/sci/ - Science & Math

bump

bumping thread for all those doing it (if any)

fuck off

>>4725056
was that necessary?

Not necessary. We already have data about that stuff. Here, OP:

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/01/classicists-are-smart/

Take the GRE scores, and convert them to IQ.

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/GREIQ.aspx

I wouldn't put much worth in Cox's histriometric estimates. Anne Roe's "The Making of a Scientist" gave actual IQ tests to eminent scientists. IIRC theoretical physicists had the highest median scores.

Biology (pre-med)

not a scientist (philosopher major), but i couldn't resist participating.

'twas fun

That's another reason why this won't work. Publication bias. People who score low are less likely to report back with results.

Besides, why are u using a beta version of this test? http://iqtest.dk/main.swf

>>4725060
The issue I have with GRE/SAT scores is that more often than not people study for them; and the fact that they're tests one can study for doesn't help: math/physics majors can easily be the hardest workers, and that could explain the data: they studied the hardest for both tests. While it's arguable that the same can be said for IQ tests, even if it were possible, people are less likely to have studied for an IQ test than the GRE.

here is mine. thanks for the test

Wicked. If the page with the score converters is anywhere near accurate, based on my SAT score, 1430, (which I took before entering my freshman high school year) I'm looking at around 140. Not too bad, and I'm assuming it hasn't dropped ...

>hey /sci/ lets do another IQ thread
>for the 1000th time!

Are fucking kidding me, again with this?

I might do it in an hour or so but you anons really need to lay off on the IQ threads honestly.

>>4725114
take the IQ test posted and compare scores

>>4725106
At least, with those data, imperfect as they are, there are decent sample sizes and representation for the educations.

The same is not true for this study.

However, if one had access to the actual GRE test results, one cud extract the g-factor from them, and see the intelligence level after all.

bump

EE

Geologist

16yr old....

I started guessing towards to end.

Does the test account for speed? Like if you finish fast enough does it give you a higher IQ

highschool senior

>>4725153
According to a short synopsis on iqtest.dk (a companion site), time doesn't count as long as you finish within the specific time (e.g. 40 minutes or so)

>>4725151

That feel when my IQ is so low compared to everyone elses.

Thats probably why I don't find grade 11 math as intuitive as grade 10, 19 year old highschool graduate btw.

Note that people have been using SD16 instead of SD15 which makes these results difficult to compare with other results. Almost always, one uses SD15.

I always get bored towards the end of the test.

But yeah, Psychology.

>>4725159
If your environment is extraordinarily rowdy (e.g. listening to music, watching television), don't expect accurate results. Also remember that--even though it may be among the best IQ tests you can find on the internet--it isn't professionally administered: so your ACTUAL IQ may be greater.

>>4725165
It is the same test as used by Mensa.

Ofc, one cud get some more reliability with adding more questions, but this one is fine.

Alternatively, u can try some other tests.

http://www.psychometric-success.com/practice-papers/Psychometric%20Success%20Abstract%20Reasoning%20
-%20Practice%20Test%201.pdf

This is a shorter version of the current test used by Mensa Denmark. I'm not a member, but a few of my friends are.

i got 119, it was fun

>>4725151
IQ isn't everything. Sure it helps, but motivation and goals help big time as well.

>>4725162
From what you've seen so far, how is it correlating with GRE scores?

>>4725169
There is also the test on Mensa Norway's page.

http://www.mensa.no/olavtesten/index_2.html

The upper part asks u to pick ur age group.

>>4725172
I haven't been collecting scores, but the scores ITT are quite high. There were a few max scores.

EE is 1187 GRE → 127.95 IQ SD16
Filosofy is 1221 GRE → 130.50 IQ SD16

This wud put the two max scores rather much over the average. Especially given that they got all the questions right, this means that their IQ is at least 140 SD16 according to that test.

I always get bored of these and guess that last 10 or so.

I got 118 so either I'm retarded and got lucky guessing or I'm at least that intelligent. Idk which but I guess it doesn't matter if I can't even focus on a 40 min test ._.

Is time factored in as well? If so, then I probably should've have spent that much time on some of the later questions. I think I managed to solve all of them correctly, but it might have taken me relatively long to find the patterns sometimes (especially the ex-post trivial question 40). I've only slept for 3 hours tonight, so that has most likely affected my results as well, but whatever.

>What is your college major or field of expertise?
Economist

>>4725194
Didn't note the major tho.

U're also the reason making IQ tests longer for more reliability might not be such a good idea.

>>4725196
Time is not factored in, and u didn't get all of them right.

Hey op I'm >>4725122

Media Studies, Animation (3D)
Usually do a tad better but whatever there you go, hope your experiment goes well.

15 year old average scoring freshman.

>>4725199

Interesting. Would love to see the correct answers, some day, then. Wonder which ones I missed, since I was confident I had figured them all out.

I will do it once I've come back from college OP.
I was also wondering if there is any literature on, or whether you had any knowledge about, the development of IQ scores against age. I have a rough recollection of my IQ scores from 12/13 (127), through 15 (132, 138) to 19 (146, 147). As you can see, it took me 4 years to accompish from 15-19 compared to the 2/3 years from 12/13-15. I would have thought that the increase would be more significant from 15-19 because, quite simply, I was a lazy unenthusiastic tit when I was younger.

High school senior, planning on going engineering. I had 4-6 minutes left, if that matters. I would love to see which ones I answered incorrectly. . .

>>4725208
15 year old top of class with same score
then again I pretty much guessed 9 of the last 10

Math major

Not posting image due to file duplication, the test said that on a deviation of 16 my IQ is 132, I'm a sophomore in high school.

19 years old, graduating secondary school this year in Estonia.

You can tell it's Fine Arts from my masterful smiley face.

>>4725293

got a 98, highschool dropout currency trader

So /sci/ is 26% high schoolers and 16% underage b&

fucking figures

>>4725305
based of the /tv/ polls for user ages at least 30 percent of the people on /tv/ are underaged, the number for /b/ is probably higher, most likely 50 percent for obvious reasons

>>4725308
I've seen polls on /sci/ with most users in the 24-30 range and a couple outliers in the 40+ crowd.

that was over a year ago though I guess.

>>4725300
110 also highschool drop out

>>4725311
Well /sci/ is a more niche board that really shouldn't appeal to under aged users (I'm under 18 but I frequent many boards), I honestly thought /sci/ would be mainly college students

how can i increase my iq /sci/

>>4725320
You can't really, I mean for me when I do those questions I just use logic my brains used too (I was a sorta autistic when I was younger and had an obsession with puzzles which is how I see the questions) So I guess it would require actually changing some part of your thought process

>>4725324
well i was also autistic when i was younger lol and im a extremely fast learner i just messed my life up by dropping out

>1 AM
>15 years old
>Implying IQ means shit

>>4725328
>>4725324
>Autistic when I was younger
I don't think autism works like this.

>>4725350
I think there's something wrong with this.
IQ is gay anyway.

you faggots know you have to be 18+ to post or even lurk here, right?

>>4725357
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF WHAT DID YOU FUCKING CALL ME?
A FAGGOT?
DO YOU FUCKING KN OW WHAT FAGGOT EVEN MEANS? IT MEANS A HOMOSEXUAL. A FUCKING QUEER. A WHOOPSY. A PRANCING LALA FRUITY BOY. YOU COME HERE, AND CALL ME FUCKING THAT? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY GIGABYTES OF PORNOGRAPHY FEATURING ONLY FUCKING !!!FEMALES!! I HAVE? DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY TIMES A DAY I MASTURBATE TO THIS COLLECTION, HOW MANY HOURS I SPEND EXPANDING IT? NO, NO YOU FUCKING DON'T, YOU JUST COME IN HERE AND MAKE A FUCKING JUDGEMENT ON ME LIKE YOu"RE SOME KIND OF JUDGER OF FAGS WHEN I STILL SMELL OF THE SEMEN FROM JACKING IT TO THE PUSSY OF A FUCKING FEMALE THIS BOARD ISN"T FUCKING /GAY/ ALRIGHT IT'S /A/

WHIPE THAT SMILE OFF YOUR FUCKING FACE. I BET I HAVE AT LEAST TEN TIMES THE AMOUNT OF PICTURES OF VAGINA YOU DO, FAGGOT FAG FAG FRUITY WHOOPSY DOO-DOO LAA LAA SCOUT BOY GET THE FUCK OFF MY BOARD

>>4725350

Guy who posted that:
>There were factors hindering my ability to perform well on this test.
>My mind still hasn't developed enough yet, being 15 and all.
>IQ tests are irrelevant and aren't accurate measurements of intelligence anyway.
Please, choose a defense mechanism: the tests are meaningless so far as how poorly you perform.

>>4725360
Did you even look at the image?
I scored 122.
If I could score 122 on this test, then there's something seriously wrong with it and this thread should be deleted if the OP meant for these results to be taken seriously.

>>4725360
The first two statements are unrelated to the last one

>>4725360
though being 15 isn't an excuse, since IQ decreases with age.

>>4725381
>Excuse
What?

>>4725381
>IQ decreases with age

Einstein's IQ was terrible as a teenager

>>4725401
>the exception that proves the rule...

>>4725411
>anecdote is not evidence
>except when it shows the opposite
>no one has any idea why

>>4725367
Dude it's not like you scored 140+. It's just a pattern recognition test. It's not like you solved world hunger.

freshman in college,
psychology major

>estimate what their IQs might have been.
>Dr. Cox found that the average IQ of the scientist was 159.
>estimate
>found
hahaha. oh wow. also, pic related.

>>4725448
his laugh is infectuous

>>4725449
great for reaction images

Hey, I don't normally come through this board, but I needed to ask a question inn another thread. Anyway, as OP's image suggests, shouldn't we see most people getting near 100, and maybe half getting under 100? It's anonymous, or are the people who aren't scoring high giving up / not posting results?

TBH I have never done an IQ test myself, I was kind of scared I'd score below average, so I thought I'd give it a try while I'm dead tired. Anyway, just throwing the comment out there because it sort of shakes my faith in this particular test... Maybe /sci/ isn't as dumb as some of the other boards on this site.

I'm half-way through a computer information systems Degree, which you could probably throw under Computer Science if you want.

Einstein never took an IQ test, he also thought of them as derpfull.

>>4725204
Wow, I forgot that was on, thank you!
I'll do this test tomorrow, since I have an exam later and I don't want to throw my confidence off if I get a low score or something.

104
Perhaps it would have helped if I knew I had a half hour left to complete it.

>>4725463
>Einstein never took an IQ test, he also thought of them as derpfull.

Even if that were true, it would still be meaningless. There is zero indication that he had any specialized knowledge in the field of psychometrics. Neither did Richard Feynman, which for some reason IQ-critics feel the need to bring up in almost every discussion.

>IQ tests

lol

Intelligence basically boils down to one's ability to quickly and successfully translate and adapt to new information.

There are many different types of intelligence. Book smarts, scientific intelligence, social intelligence (this can be divided into different areas, too; one can be good at first impressions, but not so good at long term relationships), business intelligence, etc. Good luck gauging any but the first through a written test.

You can be a very good speaker, a great entrepreneur, and be wise in social situations, but utterly suck when faced with a logic puzzle. Likewise, you can be a brilliant scientist, but be asspie as fuck around a stranger.

You can't really gauge practical innovation and adaptation through a written test. That's why 4.0 students don't always thrive when they move on from class to work.

Dr. Catherine Morris should've been fired for doing research without meaning, basis or use.

>>4725544
Which post are you talking about?

i guess im average (for a nigger)

>psychometrics
this is a fucking science board
seriously fuck this

got 100
the patterns got more retarded and have nothing to do with the truly abstract patterns i deal with in my beautiful pure math

>>4725506
well maybe that's because feynman actually took an iq test and scored 120.

>>4725583
He scored poorly in the verbal part of the IQ test, that's why he scored so 'low'. 120 IQ is still very good.

>>4725583

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/finding-the-next-einstein/201112/polymath-physicist-richard-feyn
mans-low-iq-and-finding-another
>Feynman was universally regarded as one of the fastest thinking and most creative theorists in his generation. Yet it has been reported-including by Feynman himself-that he only obtained a score of 125 on a school IQ test. I suspect that this test emphasized verbal, as opposed to mathematical, ability. Feynman received the highest score in the country by a large margin on the notoriously difficult Putnam mathematics competition exam, although he joined the MIT team on short notice and did not prepare for the test. He also reportedly had the highest scores on record on the math/physics graduate admission exams at Princeton. It seems quite possible to me that Feynman's cognitive abilities might have been a bit lopsided-his vocabulary and verbal ability were well above average, but perhaps not as great as his mathematical abilities. I recall looking at excerpts from a notebook Feynman kept while an undergraduate. While the notes covered very advanced topics for an undergraduate-including general relativity and the Dirac equation-it also contained a number of misspellings and grammatical errors. I doubt Feynman cared very much about such things.

Seems like I am pretty average here on sci..

Good enough for government work... :3

>>4725625
oh and physics.

(experimental obviously)

>>4725598
>>4725597
what's your argument? iq isn't flawed, but iq testing is?

121. Army Infantry. Used to be biology major though

soft science = bullshit shit tier science

>>4725697
You seem a little bit mad.

>>4725702
how is that test indicative of intelligence?

>>4725651
>what's your argument? iq isn't flawed, but iq testing is?

normal people have anxiety about their penis size, /sci/ aspies have anxiety about their IQs

>>4725708
its shows how stupid someone is, FACT

"soft sciences" as you call them are alot more difficult to pass than "hard sciences" (lol, hard...plz) it takes alot more thinking then to just memorize stuff like a parrot, thats all hard science and math is MEMORIZING, FACT

you mad retard who takes a shit tier "hard" science, intead of a more difficult THINKING science?

>>4725045
Always around 130-135

>Not that i hold any value to that

>>4725745
chemistry btw

>>4725745
oopsie forgot the tag

>What is your college major or field of expertise?
I don't have one yet.

Test was easy as fuck.

>>4725768
Doing PhD in CS btw.

Scored 124, standard deviation of 16.

Computer Science major.

I feel that if I studied visual pattern recognition I could score above end 140, just like almost anyone here could.

>>4725738
its quite more difficult to troll /sci/ relative to other boards, thanks for trying though

>>4725800
>trolling /sci/
>iq threads
>racism threads
>my major is better than yours threads
>which calculus 1 book is better threads
>difficult

>>4725800

>>4725800
Being Agnostic is the only logical choice.

>>4725800

3/10

i dun't get dis why all weird picz where tits? my friend tell me this site tits

can sum1 plz help where tits?

>>4725768
test only goes up to 140
2/10

mine:

math major, graduated, age 34

>>4725866 k u smart where tits?

sum1 help where can i find no tits in iqtest my friend say "tits on 4chan much tits" but no tits in iqtest help plz

>>4725885

>>>/s/

>>>/hc/

Click one of the bottom two red things in this post.

IQ is a crappy psychometric

>>4725869
i no u fagit so draw cok on mine. luk at pik closur

NEET

>>4725866
Tis true.
The number is from the SD 24. I have altered the image as to not reflect the fact that I put it on SD = 24.

>>4725045

Same as usual. :)

Gonna be studying either audio engineering, or materials design.

119, factory wanker.
I wonder how much the time influence the score.

Do you mean scientist or the best few scientists, OP? Because it's statistically impossible that the average IQ of all scientists are 159.

>In 1926, psychologist Dr. Catherine Morris Cox published a study "of the most eminent men and women" who had lived between 1450 and 1850 to estimate what their IQs might have been.

That is extremely ridiculous.

fun gloating score but the test isn't accurate what with me having taken the same IQ test four months ago.

>>4726108

p.s. my score the first time was 133 or some shit.

I don't need a bullshit online test to tell me I'm smart.

inb4 hurr durr bad score

I didn't take the thing

>>4726120

maybe so, but thou art still a faggot.

Why does IQ-tests always provoke butthurt?

I mean everyone knows that they are not decisive in how successful you will be.

There are obviously people who score very well who are useless to society and science and there are people who don't score well who contribute to science and/or society.

And in a career something as basic as motivation, even social skills will be multiple times more important then pattern recognition.

Just take it for what it is and do it for fun :3

>Also the psychologist who in the 1920 tried to retroactively assign IQ scores to people she found smart is, as many pointed out quite retarded. But that was a single psychologist 90+ years ago.

Why did I waste my genius mind on this.

OP here:
There were a total of 6 perfect scores here--4 had listed concentrations:
2 Mathematics majors
1 Electrical Engineering
1 Philosophy

Unsurprisingly, the increasingly more abstruse, abstract subjects yielded higher IQ scores--aside from EE, which is arguably the most mathematically rigorous branch of engineering (not saying much).

>>4726185

I got a perfect score and I'm a college dropout.

stay in school kids.

>>4726200
proof of score?

>>4726205

here you go.

>>4725244
IQ scores max out around age 25, and then slowly fall for the rest of ur life. I seem to recall that at around age 80, on average, one has lost 2sd=30 points.

>>4726223

that's fucking horseshit and you know it.

>>4725288
Seems to be the first who to get all of them right. I forgot that 140 isn't the max score, >140 is. (SD16)

>>4725320
> how can i increase my iq /sci/

U can grow older if ur less than ~25. U can also try n-back training, as that seems to increase fluid g by a few points.

>>4725460
>Hey, I don't normally come through this board, but I needed to ask a question inn another thread. Anyway, as OP's image suggests, shouldn't we see most people getting near 100, and maybe half getting under 100? It's anonymous, or are the people who aren't scoring high giving up / not posting results?

No. People posting on /sci/ are not representative of the general population. There is obviously a selection bias for people who like.. science and math. This will naturally be a positive selection for intelligence, and the scores will reflect that.

>>4726226
No, it probably isn't.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#IQ_and_age

>>4725781
>I feel that if I studied visual pattern recognition I could score above end 140, just like almost anyone here could.

If one trains to the test, then, ... yes, one can score higher. This does not make one smarter. It makes the test worse at measuring intelligence.

NEET
21
Male
Minority

I decided to use >>4725100 since it's harder, and received a score of 140(won't let me post the image for some reason).

>>4725174
Says : " Din IQ ble beregnet til 135 tilsvarende 99.0 prosentil."

Dunno which language to translate from.

i chuckle to myself at all the morons who are so proud of their high scores on this fake iq test when in reality the test most likely gives high results so you get proud and tell people and more people take it.

A real iq test is 4-6 hours long and i know this because i took one along with test for ADD because my school wanted to know why i was misbehaving and underperforming so much.

>>4726258
>Dunno which language to translate from.

Norwegian.

-

In any case, people taking math focused majors are expected to do better on nonverbal tests, thus overestimating their true intelligence by a bit.

Unfortunately, i don't have a good online verbal test nor a combined test. I have been looking, just haven't found one.

>>4726260
>A real iq test is 4-6 hours long and i know this because i took one along with test for ADD because my school wanted to know why i was misbehaving and underperforming so much.

This is not true. IQ tests differ in how long they take to take. This one doesn't take that long, but 40 minutes can be long enough for someone with ADHD.

Yes, there are other tests that take much longer, and might be more reliable. (I don't recall seeing numbers of reliability vs. test-length.)

Med student - 19

>>4726265
>Norwegian.

thank you.

>>4726338
U shud have been able to figure it out urself.

TLD is .no. Look up TLDs, find .no. Norway. Language of Norway→norwagian.

Enjoy working at mcdonalds, plebs

Computer science, graduate student.

I'm the same guy who posted in Language reform guy's I.Q thread last time. The guy who is so stupid he had to repeat a year at 6th form. Due to my low grades. I'm a retard.

Still in 6th form.

Best way to find your IQ is to just translate your SAT score.

Mine was 1420 so that translates to an IQ of ~140

Deal with it. Your internet tests are not valid.

Pure mathematician.
Did I do good?

114, Comp Sci


Pizza in the oven, couldn't be arsed doing the entire thing

>>4726415
The LSAT is basically an IQ test too


IQ = LSAT*1.49 – 119.77

Only did the last 6 and they were all stupid easy. Bad test.

>>4726352

In the original post with the link, it clearly says "Mensa Norway". The oversight says more of my application/attention than ability.

I scored 125. Thats okay with me, I guess on the last couple questions. I feel like its an accurate score for me.

Is it possible that having /sci/ take all these IQ tests all the time is jacking up the averages to make regular peoples scores lower than they should be?

>>4726538

No, the very nature of an IQ test says that the more people take it, the more accurate it is.

High school dropout. Tried my very hardest on every last question and used as much of the time I had as possible.

>tfw normalfag

>>4726871
Lolno.
IQ tests can also be biased due to selection bias.

>>4725045
>done marijuana, LSD
>this same IQ test at age of 11: IQ of 124
>IQ test now : IQ of 118 (age of 20)
I regret nothing
I am electrical engineer btw....

lol. on my phone whilst half asleep. pretty good result actually

Female Nuclear Engineering 2nd year.

>>4726902

Should I give up trying to learn math and science considering my IQ is so underwhelming?

>>4727086

No, it just means you just need to study more. IQ tests are iffy at best, especially online ones. Do not get discouraged, you are more than likely great at something that a lot of people are not.

My husband has the same IQ as you, but can make such hillbilly contraptions that work.. it's mind boggling.

Do what works for you in terms of studying, if you get things slower than some, oh well... at least you're trying to understand it in the first place.

I'm rather pleased considering I'm only an A-Level Student, and some of you Uni people are only 130, I shall get there one day.

>>4726413
SD24, derp.

>>4727192
>he thinks IQ increases over time
>laughinggaymen.jpg

>mfw when I rushed I got 129

>mfw I tried it again, taking my time, and got 122

Time is a factor.

>>4726440
>The LSAT is basically an IQ test too

All cognitive tests and aptitude tests are intelligence tests. They just differ in how good measures of intelligence they are. (their g-loadedness)

Better method is to extract the g-factor from the SAT and use that.

>>4727228
>Time is a factor.

No it isn't. Easy to test. Try selecting A all the way thru. Then do it again, but wait 39 minutes before doing it. Same result.

>>4727225
Why shouldn't IQ increase over time, to a degree.
Since knowledge and intelligence can be worked on and increased, and an IQ is a test designed to measure that, then it's only logical to think that an IQ score can be improved upon.

>>4727230

The eligibility requirements for some high-IQ organizations will only allow SAT scores taken no later than a particular year. Is there something to be said for the rigor of the SAT test over the years?

>>4727246

That IQ test didn't really measure any of my knowledge.. It didn't even have letters or linguistic problems which tests usually have. Everything was strictly patterns, quantities, spatial reasoning and shapes.

>>4727236

You do realise that the answers change on every attempt?

Pressing A on one attempt may be a right answer whereas pressing it on another try would be a wrong answer.

>>4727236
Fuck off IQ fundie

So basically above 140 is 0 mistake, 132 one mistake, 129 two mistakes, 127 three mistakes ...

wait why does it say the high end of 140 for some, but then it shows others with actual numbers?

>>4727667
people shopped. also you could recalculate with different standard deviation

>>4727674
>shopped

This is what I thought. So I am assuming that the test does not exceed "high end of 140"?

>>4727686
with sd at 16, no.

iq just measures your hability of identifying patterns fast
is that all there is to intelligence? i think not

>>4727712
>is that all there is to intelligence?

probably
pretty much.

>>4727650
Is this confirmed?

>>4727719
I did it a few times so yea

>>4727712

I've thought the same thing since ever taking anything called an IQ test.

I would probably place more stock in an SAT/ACT score than an IQ test. At least the so-called "g-factor" is being applied to the human body of knowledge in those tests.

>>4727085 Female Nuclear Engineering

>Telling everyone his gender in an attempt to feel on the same level as men.

>>4727192

Age doesn't make a difference. It can actually have a negative impact.

>>4727085
What school?

Theoretical Computer Science
pretty drunk right now

>>4727766

Penn State, I've talked to you a few times on here. I am also the one trying to get into the Marines.

>>4727747
You're the only one in this thread bothered by it.

>>4727843

>female
>marines

Seriously I hope you know you are probably going to get raped repeatedly.

>>4727843
I got into the Marines once.
with a 99 on the ASVAB they wouldn't stop pushing me to OCS.
it was a bit discouraging. GI bill was nice tho.

>>4727850
not likely

most woman jarheads can kill you bare-handed in under a minute.

what do you think we teach our Marines?

>>4727286
>You do realise that the answers change on every attempt?

I didn't test for that. If that is the case, then yeah, my method does not work with only 2 comparison attempts.

Still, it's just a matter of doing it many times then, and averaging the results. That wud also prove me right.

>>4727247
>The eligibility requirements for some high-IQ organizations will only allow SAT scores taken no later than a particular year. Is there something to be said for the rigor of the SAT test over the years?

I have noticed this. I don't know why actually.

>>4727866
Perhaps the test has gotten harder.

>>4727870
Perhaps. SAT scores have been falling at least. This cud mean that people were getting less intelligence, or education was getting more, or that people somehow else acquired less knowledge about relevant things than previously, or that people... too many options to say without testing.

>>4727870
As we advance, more and more things become part of common sense. Back in the day it was amazing if a person without money knew how to read, nowadays it is more common. This example is progressively becoming more prominent in things such as math and sciences.

please note that language reform guy is an unbalanced cryptofascist who agrees with anders breivik that women are out to destroy society and under no circumstances should be taken seriously~~

>>4727870
Over the years the test is changed in a number of different ways. The biggest one would be the 're-centring' that took place something like ten or twenty years ago.
Same idea as with IQ tests, average is supposed to be about 500, and it was dipping into the low 400's, so they pulled the average back up.

There were also problems with vague/poorly written questions.

>>4727847

Very nice! I only scored a 91 on my ASVAB. I thought about NROTC or doing PLC. I just have to finish removing this tattoo then I can offically sign the papers. I have the SF - 86 done right now but can't really do anything with them.

>>4727850

Not really, there are enough whorish females in the military to satisfy those needs. I thank those that serve, but some people give the females who do work their ass off a bad name. I know some who joined the Army just to try and get a guy in uniform.

got 1 wrong i believe.

fucking 34

i see no pattern

;_;

got 1 wrong i believe.

fucking 34

i see no pattern

;_;

also forgot to add, neuroscience major

>>4727908

>whorish females in the military

you've got some balls posting this on memorial day

remember, misogynists hate our fallen heroes

>>4727921

Read the next sentence. I said I think those people who serve though. Some just have put a bad name out there. You cannot deny that.

I would walk up to the same whorish females and shake their hand and say thank you for serving, but it does not mean I still accept what they are doing. Also, you do not know this since we are anonymous on this board, but I am very patriotic person.. to the point of almost breaking up with my Husband last night because he basically called everyone who served a bunch of mindless drones that probably didn't pass high school. Yeah...

>>4727921
nah, she's right.
there's plenty of heterosex in the navy.

>>4727924

that was shitty of your husband but calling other women "whorish" because they're more sexually active than you isn't much more fair or accurate than what he said

>>4727917
Also cheating with sd24. Derp.

I'm not going to screencap it because I don't think it should be counted, but I got 101. Less than halfway through I got bored and guessed the rest of them.

Say what you will about me as a person, but I'm either unbelievably lucky or the test may need work.

>>4727883
> please note that language reform guy is an unbalanced cryptofascist who agrees with anders breivik that women are out to destroy society and under no circumstances should be taken seriously~~

He is lying about me again. Actually, it was the other people in the that thread that supported fascism, remember? Those that wanted to silence the free speech of people who said 'racist' and 'sexist' things.

Altho Breivik is right about some things related to multiculturalism. But then, agreeing with serial killers is nothing new. Everybody does it. Also, very obvious guilt my association.

>>4727933
it's not really a problem so long as we agree that the men servicing those women are also whorish.

it takes two to whore

>>4727917
lulz 34 is like one of the easiest

33 however..

>>4727949
Getting about half of them correct means u're average, u're result is also average, so... Test doesn't need work.

>>4727933

Thank is true. For that I apologize. I just know some women who have cheated on their Husband back at home while they were deployed or in AIT and their Husband hasn't the wisest.

Also, those who pull the 'rape' or 'harassment' card because they suddenly grew feelings but the guy did not.. and because a lot of times when it is he said she said... she'll win. Some good people have been discharged because of that.

But anyways, I'll stop with the name calling.

On topic, is there another good IQ test website besides this one?

>>4727959
I already posted one earlier.

http://www.mensa.no/olavtesten/index_2.html

It's from Mensa Norway.

>>4727955

When I say less than halfway through, I mean about 8 questions.

>>4727948
gtfo

33 is easy, just combine spatially in your mind.

34 i have no fucking idea.

>>4727969
34 you delete overlapping lines and combine non-overlapping.

>>4727965
I misread. Well, the test may be focused on distinguishing higher than average from each other. This means that if u get the first few of them right, then u'll be marked as average. The rest of the questions will then be used to distinguish between different kinds of above average.

That or u just got lucky. I dunno.

shall we post all the answers to the test and fuck with OP's sample?

>>4727976
ah ha.

>>4725089 is me.

Here you are:
h e e c c g b e h g g e e f d g b a c g h b b g a d d d c b d h c h g h a h a

you're welcome, darlings--always remember: philosophers are brilliant

>>4728001
lettering changes everytime lol

>>4728001
hah
and you got a perfect score...

>>4727969
How do you mean combine spatially in your mind? How do you decide between the different nutshells?

>>4728001
Letters change from one test to another so..

>>4728011
I don't know how, just visualize
part of intelligence is seeing patterns
part is manipulating them

>>4728010
>>4728003
curses, he speaks the truth! sadly, my altruism has been exhausted--unless, of course, one has any particular questions in mind (i hadn't taken the test more than once to know this was the case). KAI AIPEI TOV LITHOV--OV APO OV;;;;;;;

I scored a 129 with 16 of SD(student of physics and cs) but I managed to come up with a pattern to every figure, which many obviously didn't match up with the one the makers of the test came up with, so my reasoning isn't as valid? Why?(I'm sincerly interested)

Well, I calculated the z-score and I'm in the 75th percentile.
Figure out my score.

>>4728024
i scored 129 with 16 of SD (NEET)
and i managed to come up with a pattern to every figure too :/

i am quite certain that almost every answer has uniqueness base on the pattern i found

MSc. Experimental psychology, 24 years old. I once had a fellow student do the WAIS on me as practice for a course, I scored 136 on that. This is pretty close. I do think intelligence is more than pattern recognition though.

What's the pattern in #37?
I spent 25 minutes on it and got nowhere.

>>4728048
.Forgot pic.

>>4728045
I know very little about IQ tests, but I'll assume that in a real test they actually ask you the pattern you found.

>>4728051
same as 34
delete overlaps, save non-overlaps

>>4728053
nope
there's usually enough wrong choices that chances are great if you answered correctly you saw the expected pattern.

>>4728051
It's a 'boolean' (like in 3dmax) , the third figure is the symettrical difference between them(it's in an horizontal line). It's like 'substracting' the points.

>>4728051
you add the first two horizontal terms (boxes): open Os deleted when they meet closed Os. The ones that remain take up a subsquare normally. it's an elimination sort've thing.

>>4728059
But I'm this one: >>4728024 I'm pretty sure there was no ambiguty in my patterns.

>>4728063
your reasoning differs from the expected norm then.

schizophrenics and obsessive/compulsive types also see patterns that others do not.

that's how we get religion.

I thought 29 was most interesting.

>>4728015
So basically you have no idea why you chose what you chose, which explains why you didn't score 140+.
I found a perfectly logical explanation for each of them all, but 33 still baffles me

>>4728072
indeed
other just obvious rotation, addition and subtraction
29 is more like subsituition

>>4728074
I know exactly what I did.
I don't know how I visualized the answer rather than drawing little diagrams in the dirt.

I did score a 140

>>4728074
There are 3 different angles being utilized: you deductively determine that the only remaining angle for a combined infinity figure would have to be the vertical infinity.

>>4728078
You cheated with the 24 SD, with SD of 16 you score a 132. You chose the answer that seemed the most likely according to your reasoning, but you can't explain it because you haven't found the real logic behind it. Sometimes that works, sometimes not

>>4728084
I can explain each answer.

not sure why you're projecting. it's kinda funny.

can someone explain 36?
i found that |dots outside - dot inside| = 4 no matter it's row or column but both 4dots outside and inside are feasible

>>4728084
The 3 angles aren't really obvious, for instance the 2 figures on the 3rd row don't seem aligned

>>4728092
subtract dots outside from dots inside
add dots inside to dots inside
add dots outside to dots outside

the answer has no dots in or out

>>4728015
Did anyone find this hard or? I dunno. Seems like an obvious case of 'destructive overlay' to me, or whatever it is called.
Two lines → lack of lines.
Only one line → line still there.
Two lacks of lines → lack of line.

>>4728091
Because you said you don't know how you decided between the different answers

>>4728092
You could say one dot inside the circle is -1, one dot outside +1

>>4728092
inside dots + inside dots = addition
inside dots + outside dots = subtraction
it's an empty circle in either case (rows or columns), 'cause 2 inside + 2 outside is always 0: is this not what you're asking?

>>4728104
are you the schizophrenic?
that woud explain your failure to comprehend....

XOR problems are like the single most common "hard" problem on internet iq tests (where by hard I mean "in the last 10 problems or so).

Every test also seems to have some version of the "addition of circles" problem where circles on the outside are positive and circles on the inside are negative.

I swear IQ test makers have no fucking creativity.

>>4728114
This is to >>4728102

>>4728112
I'm not, just quoting you there :

>I don't know how, just visualize
>I don't know how I visualized the answer

Might have to do with your failure to explain yourself properly

>>4728011
Sup. >>4727969 Here.

Let me show you.

>>4728117
...or your desire to conflate visualization with recognition.

>>4728102
OP here:
According to mensa's "qualifying test scores" page, the GRE, SAT, LSAT and other aptitude tests no longer correlate with IQ tests.

>>4728105
sorry still cant see the pattern, isn't on first row or column inside dots + no outside dots = 4?

>>4728121
If you can recognize the answer then surely you can visualize it? So if you can't visualize it...

>>4728124
Overlaps cancel each other out.

>experiencing genetic superiority first hand

Just subtract the dots that overlap in your mind. The first two represent the grids being overlapped, the third the outcome. 3 rows.

>>4728122
>GRE, SAT, LSAT and other aptitude tests no longer correlate with IQ tests.

SAT doesn't correlate with IQ?
That's flat out nonsense.
Sauce?

>>4728124
first row,
1 inside dot plus 1 inside dot= 2 inside dots

>>4728124
Think of it as a regular equation:

the first row think A + B = C, where the last term in the row, C, is the sum of the first two terms (this also applies to columns). So the first row becomes (1 inside dot) + (1 inside dot) = (2 inside dots). The second row: (1 inside dot) + (3 outside dots) = 2 outside dots (because you subtract outside/inside dots), etc.

>>4728119
okay.jpg, it's unusual to have to jumble the figures to see a pattern, usually the pattern is present along the rows/columns

>>4728129
>>4728129
http://www.us.mensa.org/join/testscores/qualifyingscores/

Where it says N/A, scroll to the bottom or click it for an explanation; apparently, they're no longer accurate measurements of IQ. If you further scan mensa's resources, they explain it in further depth.

>>4728135
>Think of it as a regular equation
>1st + 2nd = 3rd
on god, finally know what you guys are talking

>>4728135
>Think of it as a regular equation
>1st + 2nd = 3rd
oh god, finally know what you guys are talking

EE/Physics. I completed the test in 6 minutes and scored above end (>140). I don't have much faith in the accuracy of this test.

An idiot who almost failed grade 10 english

>118
Majoring in Maths and Physics, I've aced every single maths I've encountered but I don't have that much of Physics since I started taking classes this year. IQ tests aren't that accurate, I've gotten ridiculous scores before and even lower scores than this.
No se puede evitar.

127

I'm so dumb ;_;

110

Field: Psychology & Neuroscience

>>4728122
>According to mensa's "qualifying test scores" page, the GRE, SAT, LSAT and other aptitude tests no longer correlate with IQ tests.

This is just flat out wrong. This considerably lowers my opinion of the American Mensa.

>>4728446
Your opinion of Mensa was high enough that it could go lower?

>>4728446
To expand on this with some actual data.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAT#Correlations_with_IQ

Take a look at the two sources listed.

First one:
ABSTRACT
There is little evidence showing the relationship between the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT)
and g (general intelligence). This research established the relationship between SAT and g, as
well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g, and examined the SAT as a premorbid
measure of intelligence. In Study 1, we used the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979.
Measures of g were extracted from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and
correlated with SAT scores of 917 participants. The resulting correlation was .82 (.86 corrected
for nonlinearity). Study 2 investigated the correlation between revised and recentered SAT
scores and scores on the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices among 104 undergraduates.
The resulting correlation was .483 (.72 corrected for restricted range). These studies indicate that
the SAT is mainly a test of g. We provide equations for converting SAT scores to estimated IQs;
such conversion could be useful for estimating premorbid IQ or conducting individual difference
research with college students.

>>4728451
Second paper

Abstract

This study sought to assess the ability of the equations Frey and Detterman (2004) presented to assess IQ in the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS). The study confirmed Frey and Detterman’s equation (2) best predicted IQ from recentered SAT scores. Nonetheless, both of the Frey and Detterman’s equations did not match the optimal model found in the current data, namely that SAT Total or SAT Verbal, alone, best predicted IQ as measured by the RIAS. Implications from this study are much the same as those stated by Frey and Detterman, namely, that SAT appears to be a measure of general intelligence and is a useful tool in predicting cognitive functioning. Nonetheless, future research is needed with a wider range of IQ instruments to assess which SAT variables are the best predictors, and what weight each should be ascribed.

-

Pretty much a replication of the first. Too bad they didn't use a more lengthy IQ test and then extracted a g-factor and discovered how g-loaded the SAT is. Or maybe they did, but it seems not from the abstract.

>>4728448
>Your opinion of Mensa was high enough that it could go lower?

Yes. Altho i'm not a member myself. Seems like a waste of money.

Another paper that is relevant is:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606000250
Males have greater g: Sex differences in general mental ability from 100,000 17- to 18-year-olds on the Scholastic Assessment Test
Douglas N. Jackson, J. Philippe Rushton

The interesting part of the paper is that if one removes the g-factor from the SAT scores, the remaining scores no longer predict grades in college (except for a weak prediction in math). Pic related.

No college major as I am not in college. I have applied for a bachelor of mathematics and will be attending university in September.

just took a look on SAT on wiki
such reasoning test is so shit in terms of raw reasoning skill and processing speed(aka intelligent in my opinion)

i mean, SAT is definitely a good test for some job interview but the test is more like applied(high-level) reasoning skill rather than measuring the abstract(low level) data of human

OP's IQ test is on the right track but the pattern is too repetitive and overall too easy. If not mistaken your test should be online for a very long time, i remember doing this like 5 years ago or so and the patterns on the last few questions are hell lot more diversity(still not complex) than this one.

just took a look on SAT on wiki
such reasoning test is so shit in terms of raw reasoning skill*processing speed(aka intelligent in my opinion)

i mean, SAT is definitely a good test for some job interviews but the test is more like tesing applied(high-level) reasoning skill rather than measuring some abstract(low level) data of a person

OP's IQ test is on the right track but the pattern is too repetitive and overall too easy.
If not mistaken your test should be online for a very long time, i remember doing this like 5 years ago or so and the patterns on the last few questions were hell lot more diverse(still not complex at all) than this one.

>>4728502
Ur reasoning is flawed, but generally, no such sofisticated non-mathematical reasoning is necessary. The data are pretty clear. The SAT is basically an IQ test. This is not surprisingly since it is exactly what IQ tests measure that is good for predicting things. That is to say, general intelligence aka g.

One wud be surprised to learn how many ways one can measure g. For instance, even simple reaction time tests are surprisingly good measures of g.

How could it be that I scored 120 but found a logical explanation for every question? I'm 100% sure that I found correct patterns.

>>4728818
forgot to add: chemistry, computer science and biology

This is what IQologists actually believe:
We estimate the IQ of dead persons by giving them the result we think they should have based on their success to prove that their IQ correlates with their success.

>>4728818

I had the same problem. Only plausible explanation is that the questions are flawed, due to there being multiple patterns, yet only a single answer is deemed 'correct'. If one finds a pattern, and answers the question accordingly, it should be considered correct, due to the logical thought process involved in it.