Thread: Problems with IQ, tests ect..

1. If one takes many online IQ tests you get a quite good picture. Even if you take official tests, your results will vary somewhat. It is a problem that different tests use different standard deviations though. Let's say a person score 130 on an IQ test with SD=15 and scores 148 on an IQ test with SD=24. That is exactly the same result, but that person might not get that, and dismiss IQ as just being crap, because the results "vary" so much. Of course it is more difficult to measure high IQs, so one can be less certain about those. Anyhow, if you take a lot of online tests and just calculate the average score, I am sure that score will be a very decent indication on what it really is. Personally I just say my IQ is about 125. I think it is foolish to say ones IQ for example is 127. You can never be that certain about it, it is always going to be "ish".

2. it's mho that online iq tests are bogus tho... bogus, as in, they give you a set of problems and convert that to an "iq score" in a pretty much haphazard fashion.

specific problems:

1) imo, as online iq tests are free, they basically just want people to crowd their pages. thus, they give higher scores than normal, making people excited about their scores. personally, i'd guess at least 20 points extra.

2) even if they create a score based on standard deviations (ie. bell curve-ish), the pool of users that has access to internet etc. or has interest in iq tests is not an average of the population. which screws up the scores again. (and i know some might be thinking that, hey, but internet users are prob smarter than average, and so on. i'm guessing they're correlating for that as well - based on not fact, but a guess at best - adding even more noise to the real score.)

iq scores are just bullshit anyway, tho, aren't they? extremely thorough research on achievement has shown that there is basically zero correlance to achievement and IQ, and instead a very strong correlance with "hard work."

reference to research: Secrets of greatness: Practice and hard work bring success - October 30, 2006

let's abandon the iq-sit-on-your-ass-with-your-supposed-talent-bandwagon and start working hard! =) it's the "smart" thing to do...

3. "Hard work"? This is the NT forum.

4. blah. online tests seem pretty damn inaccurate. i've gotten as low as 120 and as high as 180.

i took a real IQ test in high school (~10 hours of testing), and i got somewhere in the high 130s.

but i think the standard deviations are different for different tests, so none of those numbers really mean anything lol.

5. Originally Posted by dissonance
blah. online tests seem pretty damn inaccurate. i've gotten as low as 120 and as high as 180.

i took a real IQ test in high school (~10 hours of testing), and i got somewhere in the high 130s.

but i think the standard deviations are different for different tests, so none of those numbers really mean anything lol.
I give IQ tests the 'ish' credit, so if an iq test claims I'm 138, I'd say 130'ish'. That's the most certain I can be.

6. Originally Posted by Camelopardalis
I give IQ tests the 'ish' credit, so if an iq test claims I'm 138, I'd say 130'ish'. That's the most certain I can be.
well then i'm 180-ish and 120-ish and a lot of ishes in between.

(but i'm totally nowhere close to 180)

7. An IQ test is not a direct measure of our score. It takes your performance and compares you to a bank of average scores by age. It divides the age you scored by your actual age and multiplies by 100. Therefore, if you get the same percentage of correct answers when you're 16 that you do when you're 17, your IQ will be lower at 17 than it was at 16, in spite of the same performance.

Also, the precision of an IQ test relies on how many results you have for comparison. Therefore, the higher and lower on the bell curve you get, the less precise you get. I've scored as low as 146 and as high as 174 on unofficial IQ tests. It depends on the test, but once you get above about 130, most tests are no longer very meaningful due to low precision.

8. IQ tests that assign quantitative criteria tend to statistically generalize when working to relate "abnormalities" against their central formulaic scheme.

That is not to say that the test itself is founded on unreliable properties; rather, that the efficiency of the numerical assignments flex when working to include statistical anomalies.

As a sidebar, I don't believe most tests share a central statistical system/skill set when deciding what types of questions to use. As such, many of the concepts could be unique to the proctor and/or biased in favor of this "normalizing" effect.

9. You people are making me feel IQ deprived, "as low as 120"? 126 is my highest score!

10. Why feel deprived? Who cares what they consider?

For that matter, why baseline your personal estimation against an arbitrary sum at all?

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