/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10869383
https://www.free-iq-test.net/
http://test.mensa.no/#

>>10869383
http://www.avlisad.com.ar/test/
It's in spanish, but you should be able to do it with google translate since only the first page where you enter you age and sex and the last page which displays your score are in spanish.

That test is the original progressive matrices test. I don't know how useful it is in 2019 due to the flynn effect, but from what I heard, most modern tests are modified versions of that one with similar difficulty, modified only because the answers to the original one are apparently readily available.

There is also the advanced progressive matrices which can be found here:
https://www.docdroid.net/2GeaOPU/jpg2pdf.pdf
This is also the original one but once again, modern versions might differ.

Take the results of those tests with a grain of salt and make sure to use the british norms to convert your raw scores to IQ

>>10870480
Got 50/60 at age 15 with the Spanish one

>>10869384
>https://www.free-iq-test.net/
this one is legit i have got similar score to the one i got on wais-r

>>10871179
I am satisfied with my score, so I agree with this statement

>>10869384
Most likely these tests are inaccurate.

Pic related is my ethnicity. According to the first-rate work of science known as "The Bell Curve," my average group IQ is 85, but I scored a whopping 143. This puts me 4SD above my racial average (i.e. the top 0.006%) and even 3SD above the white average (smarter than 99.7% of whites).

We can therefore conclude it's far more likely that those tests have a lot of error than that I'm some kind of elite genius.

>>10871629
>believing in "average ethnic IQ's"
Expected better from someone with an IQ of 143. Do you realise how many people you have to test, let alone get the funding to do so, to work out average scores?

>>10870480
Just finished the Spanish one with six minutes left. How do I convert my results into an IQ score?

>>10873924
Nevermind, apparently it's 125. Got the same result with the online mensa test a few years back. Online IQ tests shouldnt really be taken seriously, but I think my IQ is probably 110-115.

>>10869383
I’m always skeptical of these. Whenever i do these iq tests i do pretty good, usually around the 110~120 zone. However I’m a slow reader, mediocre at best, with bad comprehension. I have to read the same shit like 3 times

>IQ thread

nice coping mechanism for being a loser, losers

>>10874300
I got a 135 on mesa and 125 on the spanish one

>>10874325
found the 95

>>10869384
Those only cover ravens matrices.

>>10871629
you better thank dem huwite ancestors boi

another iq thread

>>10873821
It's not about what I believe, it's about the facts.
Thankfully, /sci/ and /pol/ have made it abundantly clear what they are.

>>10875192
the facts are niggers are niggers to white people. and white people are niggers to the jew. the jew is the superior race and nothing else really matters. you are a slave to the jew, you are just a nigger

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence

>>10873821
>>10874368
its pasta retarded newfags

I've had a real IQ test and all of the online tests on here give me a way higher score than what I got.

>>10875307
pic + timestamp or confirmed shill

>>10870480
>>10871051
>>10873924
>>10873961


Use the following equations to convert raw score to IQ

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Becker11/project/Worlds-IQ/attachment/5a58f1194cde266d588273d0/AS:523585703735296@1501843967031/download/Raw-score+to+IQ+conversion+formulas.txt?context=ProjectUpdatesLog

>>10874338
Spanish one goes all the way up to 125. Thats the limit. You need to take the advanced progressive matrices which measures up to 135 i believe or 145. Not sure

>>10875192
>it's about the facts.
Your facts do not take into account the many different variables that affects intelligence beyond ethnicity. Nutrition, pollution, education and culture affects not only your IQ but also how well you perform on IQ tests, even for the so called culturally unbiased ones like the raven matrices.

>>10871179
What did you guys get on this one?
>inb4 162

>>10875453
157, which is horseshit. I'm somewhere in the 135-145 range, and from the looks of it, that test is very similar to the advanced progressive matrices, and my raw score would put me at around 140.

>>10869384
>https://www.free-iq-test.net/

Literally horseshit tier.

OP it's or the mensa norway or JCTI

>>10875489
There was also a really good troll RPM one posted here which gave you a borderline retarded score, but still had good questions/raw score

>>10875489
can you link the JCTI I cant find it anywhere

>>10869383
>are there any online tests that are worth it?
no
Either it's done by a psychiatrist or you're wasting your time on a literal facebook quiz.
t. 142 IQ, professionally tested

>>10875232
It's not a pasta, it's just the same (correct) answer to the same old question. Those online tests are bullshit, if a nigger can score 4SD above his racial mean.

>>10875539
https://web.archive.org/web/20180701142825/http://www.cerebrals.org/jcti/index.html
Also what the fuck is the pattern here?

>>10876120
Go clockwise:
Patterns move: left -> left -> right -> bottom -> bottom.
Answer: 2

>>10876151
>Patterns move: left -> left -> right -> bottom -> bottom.
This doesn't hold for the right pattern in the first disk from the right. Instead it appears on the right every 2 disks which is incompatible with answer 2 assuming your clockwise interpretation is correct.

This is a good IQ, right? Right...?

>>10876185
Yes. /sci/ losers will tell you you need 140+ IQ to get anywhere, but don't listen to them

>>10876185
It is if you do something worthwile with it, otherwise it's meaningless.

>>10876120
I'm 100% sure the pattern is either 1,2, or 5. Most likely 5. My logic is as follows: You have two layers on each image. The bottom layer is the layer with the grid on the left, the pizza slice on the right and the horizontal line on the bottom. You then take the bottom pattern that is given at the start and rotate it anticlockwise twice. So from bottom to right and from right to left. Then you start all over again once the color has reached the left side, taking the new bottom pattern and rotate it anticlockwise to the right then left, then do the same over and over. Now that's when you go forward, from the first circle all the way to the last in a anticlockwise pattern. If you want to go backward, you rotate the left pattern clockwise. So you should have ideally the 3 line pattern at the bottom, the grid pattern on the left because and the pattern on the right would most likely be the bottom layer which is the pizza slice pattern. 5 fits the pattern the best from my perspective, not 2.

>>10876120
its 4, each circle only shares one segment with the one before/after it

>>10876250
By this metric answer 5 is also valid.

>>10875444
>https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Becker11/project/Worlds-IQ/attachment/5a58f1194cde266d588273d0/AS:523585703735296@1501843967031/download/Raw-score+to+IQ+conversion+formulas.txt?context=ProjectUpdatesLog

I got 56/60but I am too stupid to do the formula. Spoonfeed me please?

Stanford Binet

>>10876297
age?

>>10876362
27

>>10869383
ur on sci. your iq is probably around 130. that's all there is to it.

>>10876506
You may have 125, 130, 140, there's no way to know exactly since the test wasn't designed to go that high, but according to the norms I've provided, your IQ should be around 130 for that specific score. Just remember, the test can discriminate only up to the 95th percentile or 125 IQ, so anything above that might not be very accurate. I've posted also the advanced progressive matrices, which has a set of 3 questions. That one should be able to discriminate up to 145 if I remember correctly.

>>10877182
a set of 36 questions*

>>10870480
That was a really scrub-esque test.

>>10871051
>50/60
Wtf's wrong with you?
These are easy as shit.

>>10876120
5

>>10876120
It's 5.
Proof: The proof is trivial. Use your head.
Source: It came to me in a dream.

>>10876151
>>10876245
>>10876250
Brainlets, all of you. The answer is unequivocally 5 and the reason should be obvious to anyone with an IQ above room temperature kelvin.

Start on the right side. The black segment moves clockwise. On the first movement from the left segment it reveals a new pattern and covers the spoke pattern. On the second movement it replaces the bottom segment and remains stationary, revealing the spoke pattern again.

This simple pattern repeats 3 more times. The second time for the white square. It moves once, revealing a new pattern and covering the spoke pattern. Then it replaces the black square as the new stationary bottom.

The pattern repeats again for the second new pattern. It reveals a new hatched pattern and covers the spokes. Then it reveals the spoke pattern and takes the stationary bottom. The answer is 5 and everyone is a brainlet except for this based big brain man. >>10877811

>>10871629
its your chad Akan genes, obviously

>>10877798
Agreed , I honestly zoned out a bit due to them being too easy. Started to overthink a bit on certain questions due to their simplicity.

I got 59/60 on the spanish one at 3am. Literal retard tier.

>>10877798
>That was a really scrub-esque test.
It is easy, but the test is supposed to measure IQ up to 125. If you get 60/60 it just means you're above 125. Try to do the advanced progressive matrices, I posted the link as a pdf. If you got 60/60, the advanced progressive matrices should still be fairly easy, except for the last 2-3 items. If you sore 36/36, then your IQ should be 145+. The triple 9 society used to accept applicants who scored 35+/36 on that test

>>10877845
>Brainlets, all of you.
Good to know i'm a brainlet for saying it's 5.

>>10878311
Choosing multiple options makes you the biggest brainlet of them all.

>>10875902
there are blacks with genius iq tho

>>10879223
There are also apes with higher IQ than african children. What's your point?

>>10879226
Ive never encountered someone who was staunchly opposed to iq tests that was particularly bright or honest

>>10879230
I'm not the guy you were replying to but he's not saying IQ tests are bullshit. He's saying the online ones are which is true.

>>10875213
>>10875192
Anti-white propaganda

What in the fuck? How do?

>>10880768
I'd say one. Too brainlet to see a pattern with the color of the dots, but that matches the position and numerical patterns.

>>10880768
1

>>10880768
2

>>10880768
Pretty obviously four.

>>10880768
1

>>10880768
four's the only one that makes sense.

>>10880832
>>10880839
>>10880841
Thanks

took test once i got 98, took it again got a 126.
if i take it again how much higher will i go?

>>10880768
4. The pattern is simple. 2 white and 1 black per row/columm and the dots increase by one each time you go down or right. The dots also never appear in the same triangle in a given row/column

>>10880768
4. The pattern is simple. The black dots are always either on the top triangle or bottom one while the white dots are always on the side triangles. This right off the bat rules out 3,5,6. The amount of dots increase from left to right or top to bttom. There is also 1 set of black dots and 2 set of white dots per row/column. This rules out 1,2. Answer left is 4

>>10881248
Let me consult the chart

>>10873924
Finished it too with 25 minutes left, I'm dumber than you though x)

>>10876120
Answer is 2 because every time you from one circle to the next it carries with it only 2 patterns from the previous one and only one of those patterns is in the same position.

2 is not perfect but it's the most right answer.

>>10878308
I got 35/36
We big brain nao.
Surprisingly, only fucked up 24- the pattern doesn't make any sense. The questions 32-36 seemed too easy, though. You only have
>some rotator tile that cover up other tiles (32)
>addition/substraction of the opposite sides, depending on colour (33)
>angular rotation, form following and point annihilation (34)
>overlapping dark lines stay, opposite dark lines annihilate, dotted lines stay (35)
>overlapping dot-connected lines stay, overlapping external lines and non-overlapping (or alternatively- opposing) dot-connected lines are annihilated (36)
They look like something even the average brainlet would make out in ~15 minutes if they try.

>>10880768
It's think it's either (1)(more probable) or (2)(less probable).
You always have 3-triangle fill up at a 180 degree arch, so (3) and (4) would shit up the pattern both horizontally and veritcally. They also shit up the whole matrix pattern.
A up-vertical 5 black dots (1) would finish the matrix thingy in a symmetric satisfying way, as it mirrors the top right and maintains the arch rule.

>>10880768
If this is anything other than four the test is garbage.

>>10879230
>Ive never encountered someone who was staunchly opposed to iq tests that was particularly bright or honest
Are you in a position to make that judgment?
I'm not talking about IQ tests in general, I'm talking about those particular tests.

I did a reputable test and got 84 but I'm the smartest person I know :(. I read lots of books and academic journals so I know I'm not retarded but I'm no good at patterns and math so that's what I think it's low.

>>10880768

Obviously 1.

>>10880768
>>10883309
>A test must suit my level of intelligence to be legit

The answer is obviously 1.

>>10884161
Nah. The answer is obviously four. It's not my fault if there is more than one answer to the shitty test. Four fulfills more patterns than one.

>>10871179
Half way through got bored and marked 6th as correct answer for the rest
Still 126 IQ
Feels batman

>>10875450
Where does culture come from, fundamentally, if not from race?

>>10869383
iq tests are only needed when circumference goes unheeded

>>10885137
>tfw bigger than average head
It's all a game to me, brainlet roaches

>>10885099
from the environment of course :^)

China: IQ testing only best students
USA, Canada, Western Europe: widespread testing among all races, classes
Africa: no testing

>racial IQ is a thing
Sure, bud.

>>10886336
none of the things you said are true

>>10886357
Yeah, no one actually issues any IQ tests. Lynn the con man just smooches some PISA results.

>>10887090
imagine believing human subpopulations that have been isolated for tens of thousands of years in wildly divergent ecological contexts have the same exact behavioral and cognitive profiles.

>tfw 123 iq

>>10885099
Culture comes from environmental and socioeconomic factors as well as the history of t hat specific group. There are no genes that codes the dress different ethnicity or races wear. There is no gene that codes the music that different races play. There is no genes that codes the stories and legends that different races pass down.

>>10876185
Cranial parameters if you don't mind? This is a part of my personal project.

>>10887433
not a chance hans

>>10887104
Not the OP so not saying races are the same intelligence-wise.
The problem is that they don't administer any tests and do derivations form other factors.
Call me back when Lynn does actual n > 1,000 testing on adults in the actual countries, instead of basing estimates on the PISA test that no one takes seriously in 90% of the countries, GDP estimates that don't take into account the economic history of the countries or rounding up IQ of countries based on their neighbours.

>>10871629
140iq
Doesnt know the meaning of "average"

>>10869383
>is pic related a credible iq test? are there any online tests that are worth it?
No and no. IQ tests are all garbage.

>>10880768
It's 1.
You can see the incrementing number of dots. Which means the next one hast o have 5.
Leaving 1,2,3 or 4.

You can see white or black go side to side.
They start either on top or on the left and finish on the bottom or to the right.

If the next square is white, it should start on the left. 4 doesn't so it's not 4. Also not 3 because it is not in a starting position.

It's either 1 or 2. But I'll go with 1 because it's possible it goes on 2's; 2 white, 2 black. 2 top to bottom, 2 left to right. So the next one should be black and starting on top. Or it could be either 2 inside 2. 2 white inside 2 blacks. Black starts, White starts, White ends, Black ends, so the next one it's a Black Starting.

I don't speak proper english

>>10888383
>not understanding confidence intervals
Evolve.

>>10887104
And yet among those subpopulations, ~99.9% of the genome is the same
So really the odds are against, not for, differences

>>10887453
This. round 55% of the countries studied had no IQ test done and were just estimated based on neighbouring countries and GDP.
For the countries where IQ tests were used, which happens to be only 81 out of the 185 countries studied, 34 of them were based on only 1single study, 30 of them were based on two studies and only 17 countries were based on 3 IQ test or more. Most of the IQ tests were also performed on a very small sample size and in a lot of case were not representative of the population. If i remember correctly, some sample sizes were as small as 20 but don't quote me on that. Furthermore, if people took the time to look through the sources for the IQ scores, they would have realized that some countries have had their national average IQ derived from either outdated or completely inappropriate IQ tests like the Goodenough draw a person test. That's right, the IQ of a nation was based on how well kids could draw a stick figure. In other cases, where appropriate tests were used, the data set were severely outdated. Some tests went back as 50 years. The study is complete garbage and I don't even know how they thought it was okay to release it.

>>10889334
Which countries have the most legit measurements?

>>10889341
European and north american countries have the most legit. African the least.

>>10887414
Read a fucking book

>>10889533
kewl, how about you read the lynn book which shows that every eastern european, middle eastern and south asian immigrant that immigrated to the US, with the first generaton having an average IQ of 85 at time of entry, ended up having 3rd generation grand kids with averages that converge toward the mean? In some cases it was even higher. How about you start reading that book before arrogantly telling others to do so. Environmental and cultural factors affect how well someone does on an IQ test significantly, even on the so called culturally unbiased ones.

>>10869383
take sat out of 1600, take off zero, rough IQ estimate.

Its rough because the SAT is definetly knowledge and skill dependant. but on average thats a good reference. I however got 1000 on the sat but on a certified "see if im retarded test" at doctors offices i scored well above 135. Havent done much with that IQ so not bragging.

>>10886098
>1850cm^3
>mfw

>>10870480
Finished with 27 min left. This test really isn't suitable for measuring IQ >124 Weschler scale and frankly I think it's pretty outdated due to the Flynn effect. Shouldn't be taken seriously, I've taken APA (or at least the Polish counterpart of it) approved tests under supervised conditions and this doesn't come close to the hard ones.

>>10889726
I've taken advanced progressive matrices at 13 and got 33/36 and now at 19 I'm pretty much an academic failure (didn't get to my first choice undergrad course, I have to either take a gap year and reattempt my finals or study something I don't really want to study) due to harsh and abusive upbringing and complete lack of discipline. IQ might be important but only if other, crucial conditions are met.

>>10889334
>That's right, the IQ of a nation was based on how well kids could draw a stick figure.
Many had never even held a pencil.

>The study is complete garbage and I don't even know how they thought it was okay to release it.
Clearly it was correct since it supported the obvious, Great Truth.

>>10871051
I scored 53 but I was not taught math in English as it isn't my first language, I cant figure out how to use that formula and I have no idea what the letters in the first column mean
I politely request for someone to convert a score of 53 on this spanish test >>10870480, to a normal IQ score I can read

>>10875213
but I'm white and Ashkenazi's can't touch my intelligence with a 7SD stick.

>>10876120
>https://web.archive.org/web/20180701142825/http://www.cerebrals.org/jcti/index.html
I'm 99th percentile and I only scored 119-129... I guess I shouldn't have rushed

The guy who linked the Advanced Prog Matrices, that's like the only legit IQ test you can find online. At it is legit!

In any case I'd say do that one when you are feeling up to it.

>>10875213
It's insteresting how Jews conveniently forget to mention that only their verbal IQ is supposed to be that high whenever topics like these come up or when they're called out for their nepotism, because they're mediocre or below in every other IQ category. Why do you think are so many Jewish scientists known for making up bullshit theories, spaghetti math or stealing their work from others?

>>10870480
Raven's matrices is limited. It only measures spatial IQ.
I'm shit on it. If you took my results you'd think I'm retarded.
One would need a more comprehesible test to gauge their IQ.

>>10870480
Apparently I've got a 120 spatial IQ (90th percentile). Goes in line with me being more verbal than spatial.
(I'm black btw)

>>10888383
a genius black is a unicorn, keep dreaming

>>10890939
visual-spatial tests are highly g loaded so your performance on them is indicative of overall intelligence. you probably are stupid desu
>>10890619
Jews have above average quant, logical-symbolic goes with verbal, jews excel at both.

>>10891068
Not quite. The higher the IQ, the less g-loaded the test is.
Did the Wechsler one and got 99th percentile, and English isn't even my first language.

>>10871179
i got 139 whatever that's worth.

>>10891068
Quant can be both verbal and spatial.

>>10869384
just took the Mensa one. It seemed a little too easy.

>>10891264
It needn’t be limited to just those, and that’s precisely what i mean by logical-symbolic and quant, Jews are not bad at mathematics they are poor visual thinkers. /pol/niggers cope by focusing on verbal without even understanding verbal is utilized outside of fields like law and politics.

>>10890549
Yeah you can take as much time as you want with this test but the questions get extremely hard, more than the mensa norway at least, i think those kind of test are the best honestly.

>>10869383
iq don't matter. anyone can have high IQ if you work hard. like anything in life.

>>10881931
>There is also 1 set of black dots and 2 set of white dots per row/column.
That's true but only because we are only shown left right pairs in every row/column, which as you pointed out are always white. Could there be a top bottom pair in the same row/column? Just because we aren't shown one doesn't mean there couldn't be. If there was, it would be black-black.

Notice how in every row and column three different triangles are used, choosing 4 you would repeat on the right side.
I think 1 is better because the upper triangle isn't used in that row/column.

>>10892054
didn't realize it was a I was replying to a 4 day old post, fuck it
here's my mensa score, ran out of time and picked last 3 answers at random

I skipped anything I didn't understand to keep from inflating my score. IQ is still dumb tho since it's just a measure of how quickly someone catches on to things

>>10892146
Life is literally just a series of "things to catch on to". Being able to do that more quickly is an indispensable asset.

>>10891010

Using normal distribution there would be around 60,000 US blacks at or above a genius IQ. Money is that you're not one by taking some online IQ test.

Oh god I'm retarded.

>>10892205
>115 on an online test
Confirmed not gonna make it, bruv.

>>10892172
there are lots of freaks on 4chan, its also pasta

>>10890619
yep coping bullshit gtfo

>>10871629
>hurrr 6 sigma law
>i outside of 3SD
>nothing can exist outside 3DS
>>>>>143 IQ
just shows that even if you have a high IQ you can be a brainlet

>>10892488
what is ligma?

>>10892491
shut the fuck up faggot normalnigger

>>10892503
>faggot
Why the homophobia?

>>10869383
kind of credible, maybe +/- 5 points error. All my friends with a good record of dealing with science/math have scored over 125 so I guess it makes sense.

>>10891673
I'm the same guy you replied to, and I absolutely second you in this. I hate people who say that they are good with languages and bad at math. They are either (1) brainlets who like learning languages, thereby putting a lot of effort into it or (2) lazy fucks who never bothered to learn math.
And it goes both ways. I've seen plenty of STEMfags who are shit at grammar because they are more "math inclined". Though many of them could be more spatial than verbal, I think there is a whole lot of them who are verbal.

>>10892503
Can't tell if trolled or triple seekrit ironic fake retardation

>>10892172
When I was 14 to 16 I developed a method of calendrical calculation which takes me half a second to tell you the day of the week of any given date between 1800 and 2100. I don't think I'm Albert Einstein-tier, but I'm not the average brainlet nigger either. If I were, I wouldn't even know what this central thaiwanese knitting virtual fair is, let alone be in /sci/.

>>10892481
It's not pasta. I literally got the 90th percentile on that test.

>>10869383
>Gone for a year on a scientific expedition.
>Return to/sci/
>IQ thread
>That sense of hope for humanity diminishes.

I score around 130ish on these but my parents are dumb as fuck

>>10892950
that's not uncommon honestly

>>10869383
my visual-special is off the charts >99.99%
if I apply to write the mensa test would it be to my advantage to request the non-language biased one or whatever it's called?

>>10893478
Mensa uses Raven's matrices, which is (unfortunately for me and fortunately for you) 100% spatial. If you truly have the level you state, you'll breeze through it.

>>10893543
there's no verbal part to it? nice.

>>10887414
We dont know if those genes exist.

>>10890356
Id really like to see the truth then, this needs to be studied further, if not just to remove ammo from racists. I dont think there will be in the forseeable future becasue this is a taboo subject

>>10893478
How do you even get different types tested?

>>10892950
my dad, who is 40 years older then me, got 150.

>>10893614
You contact a specialized psychologist.
Mensa uses this to avoid problems with translation, I guess.
They have been criticized for that in the past, since spatial intelligence is just a subset of general intelligence. It's like verbally testing dyslexics intelligence. Lol

>>10893614
I think it was just part of the WAIS when they did it... I got 97% overall with about 93 on verbal and >99.99 on visual spatrial… so I figure if the verbal isn't even on it, I should be golden.

>>10893771
wait, what the fuck.
are you autistic?

>>10893611
Chances are there is some truth to it, but not a difference of up to 40 fucking points, and whatever difference could definitely be mostly due to environmental factors.

You can debunk the study with one simple fact. If race is truly relevant to intelligence, then why do middle eastern, which are very close genetically speaking to europeans, since they both belong to the caucasoid race, have anywhere between 15 to 25 point differnece in IQ? A lot of them are on par with the IQ of blacks, which they are very far from genetically.

You can also look at asians, where some groups like japanese, koreans and chinese are high in IQ, but other asian countries like the philippines. Once again, those goups are significantly closer to each other than blacks, but once again have a difference of anywhere between 10 to 20 points. If whites are on average smarter than blacks due to genetic differences, then how do you explain that groups closely related to whites genetically are of lower intelligence and closer to blacks than whites? It simply does not make sense, and the fact is, there are many studies out there, including from lynn itself that shows that immigrants moving from third world countries into european countries, end up having IQ averages that are very similar to europeans and converge toward the mean after a few generations. Most of the people who believe in the lynn study would say it is due to the fact that the immigrants moving to western countries are usually from upper class and are part of the smartest in their home countries, but that still does not explain why they score 85 on IQ tests on the time of entry and their grandkids score around 100. Those stats are from the book lynn published himself in the late 1970s.

>>10869383
No, and no.

>>10887414
Genes for x trait most likely do not exist period.

>>10894949
>immigrants moving to western countries are usually from upper class and are part of the smartest in their home countries
Lmao

>>10894979
I got 132 on the mensa and 129 on free IQ test

>>10885137
wtf

>>10887433
Its more about the curves and dents in the brain than size and and volume of the cranium, people can be big "headed" but they can just as well be thick skulled and smooth brained.

>>10894949
>why do middle eastern, which are very close genetically speaking to europeans, since they both belong to the caucasoid race, have anywhere between 15 to 25 point differnece in IQ?

Chronic inbreeding.

>>10895083
And yet according to the study, ashkenazi jews, which have one of the highest percentage of consanguinity on the planet are apparently the smartest. The study is full of special pleading and cherry picking.

>>10869384
can't believe I've wasted a whole hour for this fake score crap, no way in fucking heaven I'm 131 iq
if I were I wouldn't have failed algebra I

>>10888619
96% of our enome is the same compared with a chimp. 60% with a banana.

When it comes to intelligence, a single point mutation can lead to a retard.

0.01% is certainly enough to account for a dozen IQ points.

>>10892488
I didn't say nothing could exist outside 3SD, retard.
I said the likelihood of the test being shit is higher than the chance that I'm some kind of genius. Think about it for a bit.

And based on the fact you're calling me a brainlet, I guess you agree with me. The test is trash.

>>10895630
From the looks of it, the test gives you a 30 IQ boost. Assuming it's a valid advanced progressive matrices, your IQ would be 100 based on that raw score you got.

>>10888619
>And yet among those subpopulations, ~99.9% of the genome is the same
Just like how your genome is ~99.9% the same as a mentally disabled vegetable. The small differences make a huge difference.

>>10897851
Really? I had to do an RPM a couple of years ago and I found it a lot easier than this test. Could be just me though.

>>10880768
3,

Look at it diagonally, it goes:
1, 2, 3, 4

Then there is the position:
The one dot on the diagonal means that the next diagonal will be one to the left. This pattern repeats replicating the position of 3.

To explain the blacks and whites, there is are black dots every line. Their position changes two to the right every line down.

>>10876120
Imagine a cylindrical wooden toy with patterned, rotating/vertically sliding segments viewed from above.

This is literally just some autistic boomer's childhood toy. Answer is 5 btw.

Are legit IQ tests usually these pattern recognition things? I mean it makes sense due to it being language and culture independent but how accurate is it for "general" intelligence?

>>10898148
The advanced raven's progressive matrices is supposed to be harder than the standard raven's progressive matrices. The advanced test has 36 questions while the standard has 60, but the advanced can discriminate up to the 99th percentile, or 145 iq, while the standard can discriminate up to the 95th percentile or 125 iq

>>10898194
No, legit IQ tests use multiple modes of evaluation under direct examination and time constraints. Meme online shit and BIG BRAIN mensa tests get overly hung up on progressive matrices. These are part of a full battery, but it's not the sole determining factor.

>>10898194
The raven matrices and the wechsler test are both used today, but the wechsler is deemed to be more comprehensive. Personally, i think the raven matrices is the fairest, although still isn't a great way to measure IQ. The wechsler test has a lot of questions that is based on education like convert feet to yard or definition of words, as well as a lot of questions on math ranging from arithmetic and algebra to logic, while the raven's matrices is mostly abstract. A lot of the math questions in the wechsler test is related to sequences, prime numbers, roots and squares, algebra, addition/subtraction and the logic section has a lot of if/then statements and other discrete math problems that can be easily solved by people with a better education, and given equal intelligence, the one with a higher education level will most likely always do better.

The raven matrices is still not completely unbiased since a lot of the solutions involve rotation, translation, reflection, combination, permutation, XOR, NAND, AND, NOR, OR and so on, which are also things that people also get familiar with during school, although sometimes it is not obvious.

For those reasons, I believe that comparing IQs beyond a group of similar culture and education is irrelevant since there might be a lot of variables that affect the score beyond intelligence.

>>10897851
>>10898200
Weirdly enough, I got a lower than usual raw score which still more or less corresponded to my tested IQ.

>>10898236
Sorry, I meant that the raw score itself was lower than usual, but the iq was similar to a previous assessment.

>>10880768
It's 1 all day.

So obviously it's between 1 and 4 since they're the only ones with 5 dots in a legal position (assuming based on the matrix that left/right are white dots and top/bottom are black dots)
But 1 implies a simpler pattern (Up,Left,Right,Down) if you think about how it would look if you extended the matrix past 3x3 (think about how the diagonals would look)

If you are white and you chose any answer than 1, you have failed at white supremacy and your ancestors are ashamed that you are reducing the black-white average IQ gap and hurting your race.

>>10892054
>Just because we aren't shown one doesn't mean there couldn't be
That's true, but you're trading one pattern for another. You could also assume that no same triangle repeats is just a coincidence and go with 4. Question is obviously flawed and neither solution fits perfectly, unless you're seeing a better pattern that I am missing that completely fits one or the other. Right now you either assume overlapping triangles are possible, in which case 4 is the correct answer, or black pair are possible,in which case 1 is the correct answer, both of which are not specified in the original matrix.

>>10898815
>You could also assume that no same triangle repeats is just a coincidence and go with 4.
You know once you admit that, technically every (or indeed any) answer is correct right?(Why is left as an exercise for the reader.(You should be able to solve this))

>>10898834
That's actually my point. Each row/column has two white and one black. Going with 1 goes against that pattern. Similarly, the dots in each row/column appear in different triangles. Choosing 4 would break that pattern as well. Now the question is, which patterns would you decide to ignore? First one and the answer is 1, second one and the answer is 4

>>10875450
>what are twin studies
>what are SES vs Race vs IQ studies
>what are voucher studies

Intelligence is one of if not the single most explored subjects in psychology. Virtually every angle has been explored and every relevant variable tested. While environment does play a role in intelligence, it is also absolutely undeniable at this point that genes play a major role and that the races differ significantly on this dimension.

>>10880768
The numbering goes
1 2 3
2 3 4
3 4 _

The coloring goes
B W W
W W B
W B _

The position goes
U L R
L R D
R D _

Which means the blank is
5, white, up
Which isn't on there. Any other answer is pseudo pattern recognition

>>10890939
I'm the opposite. I excel at Raven's but as soon as a test includes any mathematical or numbers based logic questions I score below average. Also a visible time limit significantly reduces my score. If both apply, we're talking about a 2SD difference in scores as compared to my result on the RAPM. It made me wonder if I'm bordering on disability-levels of numeric reasoning abilities. I'm not worried about my general intelligence, however, as Raven's is one of the most g-loaded tests there are.

>>10899002
You're supposed to find the best fitting pattern of the options given, not come up with a new one. The answer is 4.

42

fallind down trepes

>>10890619
Jews are only below average in spacial

>>10898932
>Each row/column has two white and one black.
If your IQ is high enough, you see this pattern is fake.
Think about the problem in terms of diagonals as stated by >>10898726 and >>10898170 (although he got the wrong answer)

If there was a 4th column and row, what would it look like? Think about it.

>>10876120
>https://web.archive.org/web/20180701142825/http://www.cerebrals.org/jcti/index.html

WTF I took the test and it gave me a result of 0 to 10. Apparently, I mistyped my age in the beginning, as it said 2 instead of 24 in the end profile. It gives me no raw score to at least estimate my real results. Whatever douchebag designed this test made me waste an hour for nothing.

>>10899263
lmfao. 1 fulfills exactly one pattern. The fact that there are five dots is ancillary; by your logic if it was one filled dot the answer would still be one.

>>10899263
>if there was a 4th column and row, what would it look like?
If there was a 7th answer, what would it look like? You have to use what is given to you, not make up patterns that are not there. If you also had experience with raven matrices, you would quickly realize that diagonal patterns almost never happen, as a matter of fact, I don't think a single one of the patterns on the official tests have diagonal patterns in it. It's always row/column or the pattern is present in equal amount among all rows/columns, e.g. you got 3X, 3Y, 2Z, so the missing one must be a Z. The right pattern would have been 5 white dots on the left triangle, which is not available as part of the solution, therefore the test is poorly made. There is a reason why this test is not administered professionally, the actual raven matrices are designed in a way where there is no ambiguity and the correct pattern does not break any other patterns in the matrix, nor allow for two equally possible patterns to exist. In other words, if no multiple choices were given, you should ideally come to one possible pattern. There is no such "fake patterns" in those tests. All patterns are important and you don't get to decide which one is and which one isn't. But let's entertain your theory anyways. You wanna look at diagonals? We can do that.
_ 1 2 3 4 5 6
A U L R _ _
B L R D _ _
C R D X _ _
E _ _ _ _ _
F _ _ _ _ _
I've numbered the diagonals. Looking at the diagonal 5-E, it is the inverse of diagonal 2-B. similarly 3-C should be the inverse of 6-F, which would mean it should be on the right triangle. Similarly, you can do the same for color, although the pattern is that the colors match the corresponding diagonals instead of being the opposite. So it should be a white 5 dot right pattern.

Fucked up the grid, let me try again:
_..1...2..3...4..5..6
A..U..L..R.._.._
B..L..R..D.._.._
C..R..D..X.._.._
D.._..._.._.._.._
E.._..._.._.._.._
F.._..._.._.._.._

>>10899007
It's highly g loaded up to a certain point. The higher the IQ, the less correlated it gets.
I'm more verbal than spatial. My score on Raven's matrices doesn't tell shit about my verbal skills.
It's probably more g loaded than other tests because verbal intelligence in general (I'm talking not only languages but also symbolic manipulation, which also involves mathematics) depends a lot on knowledge.

TL;DR your IQ is probably high, but hindered by your low verbal skills, and my IQ could be high, but hindered by my spatial skills

>>10900213
1D and 4A would be 4 dots black
if the pattern repeats, the dots move back to the top
and because they're in the top spot, they're black
also in some professional iq tests, the test administrator actually asks your reasoning for the answer

>>10900395
like this

>>10900401
You're assuming that the pattern moves back to the top. But the pattern could also "backtrack" to right, then left, then top. In which case, 4 would be the answer. This is the issue when you assume that the pattern restarts, even though it isn't specified.

Why would the restarting sequence top-left-right-bottom...top-left-right-bottom be a sequence that is any more valid than the backtracking sequence top-left-right-bottom...right-left-top-left-right-bottom? You're assuming that the pattern must restart at the top, which isn't specified. Pic related on the other hand makes no such assumption, and shows how the blue squares are related to each other and red squares are related to each other. The blue squares are related to each other by repeating the whole matrix on the left/right/top/bottom and ditto for red. You see that colour wise, the red squares must be the same colour and the blue squares must be the same colour. Furthermore, the sum of dots in the blue squares must be 9 and the sum of the dots in red squares must also be 9. For the blue/red squares, position of two of the dots are on the same side and the third is on the opposite side.

#4 match those patterns, #1 does not. And you don't have to guess what comes after 4 black dots to come to #4 pattern and only use given patterns.

The 140-150IQ INTP deep-perceiving inductive-reasoning Chads >>10900401 >>10883294 >>10884161 >>10883556 >>10880800
vs
the 100-110IQ INTJ mentally imprisoned deductive-reasoning Virgins >>10881931 >>10881166
>>10883309 >>10884582
>If this is anything other than four the test is garbage.
As expected of a reductive logic Virgin.

>>10893611
Weicherts et. al. did a study summarizing (with full citations of course so you can see for yourself) ALL of Lynn's studies, maybe someone has the link

>>10900786
>not even mentioning the green squares
Well?
>positional pattern could backtrack
Sure, but that means we wouldn't have seen the full pattern in the original matrix, meaning you have to make a huge assumption. Somehow you can't get past the "2 white, 1 black" pattern, but you think it's okay to ignore the "3 different positions" pattern. Sorry but that guy's explanation was way more elegant than yours.

It's moot though. You're both fucking brainlets. The actual answer is #3. Should have been obvious.

1. The number of dots increments.
2. Each square rotates 90 degrees left one time for each dot. So 1 dot = rotate 90 left. 2 dot = rotate 180 left. 3 dot = rotate 270 left. Thus, 4 dot = rotate 360, landing in the same spot.
3. And then the dots are white because there's 2 white and 1 black in each row/column (alternatively, you could say the black dots move one spot to the left).
Hence the answer is 5 white dots on the bottom.

>>10900821
>the 90 IQ INTP thinking in circles about muh intelligence while being incorrect the whole time
Point and laugh

>>10898170
The only one to not fall for the "top and bottom are black, left and right are white" trap.

Protip. Not just for IQ tests but for life in general. Sometimes, the initial, most obvious assumption is actually the one you need to discard.

>>10900786
>>10900401
Answer is 1

>You're both fucking brainlets. The actual answer is #3.
Actually you're the brainlet, answer is 1 and you can check it by doing the test, skipping all the questions except for that one and enter 1 and see that your raw score is 1/38. Then restart the test, skip all the questions and entering 3 for that specific one and end up with 0/38.

>>10876120
I need some bigbrain yakups to help a brainlet out.
I'm doing the test and it all seems easy to solvable, but this one type of task just doesn't make sense to me. How the fuck am I supposed to solve this? There seem to be way too many possibilities of how the two patterns combine and it seems literally unsolvable with the given information.
And it's not just this specific question but almost all similar ones, where 2 lines of patterns merge into one line.

I'm new to taking IQ tests so I was wondering if anyone could explain how to find the raw score? I know how to work that formula posted for the spanish test here >>10870480 but I lack the knowledge to form the raw score for the result I had gotten.

>>10901054
The raw score is 57/60. What you are looking for is probably the standardized test score, for which you need to find norm tables of a demographic that is comparable to you in terms of age, education, and country of origin.

>>10901084
Thanks, anon!

>>10900989
The top pattern is simple. You rotate the suqare clockwise and shift the pattern clockwise. Everytime you shift the pattern, you also change it from circle to triangle and triangle to circle.

The bottom pattern is the exact same, except you start with a black circle instead of a white triangle.

This means the top branch yields a rhombus with a black circle on the left side and the bottom branch yields a rhombus with a white triangle on the left side. Now another thing you should know is that the white triangle is covered by the black circle. Therefore 5 should be the correct answer. Then from 5. you once again rotate the rhombus to get a square, and you shift the circle and triangle by one square clockwise, which converts the triangle into a black circle and the black circle into a triangle, and once again, the black circle covers the black triangle.

>>10901088
No problem. I also recommend you take the advanced version of the Raven's test with 36 instead of 60 problems, seeing as you got a relatively high score on the standard version. It measures high IQs more accurately.

>>10901102
Was that the pdf of the book that was posted with the spanish test or was it posted somewhere else on the thread?

>>10901054
Hi. I'm the guy who posted that IQ test originally. So first of all, it would probably be a good idea to understand how IQ test and score work. Every IQ test is similar to any other test, where you get a "raw" score based on how many correct answers you got over the total amount of questions. So in your case, the test had 60 questions and you got 57 of them right, so your raw score would be 57/60.

Now this is the part where things get tricky. To convert your raw score to IQ, you need a conversion chart. The way a conversion chart works is by administering the tests to a lot of people of a specific age and region, then looking at the average score the people scored as well as how likely someone is to get a specific score. The average score is assigned the IQ of 100 and then if you get a raw score above the average your IQ is above 100 and similarly if you get a lower raw score, your IQ is below 100. Now, what exactly your IQ number is depends on both the average raw score people in your group scored as well as how likely a score is. This is usually expressed in percentiles. a 95th percentile means you got a higher score than 95% of the population (or 95% of the population has your IQ or lower than that). Here is a website that goes in depth on how this works:
https://www.psychometrica.de/normwertrechner_en.html

Now the tricky part is to find the conversion chart. Each country, each age group has a different chart and therefore someone who gets 56/60 in one country might end up with say 125IQ while in another country might end up with 140, since it depends on the average scores. For a while now, to be able to compare IQs across different countries, we use the british norms to have everyone on the same scale. The british norm can be found via google, or you can use the formulas ive posted here:
>>10875444

You took the standard progressive matrices (SPM), so find the one that correspond to your age and replace RS with your raw score to find your british iq

>>10901123
its the pdf of the book that was posted with the spanish test correct answers are at the end of beggining, i dont remember.

>>10901098
Thanks for the response. Most of what you said is also what I assumed but I still have some issues with you explanation.

>You rotate the suqare clockwise and shift the pattern clockwise
Wouldn't that mean that the circle or triangle in the third square should be in the bottom left corner?

>Now another thing you should know is that the white triangle is covered by the black circle.
How can we assume this with the given information? Isn't it also possible that the triangle cancels out the circle, or that a different mechanism applies for the rhombi than for the squares (as is apparently the case with the clockwise rotation)?

>>10901133
>Wouldn't that mean that the circle or triangle in the third square should be in the bottom left corner?

So you have a square, with the triangle/circle on the bottom right. The next pattern will be as follows:

Rotate the figure by 45 degrees. This gives you a rhombus with the circle/triangle at the bottom
Now shift the circle/triangle clockwise. This will move the circle/triangle to the left square.
Now change the triangle for a circle and circle for a triangle.
You should end up with a rhombus with a black circle on the left for the top brancch and a rhombus with a triangle on the left for the bottom branch. You now "add" those two together, and get rhombus with a black circle and triangle on the left square. Black circle "covers" the triangle and you don't see it anymore, but it's still there.

>>10901133
>How can we assume this with the given information? Isn't it also possible that the triangle cancels out the circle, or that a different mechanism applies for the rhombi than for the squares (as is apparently the case with the clockwise rotation)?
You cannot assume it with what is given, but as you will see later, more of those will pop up, and assuming that the circle covers the triangle will allow you to find the correct answer. It's just one of those leaps you have to do. For instance, If I remember correctly, later one you will have a similar question where one shifts the circle/triangle clockwise and the other anticlockwise and when they overlap, the circle disappears, but in the next figure, it reappears. So it is unlikely that is cancels the pattern, just hides it.

>>10901149
Sorry, meant the triangle disappears

>>10901142
You misunderstood me. I get your reasoning for how the third squares turn into the missing rhombus, however, applying your solution would mean that in the third square the trinagle/circle should be in the bottom left corner and not in the bottom right. To get to the third square, we need to NOT rotate the circle/triangle when coming from the second step, which seems to violate the pattern we saw up until this step.

>>10901161
Ah yes, my bad. I did the test previously and was mostly speaking from memory. You are correct. There are two patterns. one applies from square to rhombus where you shift the circle/triangle. And then the second is from rhombus to square, where you DO NOT shift it. My bad. You're indeed correct, You always rotate the square/rhombus but you only shift patterns when you go from square to rhombus but not from rhombus to square.

>>10891885
Dumbest thing i've heard in a while

>>10901149
After solving a few more I agree with you. This seems to be the solution to the circle/triangle problem. I would still maintain that having to jump to conclusions that aren't entirely based on logical reasoning but require making assumptions is not an elegant solution for designing such a test. And this seems to only apply to this specific kind of task, where you have 2 converging lines of patterns. All the other problems in this test seem to be entirely solvable by logical deduction without any room for error by what is essentially educated guessing.

>>10901125
Age would be column 2, correct? In which case it seems to only go up to 15.5 in the text file that was provided. Unless SPM+ works in which case it goes up to 18. I do see what I was doing wrong now, though, as I was originally calculating using the APM as it had more relevant age groups.
And thanks for all the explanation and resources, anon. I'll be taking a look at that link.
>>10901129
Ok, I'll have to try that out in a bit too.

>>10875552
>>10875552
Can confirm, took one 8 years ago, psychiatrist told me the same; either you get a real one or its worthless. Also 142 here kek

>>10901168
No worries. I hope you can relate to my criticism now. The fact that the pattern changes from rhombus to square also means that we cannot possibly assume that the circle always covers the triangle.

>>10875552
>>10901176
I dont think anyone who's not a retard takes it as an accurate score. It's just something fun to do, like a personality test. Take it, brag/shitpost with your friends about what they got, then move on.

>>10901172
I do agree that it isn't entirely based on logical reasoning, which is probably why it isn't a test that is administered professionally. Use the SPM/APM that I posted earlier or try to find the officla wechsler IQ test online, those are the actual test being used by psychologists. The one I posted is the original raven matrices and from what I read, new ones have the exact same pattern but with different colours and shapes since the answers are available online. For instance, the new test uses diamonds, spades and hearts instead of circle, squares and Xs, but the pattern is still the same.

>>10901176
While online tests will obviously never be as valid as a professionally supervised one, they can still give you an estimate if they are well-designed. The only thing that makes even the best online test inferior to tests administered by psychologists is the lack of controlled conditions.

I don't quite get why people are so obsessed with IQ tests. It really seems like a lose/lose scenario. Either you score lower than you'd like and just hate yourself for it forever and prevent yourself from pursuing career avenues you'd otherwise like doing. Or you get a score you like, or higher than you'd like, and get a temporary ego boost before not thinking about it after a few days.

>>10901202
I already did the RAPM as part of a study at my uni. Back then I got 31/36, hence me calling myself a brainlet in this post >>10900989
kek

>>10901212
oh lol, wanna give it a second try? You never know. I personally believe you can study and get a higher score on raven matrices. Prove me wrong if you want, the test is right here:
https://www.docdroid.net/2GeaOPU/jpg2pdf.pdf

>>10901206
Well, they lack VIQ (Verbal IQ) and PIQ (Perceptual IQ) tests so they may be accurate in a certain way, but lack important factors. Also don't apply for mensa because they are a bunch of people who don't do shit cuz me got high IQ

>>10901214
I might give it a shot later tonight. I doubt my score will increase but I'd be happy to prove you wrong.

>>10901214
I'm also curious what you score on the RAPM, as you seemed to have a better grasp on the guesstimate task from before.

>>10901226
36/36 on the APM, 60/60 on the SPM. Those tests are really not hard once you do a couple of them, which is why I believe you can improve your score. It's kind of like sudokus. The first ones, even the easy ones, are hard, but as you do a few, you get better. Ultimately, the same type of patterns come over and over again in those tests. It's either rotation, translation, reflection, or performing logical operations like XORing two shapes to get a third one or a mix of all of those. Once you learn about those "basic" patterns, it's just figuring what combination of those are present in the specific question.

It's kind of like asking you what comes next in the following sequence?

1,3,5,7,?
Should be pretty easy. Now if I were to rewrite the same question using roman numerals and ask you what comes next in this sequence:

1,111,5,511,?
If I didn't tell you those were in roman numeral forms, you would go insane trying to solve it, but it's not necessarly because you're stupid, just because you don't use roman numerals often. If you were to do math in roman numerals from elementary school to university, you would be able to solve that last pattern as fast as the first one. This is one of the main reasons why I believe you can improve your score, since it doesn't have that much to do with intelligence. Sure intelligence helps, but anyone can solve those given enough time, and someone who practices such tests can solve them significantly faster than someone who doesn't, similarly to how a math teacher can solve algebraic equation in high school faster than its students. I'ts not because the kids are low IQ, it's because they haven't had enough practice.

>>10900989
>>10901098
>>10901142
>>10901149
>>10901168
>>10901202
Ok, I'm sorry but I can't stop shitting all over this task. Look at this and explain to me how the circle and triangle work here. It seems like in this one:
>triangle+circle=triangle
>triangle+triangle=triangle
>circle+circle= nothing

And again, it seems like the rule only applies in the squares but not the rhombi, as there is no solution otherwise. So this kind of task is not consistent over the whole test, meaning that we definitely have to guess at some of these tasks.

>>10901240
That's pretty impressive! I definitely see where you are coming from, but I think that what you describe only holds true once you pass a certain intelligence treshold. If the problems get complex enough over time, people below that treshold won't be able to solve them even when they can be solved using the same logical steps as with simpler problems solved earlier by that person. This, I believe, has a lot to do with working memory. Smarter people will have an easier time keeping individual steps of a solution in mind and will also require less time to take these steps, meaning they don't have to use the same amount of working memory as someone who isn't as smart.
This is why I'm not entirely convinced that developing routine in taking those tests is as big of a help as high intelligence.

>>10901258
One tip I could give is to look at one pattern at a time, then add more as you go

First pattern and a pretty obvious one is that your square rotates to a rhomboid and then the rhomboid into a square. So right away you know the solution should be a rhombus. This rotation is clockwise, and rotates each frame by 45 degree, which is why you get a square, rhombus and square again and so on.

this leaves 2,4,5,6

The second patter you see is that every time you go from a square to a rhombus or a rhombus to a square, the circles transform into triangles and triangles into circles.

The third pattern you notice is that the circles and triangles rotate with the square/rhombus and don't shift place like the previous one

So the top branch should rotate and give you a rhombus with the black circle on top and triangles on the left, right and bottom

Furthermore, we said that the circles change to triangles and triangles to squares, so you end up with a rhombus with a triangle on top and circles on left,right and bottom

The bottom branch has the exact same pattern, so you rotate 45 degree, switch circles for triangles and triangles for circles

So the top branch should be a rhombus with a triangle on top and black circles on the left,right,bottom

The bottom branch should be a rhombus with a triangle at the bottom and circles on top, right and left.

Now in this case, you use the logical operator AND, which means if the top branch and bottom branch has a circle or triangle at the same spot, you keep it and if you have two different shape at the same spot, you remove it. So you got two circles on the left and two circles on the right, those two remain, and the triangle/circle and circle/triangle at the top and bottom respectively go away. This leaves you with a rhombus with two black circles on the left and right side, i.e. #2. You then rotate it 45 degree and desp circles to triangles to get the final shape.

>>10901274
>you use the logical operator AND,
Meant XNOR, not AND

>>10901274
That makes sense but it violates the rule from earlier where the rules change depending on whether you go from square to rhombus or the other way around.

>>10901322
They are different questions with different rules. I might have not been clear previously, but you don't necessarily have the same pattern in each question. When I said
>later one you will have a similar question where one shifts the circle/triangle clockwise and the other anticlockwise and when they overlap
I didn't mean that every question follows that rule, but that thinking about it this way would allow you to solve one of the questions that come next. Some patterns can come over and over, other come and go, and some are completely new. That is normal and if one of the question breaks a pattern from a previous one, it's fine because you should see the two as completely different entities and not a part of each other.

>>10901258
>unbenannt.jpg
Welche uni?

>>10901346
University of Twente in Enschede

>>10901274
>giving tips for how to do iq tests
>creating heuristics for tests that are supposed to assess fluid intelligence
OH NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

>>10901365
Nice, getting really tired of my uni and wanted to do a semester abroad in Delft or Eindhoven.

>>10901371
I find those tests very similar to mazes, puzzles, crosswords and sudokus. They are enjoyable to do and you can definitely get better with practice. If a test that can actually measure intelligence ever exists, it would most likely involve MRIs, CT scans or other medical and scientific equipment and not a bunch of geometrical questions.

>>10901331
Yeah you are probably right. It's still strange to me how I could find all these irregularities and potential flaws with this specific set of problems while having no issue whatsoever with all the other problems on the test.

Here's my result btw. Seems about right and roughly corresponding to my earlier 31/36 on APM. I probably won't do the APM again tonight but maybe tomorrow if the thread is still alive by then.

>>10901373
Never been to either of those places but I'm enjoying studying in the Netherlands quite a lot. My uni specifically is amazing. It has a huge, beautiful campus like is common in America. I would really recommend considering the UTwente if you want to switch.

>>10901415
All right. Just remember, 31/36 on the APM is still a fairly respectable score and around 120 according to british norms

>>10901390
>you can definitely get better if you practice
that you can!

>>10900935
You have to admit his logic is ironclad though

>>10901628
who's logic?

>>10901173
Yes, just use the highest age on the list which should be 15 i believe. Alternatively you could search for the british norms on google

>>10901634
This guy's >>10900903

>>10901634
This guy's >>10900868

>>10869383
The only credible IQ test is one applied by a psychologist.

>>10900821
Wicherts is even more deceptive than Lynn was in his review of Lynn's research, cannot be taken seriously at all.

>>10902415
I read Weicherts' paper closely and even followed the references to many of Lynn's studies.
Can you give an example of some of the deception you're talking about?

>131 IQ on mensa.no
>110 IQ on the >>10870480 test
doing an extreme think on this one, which one do I believe?

>>10904464
Did you do https://www.free-iq-test.net?

>>10904470
no because my retard brain is already hurting from over exerting myself on these stupid pattern tests

>>10904363
the exact things Lynn cites as unreasonable for including in the data, like using elite samples and disregarding valid proxy for intelligence Wicherts does to boost the average iq of sub-saharan africans to ~80 when they should be much closer to 70. Its a very bad hit job that was done as a reaction to the results Lynn got. There is nothing valid about the review. One can't discount "malnourished" children when most people in the country are malnourished, one cannot include grammar school students in capital cities when they represent a tiny fraction of the population.

>>10904494
>exact things Lynn cites as unreasonable for including in the data, like using elite samples and disregarding valid proxy for intelligence Wicherts does to boost the average iq
Lynn used in some cases the goodenough tests, which is a test that derives an IQ by having kids draw a stick figure and count how many "body parts" are present on it, that were performed over half a century ago on a very small sample, usually less than 100 kids, as indication of national IQ. At that point, using elite samples would be a singificantly better indication of national IQ since you could compare it to elite samples in other countries and estimate the average more efficiently.

Furthermore, as if the quality of the IQ studies he used wasn't bad enough, in 104 of the 185 countries, he didn't use any IQ tests whatsoever and just estimated the IQ based on GDP. In cases where GDP per capita did not match the IQ measured, such as in the case of China, he does some hand wavering and blames it on the fact that it is a communist country, as if China would have a higher GDP per capita than the US if they moved to a capitalist system.

The whole fucking study is shit and those who takes it seriously or even quotes are probably the only group with an average IQ 65.

>>10904464
Did you do the spanish or pdf test? What was the raw score? Perhaps you didn't calculate your IQ properly.

>>10904494
But isn't the point to find the innate iq of the race? If anything, shouldn't we be more interested in the performance of rested, fed, educated students than in malaria-addled famine children who are guaranteed to have a depressed average iq regardless of race?

>One can't discount "malnourished" children when most people in the country are malnourished
So rich countries get better iq scores because they are rich, then we use this data to show that those countries are wealthier because their people have higher iq? This reasoning is circular

>>10904624
espanol test
the score was 53 out of 60

>>10904630
It is indeed circular reasoning. But the worst part about this study is that people like the ones you find on /pol/ use it to try to prove that other races are indeed inferior, not realizing that this test is highly flawed and is also not an IQ vs Race study but an IQ vs wealth. If they really want to show that there is genetic gap between races, they should use actual reliable studies, not this pile of manure.

>>10904470
What did you guys get on this one?

>>10904630
That presupposes that the only difference between children from elite families and the rest of the country is wealth and nutriment, this has not proven true for other nations it should not be used as an excuse when dealing with a group known to perform badly on intelligence tests.
>>10904619
>using elite samples is more accurate
no it is not and in many of the studies lynn goes over the tests administered are not “stick figure” tests they’re dumbed down iq tests suitable very extremely low iq populations. Many of the elite samples were coached on how to take the tests as well, further lowering the g loading of the tests. China’s gdp can be explained by the cultural revolution and the sheer size of its population. There is little to handwave, America has a largely mixed population with many low iq subpopulations like southern blacks and sw american mestizos who strongly skew the average below what it should be. The average iq in the plains states and ne is much closer to northern europe and east asia. Garbage studies meant to inflate the confidence of liberal academics regarding the debacle of wasted trillions in aid to africa. Lynn’s work is legitimate, you absolutely can measure the iq of malnourished individuals just as you can justify doing so in any other population. Additionally, in the West they do not take just elite samples when calculating national averages, wealthy white children sit around 1 SD or higher compared to rural whites yet they are not the standard used for calculating these averages. If you would like to compare 115 iq whites from private schools to the sons and daughters of government officials in Nigeria by all means do so the gap will be just as large as what the one you meant to avoid.

>>10904644
you should be around 120.

>>10904669
thanks

>>10904656
>no it is not and in many of the studies lynn goes over the tests administered are not “stick figure” tests they’re dumbed down iq tests suitable very extremely low iq populations.
It actually is. If the you compare the elite group in africa to the elite groups in the western countries, the gap between them should be the same gap between the average of each country.

The studies he used were either severely outdated in the sense that the test is outdated and no longer deemed a valid test for IQ, or outdated in the sense that the test was taken a very long time ago.

>they’re dumbed down iq tests suitable very extremely low iq populations
You just said something very stupid. You don't dumb down IQ tests. IQ tests are by design designed to measure the IQ of someone and there is no need to dumb it down, otherwise the test is not a good test to measure IQ to begin with.

>Many of the elite samples were coached on how to take the tests as well
Once again, that's bullshit. If IQ tests such as the raven's matrices are to be valid, it shouldn't be possible to coach people into doing good on them, but if that is the case, then how can you say the elite living in a very poor country, which all happen to score according to you an 80 anyways, be coached on how to perform IQ tests but children in a relatively wealthy country that go through years of education and have access to all the materials they need aren't? African kids do not grow up with mazes on cereal boxes or sudokus/cross word puzzles in the newspapers. They don't grow up with cellphone games like candy crush that stimulates the brain into detecting patterns. If anything,the only one being coached if that were possible on such test, would be the people in western countries. The fact is, if you looked at the IQ tests they perform today, more specifically the wechsler IQ test, you will quickly realize how it measure more your level of education than your IQ.

>>10904695

don't be a stupid asshole. nonsense like your post is part of why universities endlessly pander to minorities and foreigners. i'm so sick of it i could blow my brains out.

>>10904712
>don't be a stupid asshole
Here is the study
http://maistre.uni.cx:70/Texts/reaction/Lynn%2C%20Richard/232861407-Richard-Lynn-Tatu-Vanhanen-IQ-and-Global-Inequality.pdf
Go to page 296 of the book, which should be page 313 when entered in the pdf reader.

Look at the list of countries, which IQ tests were done, the age of the subjects, the sample numbers and the date of of the tests. In case you don't know what IQ tests are considered valid today, you can find them here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Current_tests

If you want to have an actual civilized debate, then we can keep doing so, if you're gonna be biased and go full retard 1488 lol /pol/ said niggers are dumber than the ubermensch, then feel free to fuck off back to /pol/

>>10904720

i'm not the person you've been talking to, that was my first reply in this thread.

anyway, come on man. use a bit of common sense.

>>10904727
>use a bit of common sense.
I am and i've been pointing out the flaws with the study. Common sense would dictate that a study which assigns 185 countries an average national IQ, where 104 of said countries had no IQ test done on any of their population whatsoever, is not to be taken seriously, and surely not to be blindly used to discriminate against an entire race of people.

The study has significant flaws in it, from their data set to the way they analyze them. A lot of the studies they used are severely outdated, from the 1950s. There is so many points that I could go on, if there were no character limits on posts. But here is a quick summary:

1.The study uses outdated IQ tests for a lot of countries. Some going as far as 1932, 1935 and 1937-1938
1.The study does not use enough IQ test to estimate a national average. As I said previously, 104 countries had their national averages estimated and was based on no actual IQ tests. 34 countries had their national average based on one single IQ test. 31 countries had their average estimated on only 2 IQ tests. Only 17 countries had 3 or more IQ tests used to determine the national average.
3. Some of the IQ tests used are no longer accepted as valid IQ tests or were never IQ tests to begin with. One such example as I provided previously was the goodenough test which is basically just asking kids to draw stick figures and assigns a score depending on how many organs and body parts were included in the stick figure.
4. The sample size of the IQ studies used for a lot of the countries were either very small, unrepresentative or both. For instance, 80 adults for cameron, 64 3-year olds for dominica, 48 teenagers for equatorial guinea, 44 8 year olds for laos and the list goes on.

Furthermore, since the IQ tests were not done all during the same period, the results need to be adjusted for the flynn effect. The applied the flynn effect of britain to all other countries.

>>10904763
>I am and i've been pointing out the flaws with the study.

i don't care about the study anon. racial intelligence gaps are practically self-evident to anyone with a working pair of eyes and ears.

>>10904727
>>10904763
>The applied the flynn effect of britain to all other countries.
Now you might wonder why this is an issue and the answer is simple. A lot of studies out there have shown that the flynn effect is not the same for every country. In some countries the flynn effect is more pronounced than the others. By applying the british values for the flynn effect, he effectively over estimates some countries and underestimate others. And when it comes to studies between 50 to 80 year old, the difference in IQ adds up very very very quickly. Even a difference of 1-1.25 IQ per decade due to the flynn effect can result in a difference of almost 2/3 of a standard deviation.

>>10904766
>racial intelligence gaps are practically self-evident to anyone with a working pair of eyes and ears.
No, it is only obvious to people who want it that way. It is very well known that environmental, socioeconomic and cultural factors affect intelligence significantly more than race does. There are ample studies out there to show that. The effect of high fluoride concentration present in nature in the drinking water of poor countries like China, Iran, Mexico and india has shown to affect intelligence by up to 1 standard deviation! Nutrition is also a very important factor that affects intelligence. Furthermore, healthcare and nutrition during pregnancy has also shown to affect intelligence. It is significantly more complicated than "blacks are dumb, whites are smart". Studies done on immigrants from countries like Turkey,Iraq,Iran and India as well as eastern european countries has shown that the average IQ of those immigrants on arrival to the united states was around 85 IQ, but when their kids and grandkids were tested, their IQs would converge toward the mean of the host country and in a some cases surpass it. The study, which happens to be from lynn himself, trie to explain the increase in IQ by guess what? Nutrition, education and a familiarization with the culture, which would allow them to score higher on the tests!

>>10904776
>No, it is only obvious to people who want it that way.

why would anyone want it that way? psychologically, it's much easier to simply believe that all races are roughly equal than mentally reconcile apparent reality with the idealized reality that people seem to believe in.

>>10904784
>why would anyone want it that way?
Why were people dressing up in white robes and burning crosses in the US? Why were blacks being lynched in the street? Why did the turks genocide the armenians? Why did the germans genocide the poles? Why did the rwandan genocide happen? Why are the shia and sunni muslims at eachothers throat? The answer is hate. Some people just have a lot of hate for a certain group and they will try to justify it in any way possible.

>>10904790

"The essence of war is a violent struggle between two hostile, independent, and irreconcilable wills, each trying to impose itself on the other". Warfighting

people fight because they have conflicting interests

>>10904796
cont.

and in my opinion, it's much better to fight than to submit to the will of another whose interests conflict with my own

>>10904695
>the gap should be consistent between stratified groups with different evolutionary backgrounds and selection pressures
there is no reason to believe there are consistent gaps between groups with different calorie availability, different technological and social complexity and different phenotypic plasticity for intelligence related traits. The notion that these are fixed qualities that must be totally regular across populations is absurd. Lower intelligence groups probably have lower iq ceilings, shorter intervals between ability thresholds and shorter time to max out the trait plasticity.
>you don’t dumb down iq tests
yes you do if you’re trying to evaluate lower iq individuals or high iq individuals one does the opposite. The test is a good predictor of intelligence for average european groups not for outliers, by definition low iq populations with respect to europeans are already outliers and arpm is going to severely underestimate their intelligence.
>if a test is valid it shouldn’t be possible to coach people
that’s absolutely insane if you coach someone to repeat answers to questions when testifying and they are capable of memorizing these answers verbatim it may appear they are far more verbose, quick witted and competent under pressure than they actually are compared to a high iq gang leader or any attorney giving arguments in court. The nature of coaching, tiger parents and teaching to the test is such that one no loner relies on fluid intelligence and problem solving. If i teach someone to do raven matrices and show them how I would have solved questions they cannot do on their own they will outperform others of similar intelligence who lack those resources. Random spergs online taking mensa norway test who have no idea what they’re doing but still score 3SD are getting a strong but still rough estimate of their intelligence relative to the white euro average, but some person in this thread who practices has lowered the g loading

>>10904800
>that’s absolutely insane if you coach someone to repeat answers to questions when testifying and they are capable of memorizing these answers
By coach I meant train people to solve similar problems. If your definition of coach is just giving the right answers, then why do the elites score 80 and not 125 on the test? The tests on africans were done over half a century ago and the idea that the elite would memorize the answers to the raven's matrices which is a test they probably have never heard, in a poor country in the age where computers and the internet didn't exist, and score 80 is laughable. And if you can indeed train people to solve such tests, then they are flawed and no longer measure IQ but how well you've been trained to solve such tests. Furthermore, if you look at a lot of the patterns and questions that come on IQ tests like the raven's matrices and the wechsler test, you quickly realize that you learn a lot of it during highschool. So if you can be indeed coached to do those tests, europeans have a significant advantage. The wechsler test involves sequences, additions, prime numbers, root/square numbers, logic like if/then statements, vocabulary and definition and so on. Those are all things that are learned in school. Similarly, the raven matrices has a lot of flipping, rotating, mirroring, shifting, bitwise operations and so on, which one again are learned in school during math classes. All that to say, either the test is coachable and/or culture biased, in which case the europeans are significantly more advantaged and the test becomes invalid when comparing across different group/cultures, or they are not, which means the test is valid.

>yes you do if you’re trying to evaluate lower iq
You don't change the questions to the test, you instead use a different one. If I were to administer the raven matrices to someone, and he scores too high, I don't take my pen out and start editing the questions. I move to the APM.

>>10904656
>That presupposes that the only difference between children from elite families and the rest of the country is wealth and nutriment
Whether there are other differences is irrelevant here. You still control for as many factors as possible.

>this has not proven true for other nations
Moleti Mariacarla, Trimarchi Francesco, et. al. Thyroid. February 2016, 26(2): 296-305. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0336
>Overall, the prevalence of borderline or defective cognitive function was more than threefold higher in the children of mothers not using iodized salt than of those mothers using it (76.9% vs. 23.1%, odds ratio 7.667 [CI 2.365?24.856], χ2=12.65; p=0.0001).
Yousafzai, Aisha K et al. Effects of responsive stimulation and nutrition interventions on children's development and growth at age 4 years in a disadvantaged population in Pakistan: a longitudinal follow-up of a cluster-randomised factorial effectiveness trial. The Lancet Global Health , Volume 4 , Issue 8 , e548 - e558 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30100-0
>Children who received responsive stimulation (with or without enhanced nutrition) had significantly higher cognition, language, and motor skills at 4 years of age than children who did not receive responsive stimulation.
That's just two examples pulled from a quick scholar search, but there's plenty more.

If a kid has malaria (~50% chance of severe brain damage), he's going to confound the study. If he's white or asian, you would exclude him, so you also have to exclude him from a black study. Otherwise, you're presuming that well-known confounds somehow don't affect blacks, which is unsupported by research at this time.

The Weicherts study provided statistical evidence that if, knowing nothing else about the studies, you wanted to predict which ones Lynn chose to exclude, you could simply choose all the ones that yielded an IQ result inconvenient for the narrative he wanted to push. It shouldn't be that easy.

>>10869383
>(((credible iq test)))