probably a self-selecting bias on many fronts. Intelligent people are more likely to be on the internet, for a variety of reasons. This forum is very abstract-discussion-oriented (this also explains the high percentage of intuitives on the forum) and is therefore more likely to attract intelligent people. Also intelligent people are more likely to go to college, which is where most people encounter the MBTI exam (either then or when looking for a job later on in fields that require a college degree). Also, as others have pointed out, if your IQ was low you'd probably be less likely to vote in the poll. While the people with high IQs are like "hey, look how high my score is!"


All that would amount to perhaps ~1 SD above the average and certainly no more on a forum like this (which would be equivalent to an average university graduate). To think that over a quarter of the poll respondents actually fall within the 99.6th percentile, and moreover, that over half us would qualify for mensa is nothing short of delusional. Statistically speaking, it would be surprising for a community of this size and scope to have more than one regular poster with an IQ over 150.


----------



## dragthewaters

SuburbanLurker said:


> All that would amount to perhaps ~1 SD above the average and certainly no more on a forum like this. To think that over a quarter of the poll respondents actually fall within the 99.6th percentile, and moreover, that 2 out of 3 of us would qualify for mensa is nothing short of delusional. Statistically speaking, it be surprising for a community of this size to have even one single person with an IQ over 150.


Well, when you put it that way....Another thing is that probably a lot of people measured their IQs by taking online tests. I wouldn't be surprised if those tests upwardly altered peoples' IQ scores. Plus, IQ tests vary widely. There are even different percentile distributions depending on what test you take. But yeah, people could be lying. I'm the kind of person who is all wide-eyed and innocent about the fact that most people lie to make themselves look better, but I guess other people are different, lol.

150 IQ is not THAT amazing. My IQ is 147 (measured by a fully accredited test/instructor when I was 4) and I don't think I'm anything special. I feel like a total idiot most of the time and many of my classmates are much smarter than me (I go to an Ivy League school). I wouldn't be surprised if there were several people with over 150 IQ here, but I must admit that when I saw the poll results I was like "ok, some people MUST be lying about having an over 150 IQ."


----------



## SuburbanLurker

thismustbetheplace said:


> 150 IQ is not THAT amazing.


1 in 2,300 with a 15 SD. For perspective, this means that in Canada, there are only about 13,000 people with a 150+ IQ.



> My IQ is 147 (measured by a fully accredited test/instructor when I was 4) and I don't think I'm anything special. I feel like a total idiot most of the time and many of my classmates are much smarter than me (I go to an Ivy League school). I wouldn't be surprised if there were several people with over 150 IQ here, but I must admit that when I saw the poll results I was like "ok, some people MUST be lying about having an over 150 IQ."


That's another issue. A lot of people took IQ tests when they were developing children and simply assume that their IQ remained static. This is not likely the case. While it's likely your IQ remained significantly above average with such a head start, a 4 year old's mind is nowhere near developed enough to extrapolate intelligence through adulthood. Many environmental factors affect intelligence during development, both positively and negatively.


----------



## dragthewaters

That's also probably true. I wouldn't be surprised if my IQ is lower now, lol. I certainly don't feel like I've done much with my life compared to some other people my age. Anyway I'm not going to retake the exam because if it did turn out to be lower I would get a huge inferiority complex. So 147 it is.


----------



## SuburbanLurker

thismustbetheplace said:


> That's also probably true. I wouldn't be surprised if my IQ is lower now, lol. I certainly don't feel like I've done much with my life compared to some other people my age. Anyway I'm not going to retake the exam because if it did turn out to be lower I would get a huge inferiority complex. So 147 it is.


You're essentially an example of the inflated results; I wouldn't call you a liar, but it can't be considered accurate. I wouldn't worry about it though, people put way too much importance on a simple number. Hundreds of thousands of people world-wide have IQ's on par with Einstein, but not one of them is on par with his genius. Why attach your self-worth to something inherent? It's like being proud of lineage or nationality or something, makes no sense to me.


----------



## dragthewaters

Uh, well thanks for indirectly telling me I'm stupid, I guess. But yeah, I also agree that the number is meaningless unless you actually DO something with it.


----------



## SuburbanLurker

thismustbetheplace said:


> Uh, well thanks for indirectly telling me I'm stupid, I guess. But yeah, I also agree that the number is meaningless unless you actually DO something with it.


Suggesting that you _might _not have a genius-level IQ because you haven't been tested as an adult is indirectly calling you stupid? What?


----------



## dragthewaters

I was joking. But it is kind of upsetting to realize that, after spending my entire life only being valued by my family/society for my intelligence, I might not even have that after all.


----------



## SuburbanLurker

thismustbetheplace said:


> I was joking. But it is kind of upsetting to realize that, after spending my entire life only being valued by my family/society for my intelligence, I might not even have that after all.


I would think that acceptance into an ivy league school would in of itself prove high intelligence.

Though I see where you're coming from. It's essentially why I've never made an effort to take a real IQ test - I don't want to know. If it's higher than I think, I'll just feel like a failure and a waste. If it's lower, I'll inevitably allow it to affect my self worth despite logically knowing how silly that is.


----------



## Vengeance

My IQ is 128, WAIS IV test. I got tested 2 years ago by a psychologist, the result is real.


----------



## Collie

I've taken a handful of Internet tests over the years but never one administered by a psychologist, so I don't think there's any actual weight to the results, to say nothing of its one-dimensionality...

There's also the fact that I'd probably never accept the results if I ever did get officially examined, which probably won't happen for reasons including what SuburbanLurker posted.



SuburbanLurker said:


> It's essentially why I've never made an effort to take a real IQ test - I don't want to know. If it's higher than I think, I'll just feel like a failure and a waste. If it's lower, I'll inevitably allow it to affect my self worth despite logically knowing how silly that is.


----------



## Scootaloo

I got tested in middle school, my IQ is 153. roud:


----------



## NighTi

SuburbanLurker said:


> I don't want to know. If it's higher than I think, I'll just feel like a failure and a waste. If it's lower, I'll inevitably allow it to affect my self worth despite logically knowing how silly that is.


I couldn't agree more. I don't know my IQ and don't want to know. What purpose would the information serve? Why choose it over some other linear measurement like body mass index? Call me a non-conformist, but I'm not going to kowtow to someone because she has a higher IQ than me, and I'm not going to dismiss someone because she has a lower one. That's foolish. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, not in the IQ of the chef.

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


----------



## NighTi

(deleted a double post)


----------



## Bricolage

It's curious that relatively few women throng the high IQ ranks.


----------



## Bricolage

SuburbanLurker said:


> I would think that acceptance into an ivy league school would in of itself prove high intelligence.


George W. went to Yale on the legacy program, and then Harvard. That proves just about anybody can do it. :laughing:


----------



## claude

Post it now!  ​ 


Share on Tumblr​

 Your Logical Intelligence is *Exceptional*

Your Verbal Intelligence is *Genius*

Your Mathematical Intelligence is *Genius*

Your General Knowledge is *Below Average*

Apparently I need to read a book. The free ones have always given me somewhere in the 120's or the high teens, but I havent taken a real one to my knowledge.

This was the quick and dirty IQ test someone posted earlier btw


----------



## NighTi

unctuousbutler said:


> George W. went to Yale on the legacy program, and then Harvard. That proves just about anybody can do it. :laughing:


I attended an "elite" university where I got into an argument with another student over whether white bread contains wheat. Apparently, high SAT scores don't correlate 100% with a coherent worldview.


----------



## anapuna

"Query failed : Table 'mediacuc_db.iq_paivatilastot' doesn't exis"same error as posted above

5th grade scored at 139. i believe it was the old 15 point deviation test. been awhile and back then my school did not use the "latest" but even at 16 point deviation it is still a 99 percentile according to the stattrek.com web calculator. was offered gifted. i turned it down. all of the other kids in gifted lacked imagination of any kind and they seemed emotionally stunted. was in SLD for math subtracting a double digit from a double digit? hard as crap. solving X in algebra or calculating various surface areas of a nonstandard shape, no problem. just look at a bridge and find the stress points, any time. i am so backwards. but i am what they call "twice exceptional" both gifted and handicapped at the same time. can make you feel like the smartest person in the room yet also the dumbest. when looking up twice exceptional it says that a given IQ test has to be modified to compensate for the handicap. my handicap mostly is numbers and things in grids. 2 common things in IQ tests. so what am i? 145? i fricken hate my brain why can't i be dumber. it is so easy to get through life with an IQ around 89-93

feels like someone took a 454 big block engine and shoved it in a GEO METRO. totally useless if the power can not make it through the transmission and to the wheels.


----------



## Morfy

According to the Mensa test it's 137. It's okayyyy


----------



## pointee

Seriously, I'm only NEARLY 100. I nearly cracked my brain doing the free online test. It does make me wonder why a lot of things are much much harder than many of my peers in school and college. I took this test when I was 21 or so. Don't remember.


----------



## JTHearts

It's 143 until you include my near-retarded speed, which is 86. It's more like 120 when you factor that in.


----------



## Vice

Sorry, but I can't take this poll seriously at all. The only way to "accurately" test your IQ is by doing it with a professional test in real life. Not just some shady online test. Doesn't surprise me that the average in this thread is 130-140. It's way above human average which is around 100.

In real life there's a psychologist in front of you which adds a lot of pressure. There are multiple tests and all in all it can take hours. The psychologist then has to evaluate it all and you get the results a week later (well, with me that was the case, perhaps some are faster).


----------



## Tetsuo Shima

Well, my _visual_ IQ is 190, but I think my regular IQ is 135, so I voted 130-140 and threw a minor tantrum after seeing that was the mainstream vote.


----------



## telepariah

I have no idea what my IQ is and have never wanted to know. All I care about is what I can do with my brain. It's pretty good in some areas and pretty poor in others. Standardized tests are one area where I have always seemed to have the knack. It's a pretty useless skill to be honest.


----------



## Laughmore

My IQ test that was administered by a psychologist was pretty fun. It involved using blocks of various shapes that were to be arranged according to a photograph, free association of vocabulary terms, pattern recognition in both geometric and formless color palettes, and only a few questions that could be answered directly like T/F. Apparently at random, some of the instructions were verbal, the others written. Every single prompt was timed independently.

I was sort of institutionalized at the time so take my elitism with a grain of salt, but the online questionnaires are crap.


----------



## Zeta Neprok

Laughmore said:


> I was sort of institutionalized at the time so take my elitism with a grain of salt, but the online questionnaires are crap.


Yeah they tend to be, but I will honestly believe the results I usually get. I mostly get between 95-100 which I think is pretty accurate. I have no reason to think that I'm gifted, talented, intelligent, etc. At best I'm average, so there's really nothing special about me.

But if I were to compare this to the average on PerC that would probably put me in the "utterly stupid" category :tongue:


----------



## Elusive Ace

160+ according to the Stanford-Binet test. Couldn't say what my actual IQ is because Stanford-Binet can't differentiate above 160, since that's the ceiling.


----------



## Toru Okada

All of you people are so smert


----------



## IIIIII

INFJ Red said:


> 160+ according to the Stanford-Binet test. Couldn't say what my actual IQ is because Stanford-Binet can't differentiate above 160, since that's the ceiling.



I know what my IQ is but I do not put much into it. Especially considering the origin of IQ test and what it was used for *Eugenics*

https://www.thestar.com/life/2012/12/19/iq_a_myth_study_says.html

The IQ Myth and its Fascist origins – Just how Intelligent are You? | Doctor Stu's Science Blog

https://youtu.be/37qrLGhXch0


----------



## Elusive Ace

IIIIII said:


> I know what my IQ is but I do not put much into it. Especially considering the origin of IQ test and what it was used for *Eugenics*
> 
> https://www.thestar.com/life/2012/12/19/iq_a_myth_study_says.html
> 
> The IQ Myth and its Fascist origins – Just how Intelligent are You? | Doctor Stu's Science Blog
> 
> https://youtu.be/37qrLGhXch0


IQ is, when measured properly, accurate and useful as a comparative measure, but it means naught in the long term. Life isn't about IQ. It's about how much effort you put in and what you do with yourself


----------



## Trademark

So that means everyone here is gifted, wow, what a marvelous forum site is this lmfao


----------



## Highway Nights

136 I think.
Took it at UNC-Chapel Hill years ago. I would recommend anyone wanting to find their IQ find a legit version before you base the entirety of your self esteem off of your results. Any free version online is automatically gonna be bull, and I don't think I would trust most paid online tests either. I'm gonna "humble brag" and agree that IQ doesn't really mean anything.


----------



## Carpentet810

The Military listed mine as 180+. Never could get them to give me an exact number and not sure if they really knew. Not really a huge shock since my father is 155 and my mother tested 182 at age 9. Brother is 178 and sister is 169. My nephews should be brilliant as well. My brother's wife is 170.


----------



## KiRrRr

What happened to the 50% of the people that should be <= 100%?

:O It cannot be that only smart people like to spend their time on a personality forum

I've never been tested officially....And I don't really feel the needs to confirm how smart I am.
Online tests usually give me an IQ around 145... 
Complete bullshit since I definitely do not see me as the smartest 0.1% of the world 
Quite apparent that around 15% here considers themselves to be in that range :O

Some critical self reflection if this is actually really true might be required here ^^


----------



## Bunny

Look at how many Mensa members we have here, that's just so darn interesting.

As for mine I have no idea, I do not trust the online tests.


----------



## IIIIII

*Intelligence Testing and its Dirty History*



INFJ Red said:


> IQ is, when measured properly, accurate and useful as a comparative measure, but it means naught in the long term. Life isn't about IQ. It's about how much effort you put in and what you do with yourself


It's not the level of accuracy that I have a problem with, its the origin of IQ Test and what it was used for, Eugenics


*Intelligence Testing and its Dirty History*Lewis Terman: psychologist and racist who advocated public IQ testing
​_*Like ‘Love’*_, ‘Intelligence’ is a term that everybody thinks they understand – but in reality it has a different meaning to everyone. _‘Clever’_, _‘smart’_ and _‘intelligent’_ are words ubiquitous in the English language, but are without any clear definition. Devised in the early 20th Century, the IQ test was intended as a way to screen for childhood ‘mental retardation’. Quickly seized upon by all and sunder as a test to measure the total of a person’s mental abilities, its French creator _would be turning in his grave_: Test-deviser Alfred Binet was clear – IQ testing was to serve to _*identify children needing extra help*_ at school and not to be a _“general device for ranking … according to mental worth.”_ Alas, the worst of human nature couldn’t resist the allure of this highly effective screening tool…Nazi Germany used the IQ test to protect the ‘Fatherland’ from genetic impurities – low scoring individuals were forcibly sterilized. They weren’t the only ones; one of the earliest proponents of this method for eliminating ‘degenerates’ and ‘retards’ was the American Psychologist Lewis Truman. In a period of history America would rather forget, _thirty states_ passed laws in the early 1900s forcing _‘low grade’_ people to be sterilised. And they were, _in their thousands_.

The worst part is, as stated we do not use IQ test the way it was meant to be used, as a tool to help children that may need help advance, but more so as a tool for Eugenics

Full Definition of EUGENICS*:* a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed


----------



## Zeta Neprok

IIIIII said:


> It's not the level of accuracy that I have a problem with, its the origin of IQ Test and what it was used for, Eugenics


Indeed, and this is why I prefer the multiple intelligence theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences). I mean really who's is a bigger genius Albert Einstein or Bruce Lee? Most people would say Einstein but I think that both are outright geniuses in different ways. Einstein was an academic genius and Bruce Lee was a genius martial artist.


----------



## Bathilda

I think this thread is the equivalent of walking into a frat house and announcing you're doing a study on penis size. Seriously, people.

125. Bumbling through life, continually shocking people with my ability to stay upright and speak in complete sentences.


----------



## Amy

I made a research on Google to find an IQ test online for children, and... 135 was the result


----------



## IIIIII

TheSonderer said:


> Indeed, and this is why I prefer the multiple intelligence theory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_multiple_intelligences). I mean really who's is a bigger genius Albert Einstein or Bruce Lee? Most people would say Einstein but I think that both are outright geniuses in different ways. Einstein was an academic genius and Bruce Lee was a genius martial artist.


This is awesome, I am now more interested in learning more about this.


----------



## Zeta Neprok

IIIIII said:


> This is awesome, I am now more interested in learning more about this.


Personality Hacker did a really interesting podcast on this, and they talked about how the cognitive functions correlate with various forms of intelligence. Podcast - Ep 75 - Howard Gardner Multiple Intelligence Theory : Personality Hacker

It's not perfect, but it's pretty interesting nonetheless.


----------



## B00Bz

redacted.


----------



## Drakael

Most of tests out there are not reliable. 

The only one on internet that I trust is this one : / Free IQ Test - Extremely Accurate, Instant Results | See My Personality / who is provided by four organisms including Harvard University and it claim to be the " The Most Accurate Online IQ Test " (I approve it). 

I generally get around 145-150 in most of the online tests while in this one I get 130. In fact, English is not my first language so I estimate an 5-10 points more than this score. Anyway, I'm probably more in the 130-140 than the 140-150 range, too bad I didn't get the genetic jackpot ! haha. But, in fact 130-140 isn't a bad place to be, we are enought intelligent to appear to get an 140 over IQ and to be highly succesful if we use our ressources in the right way. But, unfortunately, we also are enough intelligent to understand that we aren't.


----------



## Ephemerald

The bell curve for lying in this poll is around 130-140, or excellent to genius, so make them all 100s.

What a thread of "intellectual" losers. Would've been better to make it an open poll. LMAO.


----------



## StunnedFox

Drakael said:


> Most of tests out there are not reliable.
> 
> The only one on internet that I trust is this one : / Free IQ Test - Extremely Accurate, Instant Results | See My Personality / who is provided by four organisms including Harvard University and it claim to be the " The Most Accurate Online IQ Test " (I approve it).
> 
> I generally get around 145-150 in most of the online tests while in this one I get 130. In fact, English is not my first language so I estimate an 5-10 points more than this score. Anyway, I'm probably more in the 130-140 than the 140-150 range, too bad I didn't get the genetic jackpot ! haha. But, in fact 130-140 isn't a bad place to be, we are enought intelligent to appear to get an 140 over IQ and to be highly succesful if we use our ressources in the right way. But, unfortunately, we also are enough intelligent to understand that we aren't.


Do you have any particular reason to think this test is accurate or trustworthy? It didn't seem significantly different to other online tests, and the style of the site gives little confidence in its veracity. I scored 148, which seems unduly high (especially given I felt I struggled on the spatial and creative tasks):


----------



## Trademark

The real smart or have the "high IQ" don't really mention their's. They tend to keep it and let people figure it out.


----------



## 66393

My psychologist tested me last year and I scored 89. Wow, you all have really high scores!


----------



## Aulredigon

i took two flip tests scoring 80 and 90. i do lack the wit but i still got the sentimental savvy. i mean what bearing does eq have with iq anyway?


----------



## Ausserirdische

The only tests I've ever taken were on the internet, but I don't trust those.


----------



## Elusive Ace

IIIIII said:


> It's not the level of accuracy that I have a problem with, its the origin of IQ Test and what it was used for, Eugenics
> 
> 
> *Intelligence Testing and its Dirty History*Lewis Terman: psychologist and racist who advocated public IQ testing
> ​_*Like ‘Love’*_, ‘Intelligence’ is a term that everybody thinks they understand – but in reality it has a different meaning to everyone. _‘Clever’_, _‘smart’_ and _‘intelligent’_ are words ubiquitous in the English language, but are without any clear definition. Devised in the early 20th Century, the IQ test was intended as a way to screen for childhood ‘mental retardation’. Quickly seized upon by all and sunder as a test to measure the total of a person’s mental abilities, its French creator _would be turning in his grave_: Test-deviser Alfred Binet was clear – IQ testing was to serve to _*identify children needing extra help*_ at school and not to be a _“general device for ranking … according to mental worth.”_ Alas, the worst of human nature couldn’t resist the allure of this highly effective screening tool…Nazi Germany used the IQ test to protect the ‘Fatherland’ from genetic impurities – low scoring individuals were forcibly sterilized. They weren’t the only ones; one of the earliest proponents of this method for eliminating ‘degenerates’ and ‘retards’ was the American Psychologist Lewis Truman. In a period of history America would rather forget, _thirty states_ passed laws in the early 1900s forcing _‘low grade’_ people to be sterilised. And they were, _in their thousands_.
> 
> The worst part is, as stated we do not use IQ test the way it was meant to be used, as a tool to help children that may need help advance, but more so as a tool for Eugenics
> 
> Full Definition of EUGENICS*:* a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed


I'm sorry but you're overgeneralising the whole system, implying that it is *always* used for eugenics, which is false. My IQ testing was done to see what the school should do to help facilitate my learning at an appropriate pace and level for me. And it worked.


----------



## LeonaJay

I've taken both Internet ones and one legit I had to take for school (I took it last year when I was 14). Online I've gotten 144, but I got 126 on my school one, so I'm going for the 120 - 130 boundary :smile:


----------



## B00Bz

Trademark said:


> The real smart or have the "high IQ" don't really mention their's. They tend to keep it and let people figure it out.


That just as much of a crap statement as anything else in this thread.


----------



## Lelu

Good job guys, everyone here is a genius! Oprah must be giving out these scores.


----------



## IIIIII

INFJ Red said:


> I'm sorry but you're overgeneralising the whole system, implying that it is *always* used for eugenics, which is false. My IQ testing was done to see what the school should do to help facilitate my learning at an appropriate pace and level for me. And it worked.


IQ test cater to the Dominant nationality which is White, IMHO its just undercover Eugenics all over again when its used as a means to decide who gets access to upper level resources. If the playing field was equal then maybe we could justify using this method, to determine scholastic aptitude etc. I'm all for giving hardworking, intelligent students, opportunity, but not this way.
Where Are the Gifted Minorities? - Streams of Consciousness - Scientific American Blog Network


----------



## Elusive Ace

IIIIII said:


> IQ test cater to the Dominant nationality which is White, IMHO its just undercover Eugenics all over again when its used as a means to decide who gets access to upper level resources. If the playing field was equal then maybe we could justify using this method, to determine scholastic aptitude etc. I'm all for giving hardworking, intelligent students, opportunity, but not this way.
> Where Are the Gifted Minorities? - Streams of Consciousness - Scientific American Blog Network


Still, you are implying that IQ tests are ALWAYS used preferentially, and that this system of preference is a negative system. IQ tests are often used to aid children in getting an education more suited to their individual abilities. I don't see how a test that requires no knowledge foundations can favour certain races.

Granting high IQ kids more resources is not necessarily bad, because it means that they can grow to their potential and contribute to the intellectual aspects of our society. I see no fundamental problems with its use, when used appropriately.


----------



## Psychophant

INFJ Red said:


> Still, you are implying that IQ tests are ALWAYS used preferentially, and that this system of preference is a negative system. IQ tests are often used to aid children in getting an education more suited to their individual abilities. I don't see how a test that requires no knowledge foundations can favour certain races.
> 
> Granting high IQ kids more resources is not necessarily bad, because it means that they can grow to their potential and contribute to the intellectual aspects of our society. I see no fundamental problems with its use, when used appropriately.


Actually, almost all do test knowledge to some extent on verbal, and sometimes even performance subsections (WISC certainly does, and it's the most popular test for children), and they're definitely biased towards certain demographics. Exactly why that is is pretty controversial though.


----------



## B00Bz

Yomiel said:


> Actually, almost all do test knowledge to some extent on verbal, and sometimes even performance subsections (WISC certainly does, and it's the most popular test for children), and they're demonstrably biased towards certain demographics. Exactly why that is is pretty controversial though.


Ravens Matrices don't rely on verbal at all.


----------



## Psychophant

B00Bz said:


> Ravens Matrices don't rely on verbal at all.


Yes, and Raven's Matrices (well, proprietary adaptations of them) are only one subtest that's used in calculating FSIQ on the WISC, WAIS, and Stanford Binnet, the most commonly used psychologist administered IQ tests, and yes, they're biased towards different races too. Again, why? Well, decide for yourself. I think Raven's are very easy to game as well, but either way, they're not particularly comprehensive as individual assessments of aptitude, since they don't differentiate between the various facets of cognition (so they obviously can't be used to diagnose learning disabilities, or other specific deficits).


----------



## A Temperamental Flutist

Mine is 138.


----------



## Kalix

My psychology teacher gave me a test once where I scored 158, but I don't trust IQ tests to its prolly more like 98-104. 

That just feels about right. 

I feel as though IQ is outdated and unreliable. I'm no super genius, period. Im fascinated by astronomy and social sciences, but anything past three dimensional mathematics looks like the Antichrist to me. 


on Tapatalk


----------



## ishan

I took an online IQ test and got 157. I got some of my friends & family to do it and they scored around the 120 range (one of them scored 160). Not sure how accurate the test was though, lol. I know I'm above average for sure.


----------



## Diamante

My IQ is roughly 126, according to the Swedish (126+ according to the Swedish) and Danish Mensa-tests; the Swedish test have 126+ as highest answer and the Danish-test is said to be more like a real test, with surveillance. With roughly 126 IQ I have a higher IQ than 96% of all people, above that (128-130+, I don't remember exactly) you have a higher IQ than 98% of all people. 

You should be careful with where you do the test(s), a lot of internet-tests (that's valid) doesn't go as high as some of you suggest your IQ is. Be critical of the sources.


----------



## dragthewaters

Mine was measured as 147 when I was 4, but I think it's lower than that. I would guess 125. My husband has a 146 IQ, measured when he was 18 so it's more accurate, and he's much smarter than I am.

BTW these were the "official" tests, not the online ones.


----------



## Kalix

This is why i don't trust IQ. 100 is suppose to be an average, but people who be stupid AF be scoring 120+ on the same written test I scored 150+ on.
Meanwhile, people I see smarter than me be scoring 110+/- on the same test.

Even the 'official' tests, I see as a load.

It's understandable a lot of people here would have higher than average though. Those willing to seek deeper insight from their personality aren't going to be stupid. I'm just complaining n general.



on Tapatalk


----------



## Lakigigar

Official test: 120 (but know there are a different "official tests" with different ranges and numbers)
Unofficial test: Let's summarize it with high numbers ranging from 130 to 170.

I don't like the IQ test. I valued it a lot earlier in my life, but i do know that intelligence isn't that important anymore in my life. There are far more important things in life, however it is always interesting to know a lot of things. But that's more motivation than intelligence, and motivation is also more important than intelligence, because with motivation, you could train your intelligence and achieve more wisdom. It's up to you if it so important for you to have more wisdom and know more things and train it. Or that you just want to use it when you need it (your studies). Some people train it faster than others, but I think learning techniques (and other things like environment) are more important than your actual intellectual ability.

It is actually not a fixed thing. I'm the prove of it. I was mistreated and when i was 6 years old, i had an IQ of 48 and i couldn't go to school because i was too dumb and I could never function in real life. I also had autism. And i had an intellectual disability. And look where I am now? I still have some problems, but I don't think that i have an intellectual disability when i know two or more languages?

The IQ is just a number. It is worthless. And even as a tool to measure intelligence, it is still worthless. Especially for highly intellectual individuals. First of all: everyone has a different opinion of what intelligence actually is. Some also value creativity in it. Second of all: a test always focuses to much on some things and undervalues other things. And third of all: the IQ test is composed and invented by people that are probably not smarter than the "smartest guy in the world". So how are you going to measure what the IQ is of the smartest guy in the world for example. Is there even something as "the smartest guy in the world". The IQ test is only used by people just to brag. But they forget that you have to use it for individual purposes and that you shouldn't use it to compare yourself with other people.


----------



## idunnolol

Internet tests aren't even remotely accurate, so I'd refrain from using that as a baseline for your intellectual capabilities. 

As for my IQ personally, here are my scores:
Full scale: 107.
Performance: 82. (I have trouble with Math and memory.)
Verbal: High. Not sure the actual range. (Read at a 12.5 grade level when I was 11 years old, began chapter books at 4 and I'm a creative writer. I also read about 700-900 WPM. I did my own calculation but I'm not gonna post it because I'm not sure how accurate it is)


----------



## Sporadic Aura

Really fucking high.


----------



## piano

~130


----------



## VinnieBob

my I.Q.?
it's cumquat
ironically i can count to potato:laughing:


----------



## SharksFan99

I have only ever done IQ tests online. Most of the tests seem to place me in the 125-135 IQ range, however I never seem to be able to get an accurate result. On one test I had an IQ of 124, another an IQ of 129 and an IQ of 133 on a third IQ test. Considering that I am only 17 years old and I am near the boundary for gifted, I'm really pleased with it!


----------



## Fluctuate

Used to be probably 130ish. Now... _maybe_ 115.


----------



## Vast Silence




----------



## Messenger Six

I don't mean any offense, but I think these poll results are bogus. Do you know how rare it is to have an IQ above 140? Let alone 150. I think the top %2 in the population starts in the lower or mid 130s. That's Mensa level. That's why I don't trust the online IQ tests. I know PerC has a lot of INTs and INFs, but the numbers still seem inflated. I haven't had a written IQ test since I was in middle school, so I wouldn't trust it to be accurate now. It could have went either up or down. It was 126.


----------



## Metalize

180+ probably


----------



## WamphyriThrall

Metalize said:


> 180+ probably


Said every wannabe INTJ/INTP evar


----------



## Vast Silence




----------



## BroNerd

Katfeatherfoot said:


>


Me too but only 9001 ;(


----------



## Metalize

WamphyriThrall said:


> Said every wannabe INTJ/INTP evar


----------



## Lakigigar

Messenger Six said:


> I don't mean any offense, but I think these poll results are bogus. Do you know how rare it is to have an IQ above 140? Let alone 150. I think the top %2 in the population starts in the lower or mid 130s. That's Mensa level. That's why I don't trust the online IQ tests. I know PerC has a lot of INTs and INFs, but the numbers still seem inflated. I haven't had a written IQ test since I was in middle school, so I wouldn't trust it to be accurate now. It could have went either up or down. It was 126.


This. Also don't trust online tests, *because they are ALWAYS wrong*. Even official tests aren't accurate, but only an indicator. And with a high IQ you don't achieve everything. It also doesn't measure intelligence (for example: creative intelligence) very well. It's only an indicator to see if some have cognitive problems. That's why they invented it. It's not a test to see who is the smartest in the world. That's also impossible to measure.

Such a topic full of arrogants.


----------



## Surreal Snake

I'm a double genius


----------



## Lakigigar

Surreal Snake said:


> I'm a double genius


If you were a genius, you would be a little bit more original


----------



## Surreal Snake

I'm double original


----------



## Metalize




----------



## Wolf

I've tested as anywhere from 110-130 in the past, however I would take these results with a grain of salt. Also in my opinion IQ is not an extremely realistic measurement of intelligence, I find that these IQ tests are not always very reliable so you shouldn't necessarily trust everything the test tells you! People are very quick to assume that the number a test spits out to you is fact, and thus we get loads of people claiming that they have an IQ that's value is overly inflated.


----------



## Lakigigar

It doesn't help that this topic starts with "below 100" where 50 percent of the populations belongs to, and that you could vote on 140-150... That creates higher expectations, and people are more ashamed when they vote "below 100". Some people even are going to think that 120-130 is normal because of the high numbers, because is in the middle and so on... but actually it already means that you're very smart.

Remember that an IQ tells actually nothing (only that you have no cognitive disabilities, and believe me if you know how a forum functions, you have no "severe" cognitive disability. I think it is even impossible on the IQ test I made to have a score of more than 140+.


----------



## Iconclast

Where can I find an accurate test?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lakigigar

josephflores911 said:


> Where can I find an accurate test?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You need to pay it, or visit Mensa.

But i don't think you should do it, because you already know if you're intelligent or not. An IQ-test is only handy when someone suspects you have a cognitive disability. I don't think anyone capable of visiting forums and making an account has a disability (or an IQ lower than 80). Otherwise this forum would be overwhelmed by children younger than 8 years, if you know what i mean.

There is absolutely no difference between having an IQ of 120 or 140 to your life. There will always be a little insecurity (if you slept badly, you can have a lower score than expected or should be), and it still is an IQ test (it undervaluates some aspects).

There is no value behind an IQ tests, and even if you suspect you're very smart, you probably know it by yourself.


----------



## sereneone

It's like this: IQ of 130 or above is 2% of the population. It is the Elite of society.

In your poll, more than 55% of your audience is putting itself into that 2% slot.

Ahhhhh. Just no.


----------



## Alaya

sereneone said:


> It's like this: IQ of 130 or above is 2% of the population. It is the Elite of society.
> 
> In your poll, more than 55% of your audience is putting itself into that 2% slot.
> 
> Ahhhhh. Just no.


Everyone's special, didn't you get the memo?


----------



## Metalize

The old Dunning-Kruger effect, very good. :laughing:


----------



## Stelmaria

I have an above average IQ, it's at least 101! (When normalised and compared to other snow leopards).


----------



## beth x

Snowy Leopard said:


> I have an above average IQ, it's at least 101! (When normalised and compared to other snow leopards).


Someone added two points by changing your post rank?


----------



## Stelmaria

bethdeth said:


> Someone added two points by changing your post rank?


Just the one point!


----------



## LibertyPrime

Wow, everyone on this forum is so smajt. I can count to potato tho... <.,<

Dunning-Kruger snowflakes everywhere!










*I'll believe this poll when me shit turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.*


----------



## Carpentet810

NZT-48 will fix us...


----------



## ai.tran.75

Was 126 at 19 , quite sure it's much lower now 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## The Guitar Hero

Last time I checked, it was around 155-160. Really doesn't mean much. Primarily bragging rights. IQ is _way_ too overrated.


----------



## Doccium

According to an IQ test I took a few days ago my IQ is between 125 and 130.

Well, I don't think that IQ tests can show someone their true intelligence.


----------



## CaboBayCaptain1297

124


----------



## MolaMola

Lol I seriously doubt there are 68 people on this forum with a 150+ IQ


----------



## ninjahitsawall

ImminentThunder said:


> When I was officially tested in school, I wasn't told my score. It was mailed to my home, my parents filed it away and I never saw it again.  It did get me into the gifted program though, so I suppose it's decent.
> 
> Of the online tests I've taken, I'd say the one that put me as 134 sounds the closest to my actual score. (Assuming you can actually trust free internet tests, which I doubt.)
> 
> I'm probably in the 130-145 range, but I don't know. Could be higher I suppose. It'd be nice to find out someday.


Yeah I'm not sure of my IQ but also got into a gifted program. Since they never told me (or my parents, since I was 6) about the test or even how it's scored, I don't know how they determine "gifted". But from online research, I found the equivalent of 130 on an IQ test is a common cutoff for the gifted tests (there's some kind of scoring equivalency). 

On online "tests" I score anywhere from about 125-145. Given that internet quizzes are known to inflate scores, along with the typical giftedness cutoff I'd say 130 as a (conservative) estimate.


----------



## TTIOTBSAL

My IQ is both pretty average and high and I don't have multiple personalities disorder nor am I possessed, what am I?


----------



## Kalix

My IQ spans taller than your ego at 2207. Git wrecked.


----------



## TTIOTBSAL

Genius.


----------



## MolaMola

My IQ was super officially tested at age 20 when I was getting screened for a learning disorder. It is apparently between 143-149. My SAT score was 800v, 800w, 600m = 2200.

I also have a learning disorder! So I don't put a whole lot of faith in IQ tests because, while they are good baselines, humans are so much more than a bunch of brain games.

I know how horrible it is to feel "limited" because of some arbitrary assessment, and scoring low on an IQ test doesn't mean anything about your worth.

Furthermore, studies have shown that emotional intelligence ("EQ") is just as important, if not more so, than IQ, when it comes to general life success and happiness. 

Enviado desde mi SM-G920V mediante Tapatalk


----------



## Stelmaria

NewMango said:


> Lol I seriously doubt there are 68 people on this forum with a 150+ IQ


I'd say to anyone who thinks they do... Prove it!


----------



## Miss Bingley

Now I'm not saying y'all are lying, but IQ is a bell-curve. The overwhelming score is usually around 100, which is considered normal intelligence. So either all of PerC has IQs over 120, or some of y'all are overestimating.


----------



## g_w

Dana Scully said:


> My IQ is both pretty average and high and I don't have multiple personalities disorder nor am I possessed, what am I?


On the wrong forum? :laughing:


----------



## Delicious Speculation

Are these threads the PerC version of Weedles on Pokemon Go or something?

If you've taken an online IQ test, then your score is overestimated. 

http://www.themarysue.com/iq-tests-how-do-they-work/

IQ is an oversimplification of how human intelligence works. I've been formally tested. I have a very high IQ. I was not the greatest student and my executive functioning skills are often questionable. Even within those IQ test scores, there are differences. My spatial and fluid reasoning skills are better than my verbal skills. Again, IQ is not the end-all, be-all.


----------



## backdrop12

I have never done an IQ test , but I would think that I would be in the 70s due to upbringing and being in a bad educational environment via public schooling. Either way , I still consider myself an idiot 


One of my brothers did take the IQ test. He scored a 106.


----------



## VinnieBob

NewMango said:


> Lol I seriously doubt there are 68 people on this forum with a 150+ IQ


they just like to add the zero at the end:laughing:
my test keeps coming back as cumquat
some times potato


----------



## huhh

ten stories high if it's a foot


----------



## Clayfighter

This thread is a good example of why we cant trust what people say about their IQ score.


----------



## hahahalessandra

I took an internet test a couple of years ago and got 146. I doubt it was accurate though, since those above 140 are supposed to be Extreme Geniuses.


----------



## L'Enfant Terrible

NewMango said:


> Lol I seriously doubt there are 68 people on this forum with a 150+ IQ


Yeah. People nowadays tend to have very big egos. A person with a 150+ IQ would never believe in IQ tests in the first place realizing that (unless it's an official test) internet IQ tests are extremely inaccurate and usually the scores are inflated to pat you on the back and also, intelligence is something that we currently can't really quantify, which becomes even more accurate if we take into account all types of intelligence too.


----------



## meaningless

Pfft, all of you guys have IQs of 150+,well jokes on you; I have an IQ of 290, could talk when I was 2 months in my mothers womb, oh yeah.... I also have the ability to mindread, and the ability to rip apart subatomic particles. Jealous much PerC geniuses? :wink:


----------



## Communal Soap

meaningless said:


> Pfft, all of you guys have IQs of 150+,well jokes on you; I have an IQ of 290, could talk when I was 2 months in my mothers womb, oh yeah.... I also have the ability to mindread, and the ability to rip apart subatomic particles. Jealous much PerC geniuses? :wink:


I bet you haven't figured out how to never poop.


----------



## Clayfighter

Im not sure if we have anyone with a legitimate IQ of 150+ on perc....we might have a few that could qualify, but none of them ever discuss anything of a technical nature or at least nothing seriously impressive on any level. Most of it is all what has been heard before time and time again.

Everyone says they are smart and have an IQ of 130+ even 150+ but any use of mathematics/logic in here... or discussion of science philosophy etc is generally on the high school level. From what I have seen, if you speak about something you learned which cannot be collectively and easily pulled up on a single website from a google search...or maybe 2-3 sites at most from google. No one will have anything to really say. Because most people dont have a clue until they use the search engine to verify their words. So unless you can learn the subject quickly via google. Most people are without words.

Even the people with an advanced understanding dont talk about the topics which would lead to them producing any display of that advanced understanding, but its for other reasons than the people who cant. It's probably because no one would post in response to it or even understand it.

Generally from what Ive seen, the most intelligent people on this forum will barely say anything, often times nothing, but they will randomly surprise you with some knowledge/insight out of the blue when they feel it will be helpful. It seem like they tend not to overextend themselves in speech until they see a reason to. I assume its because it would dumb to go around speaking a language no one spoke, until they see evidence of people speaking from a higher tier of thinking(that language)


----------

