User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 55

  1. #31
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    What I've noticed with this test:
    - I had more problems with certain concepts that other. Some concepts seemed very natural to me, while some had me scratching my head and having to think very hard.
    - When I was attempting the test, I tried to poke at the puzzles from different angles: one of the main ones being "What is the test designer trying to do here?" I didn't feel like it was an objective test, but a reflection of what goes on in the author's mind, and I tried to guess at that to understand the overall picture. I also tried the 'blurry-eyed' technique on the ones I was stuck on to see if cutting details made anything pop.
    - There's quite a few 'digital' concepts, like doing something once makes it appear, doing it a second time makes it disappear, which I'm not sure is entirely applicable to the non-computer users (?)
    - If you've played with toys that have little 'poles' in a grid and you tie strings around them, it helps with understanding some of the puzzles.
    - 'Move one matchstick' games help.
    - Sudoku skills help.
    - Having experience watching logo elements floating in from all directions and coming together in the middle helps (like movie company logos and the microsoft logo and things like that)
    - I moved my hands and arms around a lot trying to solve the puzzles.
    - I was slightly bothered how some of the puzzles only followed 'vertical' or 'horizontal' logic flows and not nicely sudoku-ed it-works-from-all-directions out.
    - I usually do worse on tests that are less visual and tests with real life pictures, like three people of different heights holding different-colored umbrellas and you ask me to line them up logically... arrrgh.
    - And I usually do horribly on tests where each question is timed. I just crumble under the constant pressure.

    Conclusion: I agree with FDG that it's biased in favor of people with strong 'visual' intelligence, and who are fairly familiar with modern digital-age concepts.

    The whole IQ thing is kinda bunk anyway. Personally I value EQ a lot more.
    It's so interesting to read your thought process. It's so different to my own. I have to say I almost never think about what the test designer is trying to do (that seems like such a INFJ approach! ). I only start to do that if I'm really stuck, and even then it's simply a clue finding mission. And I've only ever done 'blurry eyes' (with any success) when I'm dealing with word puzzles - like an anagram. It rarely ever works for me, and if it does it's usually functions as a mental relaxation technique, to allow the answer to come to me instinctively. I can't really take in 'the whole'; I tend to dissect it and then put it back together again.

    I just look for patterns. Sometimes it's glances my eyes across it all, finding things that visually look similar and working out how they're inter-connected. Sometimes it's a form of cross-referencing trial and error, where I test a theory out (ie. what if the pattern is X? Does that work consistently?). I also do a horizontal/vertical/diagonal/clockwise/anti-clockwise etc scan to see if things flow in an obvious directional pattern.

    I would say these sorts of tests are very Ne friendly, and in that sense are biased. A lot of it is about how quickly your brain can unscramble seemingly random nonsense into a clear structure. Good usage of Te probably helps too because it sets good groundwork for common lines of logical thought. I don't doubt other methods (and functions) can work very effectively but perhaps it comes less naturally and is therefore more time consuming and mentally straining.

    Can I ask why it bothered you that the logic was vertical/horizontal rather than Sudoku-style?
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

  2. #32
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    I got up to Question 27 the first time and real life called, so I random-picked the rest and submitted it. Got 112. Had 20 minutes left then.

    Then today I went back and did the whole test again, using 31 minutes. Got this:



    Let's say the second time I blazed through the first 27 that I already did in 5 minutes, I spent 26 minutes on the last 12 questions, so that comes out at 2 minutes and 10 seconds per question. So I would have completed another 8 questions had I not stopped doing the test the first time. Let's minus another 2 from that where I changed my answer the second time, so that's 6 questions extra. Based on a basic, straightforward calculation of the 'extra' scores, that will be... about 120?

    I took a test in junior high and got 107. Other internet tests put me at around 105-120. I think it matters of you 'get' the author or not. I think I 'got' this one.

    What I've noticed with this test:
    - I had more problems with certain concepts that other. Some concepts seemed very natural to me, while some had me scratching my head and having to think very hard.
    - When I was attempting the test, I tried to poke at the puzzles from different angles: one of the main ones being "What is the test designer trying to do here?" I didn't feel like it was an objective test, but a reflection of what goes on in the author's mind, and I tried to guess at that to understand the overall picture. I also tried the 'blurry-eyed' technique on the ones I was stuck on to see if cutting details made anything pop.
    - There's quite a few 'digital' concepts, like doing something once makes it appear, doing it a second time makes it disappear, which I'm not sure is entirely applicable to the non-computer users (?)
    - If you've played with toys that have little 'poles' in a grid and you tie strings around them, it helps with understanding some of the puzzles.
    - 'Move one matchstick' games help.
    - Sudoku skills help.
    - Having experience watching logo elements floating in from all directions and coming together in the middle helps (like movie company logos and the microsoft logo and things like that)
    - I moved my hands and arms around a lot trying to solve the puzzles.
    - I was slightly bothered how some of the puzzles only followed 'vertical' or 'horizontal' logic flows and not nicely sudoku-ed it-works-from-all-directions out.
    - I usually do worse on tests that are less visual and tests with real life pictures, like three people of different heights holding different-colored umbrellas and you ask me to line them up logically... arrrgh.
    - And I usually do horribly on tests where each question is timed. I just crumble under the constant pressure.

    Conclusion: I agree with FDG that it's biased in favor of people with strong 'visual' intelligence, and who are fairly familiar with modern digital-age concepts.

    The whole IQ thing is kinda bunk anyway. Personally I value EQ a lot more.
    I trust any measure of EQ even less than IQ. They are both really problematic.

    I was thinking about some of the other skills involved in the test. While I said it's mostly working memory, I said it also peripherally involves other skills, right? But I think the impact of those is ultimately to randomize the results more than anything. Take this test for instance. The ability to perceive and conceptualize geometric orientation of an object will certainly help. On the other hand, it does not utilize hue at all and utilizes intermediate luminance in only one question I can think of. So, your ability to perceive or conceptualize that will not help at all.

    The question is, why should the first skill be counted toward your IQ and not the second one? I can't think of any good reason. It's really just the result of the fact that no matter what questions they ask, they will overlap with some other particular ability and it is incredibly difficult (if not impossible) to make all things equal.

    For the record, the color sensitivity thing came to mind because color tests generally indicate I have perfect color vision . On the other hand, I've had lifelong problems with geometry and spacial awareness, sometimes so bad that I wonder if something is slightly wrong with my brain.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #33
    Starcrossed Seafarer Aquarelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    3,532

    Default

    I got bored at the end and answered a few at random... 122
    Masquerading as a normal person day after day is exhausting.

    My blog:
    TypeC: Adventures of an Introvert
    Wordpress: http://introvertadventures.wordpress.com/

  4. #34
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Southern Kross View Post
    Can I ask why it bothered you that the logic was vertical/horizontal rather than Sudoku-style?
    My INFP keeps saying I have mild OCD

    Anyway, I've always been fascinated with these:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palindrome

    So since 'perfect forms' can exist with grids and something as arbitrary as language, it should be relatively easy to design these tests to be perfectly logical from all directions as well.

    I'm only a teensy bit bothered, though -- nothing to worry about.
    4w5 sp/sx EII

  5. #35
    my floof is luxury Wind Up Rex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    853 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post

    Also intelligence is highly malleable. It has been shown that people who believe they are smart perform better on tests and get better grades. (There have been experiments where children were given false test results, their progress was monitored, then they were told the real ones and monitored again.) If you think you are smart and act like it, you will be. So I say think positively.
    I came across the exact opposite idea not too long ago in conversation with a friend of mine who works in education. He described to me a recent study that took two groups of elementary school students, and administered mathematics tests to them. The researchers told the first group of students that they had done well because they were intelligent, while telling the second that they had performed well because they had "worked hard". They then re-administered the exam to the two groups and found changes in their test-taking strategies. Namely, the "smart" group tended to work easier problems first, and skipped over those they found to be more challenging. The "hard-working" group, on the other hand, tended to spend more times on the more difficult questions, and overall actually improved their scores more significantly than the "smart" group in the second round of testing.

    I'll have to see if I can track down the study he was referring to, but there is a rising interest in motivation within the field of education. Nonetheless it seems to be something of a mixed bag as far as the literature as to which side motivation/hard-work or innate intellectual ability ultimately matter more in determining success. It seems to be agreed with an IQ of 115 or greater, one is capable of virtually any profession. I did find what you said about specialization after 135 to be interesting, though.

    On a more personal note, I don't take IQ test, and generally avoid conversations around the subject for reasons similar to the ones that you mentioned. I have a basic, existential aversion to limitations of any sort, and there are enough obstacles to me in this world without added angst around some number. For me to recognize someone as totally out of my league intellectually, it means that I'm incapable of reverse engineering their thought processes, and I can count on one hand the number of times that has happened. I naturally encounter those who are quicker problem-solvers or more nuanced thinkers, and am quick to acknowledge them. I enjoy being around those kinds of people because it provides me the opportunity to go through that process of learning how they reason, and improve my own tool set, sorta speak. I do a great deal with what I have, and am fortunate to have a lot to show for it.

    To that extent, I reject IQ more or less on practical grounds. Unlike something like MBTI that applies a label to your gifts and deficits, and gives some indication on how to navigate those, IQ has no real use to the individual. It can be a loose predictor of quality of life, but beyond that what is the benefit in knowing?
    And so long as you haven’t experienced this: to die and so to grow,
    you are only a troubled guest on the dark earth

  6. #36
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    For the record, the color sensitivity thing came to mind because color tests generally indicate I have perfect color vision . On the other hand, I've had lifelong problems with geometry and spacial awareness, sometimes so bad that I wonder if something is slightly wrong with my brain.
    Now that's interesting!

    *runs off to go find color tests
    4w5 sp/sx EII

  7. #37
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Now that's interesting!

    *runs off to go find color tests
    Use this one. Then we can compare.

  8. #38
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    Use this one. Then we can compare.
    Here :

    4w5 sp/sx EII

  9. #39
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Here :

    I got 19. But I forgot to save the screenshot.

  10. #40
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicodemus View Post
    I got 19. But I forgot to save the screenshot.
    My ENFJ sis works with graphics a lot and she's always bothered about the lack of 'color harmony' in artwork she has to deal with, and when she asks me for opinions and I'm always like "Doesn't look that different", which annoys her.
    4w5 sp/sx EII

Similar Threads

  1. Visual IQ test
    By nothappy in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 07-10-2012, 04:01 PM
  2. IQ tests and myself
    By Ferrus in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 12:59 PM
  3. How do types perceive IQ tests?
    By Blackmail! in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 12-17-2008, 06:39 PM
  4. Roommate IQ Test
    By ygolo in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 01:25 PM
  5. [NT] Problems with IQ, tests ect..
    By God Of Emptiness in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-05-2008, 12:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO