/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.12723971]

are /sci/ users really as smart as they say though?
(only take once for best accuracy)

https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/FSIQ/

[Anonymous No.12724066]

>>12723971
>10+ minutes
no thanks

[Anonymous No.12724091]

Psychometrics has less to do with science than psychology

> a study and critique of creativity

Fucking hilarious

[Anonymous No.12726284]

here you go, bud.

[Anonymous No.12726316]

I'm on the shitter and am having some hella constipation right now

[Anonymous No.12726318]

[Anonymous No.12726822]

>In this section you will be a list of scrambled letters
this is an intense RP session

[Anonymous No.12726879]

>>12723971
>that verbal IQ tho
Mine's pretty consistent.

[Anonymous No.12727032]

>>12723971
Hi gay guy here looking for bf who is around the same smart as me

[Anonymous No.12727034]

One of given answers for the "minimum distance" part of the test seemed very off so I literally checked it myself with a full calculation (in a little script). On my test (not sure if they scramble it), it was the 3rd one of that subsection and it had 11 squares total (5 and 6 lined up separately). The position of their supplied answer was off from my answer (which happened to be the actual answer) by more than two full units. So, they rounded incorrectly? Misclicked? Both?

If you don't believe me, check for yourself. Some of the others seemed fishy but I didn't bother checking them.

I wouldn't rely on this test for shit.

[Anonymous No.12728473]

>>12724091
this

[Anonymous No.12728628]

>>12723971
The dots took me a second to figure out the trick

[Anonymous No.12729006]

>>12723971
perhaps I am a brainlet...

[Anonymous No.12729561]

I'm not sure if I understood how the test works

[Anonymous No.12729563]

>>12729561
this is the exact one I was talking about here >>12727034

[Anonymous No.12729572]

>>12727034
>t. low IQ midwit

[Anonymous No.12729580]

>>12729572
prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.12729598]

>>12723971
Hey, I'm not a native speaker, ok?

[Anonymous No.12729604]

>>12729561
>>12729563
Midwits. The top row has 5 squares. The bottom row has 6 squares. This weights the center closer to the bottom row. Furthermore, with 11 total squares you need the at the horizontal midpoint between them, so that five are to the right of the center and five are to the left of the center.

Maybe you can make the argument that the red-center is displaced one down further than it should be. You'd be incorrect, since the two green rows aren't equidistant from the perimeter of the square. Top row is closer to the perimeter which adds an extra weight against its centering.

[Anonymous No.12729657]

>>12729604
>Furthermore, with 11 total squares you need the at the horizontal midpoint between them, so that five are to the right of the center and five are to the left of the center.
But on the "solution" there are three squares to the right and six to the left.
> You'd be incorrect, since the two green rows aren't equidistant from the perimeter of the square. Top row is closer to the perimeter which adds an extra weight against its centering.
Now it just looks like you're saying random shit to make you sound like you know what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.12729688]

FUCK so I went back to read the original instructions and I was was actually wrong because I didn't read it carefully.
It says to find the point with minimum average distance, not a centre of mass as I thought.
I fucked up, I admit it.

>>12729604
If you compute the average position of the dots, you will find that the extra bottom square has a negligible effect, and that the point chosen is still "correct" if that's what one was looking for, but it isn't.

[Anonymous No.12729807]

>>12723971
Took this test a week ago, so just deduct 20 points from my IQ.

[Anonymous No.12729894]

i think these scores are inflated so you're more likely to recommend this to other people. if you got a bad score, you wouldn't be likely to suggest it to others. they probably show you a score that's ~10-15 points higher than what they use in for their models.

i know im a midwit and i got a higher score. there's no way /sci/ is full of 120-140 iq posters

[Anonymous No.12730078]

>>12729894
>i know im a midwit and i got a higher score. there's no way /sci/ is full of 120-140 iq posters
I don't see how that's so unbelievable; first half a dozen self-selected results is not that many. Additionally, if, according to this (admitely highly dubious) source the /average/ Physics or Math major has a 130+ IQ, the results shouldn't be uncommon on the board's demographics.

[Anonymous No.12730118]

>>12723971
tourist here
ill blame english not being my first language for the total score

[Anonymous No.12730162]

The test maker cant even into grammar so?
I got 109 while day drunk living in my car as a post iv heroin and meth addict. Also i havent gotten sleep after working a min wage night shift labor job, i am tired af. Test sucks sage

[Anonymous No.12730299]

I may have an average brain but maybe I can still get a big brain bf

[Anonymous No.12730371]

Honestly I thought I had done more damage.

[Anonymous No.12730764]

/pol/ checking in

[Anonymous No.12731515]

>>12729006
Worse. You are a midwit

[Anonymous No.12731745]

>>12729598
same here
they should make a test in some gook language and make americans take it

[Anonymous No.12731967]

I am very sleepy and feel completely drained and took lying on a sofa from my phone (too relaxed). English also isn't my native language and I literally basically haven't left my apartment and haven't seen any sunlight in around 2+ years, but all of that is hardly an excuse. Guess I am dumb as a rock. I fucking hate myself.
I don't feel that dumb IRL and most people think I am "the smart one" and can be somewhat perceptive at specific autistic things and also definitely very good at being verbose about abstract shit and the things I notice throughout my life, but these tests always make me feel anxious and I am shit at them.
Fuck me I wish I was sub-50 IQ and didn't care about any of all that shit and didn't even know how to operate a fucking computer. How can I even trust my own fucking opinions and observations on anything if I am that dumb. God, now I wish I didn't take this test, I will never fucking wash it down.

[Anonymous No.12731995]

>>12731967
IQ is a meme bro, keep your chin up

[Anonymous No.12732005]

>>12731995
I don't claim to be very informed, but I myself don't believe it's a meme. You may argue that IQ testing is a meme, however, but I am not sure if there is a better way to test intelligence.

[Anonymous No.12732038]

>>12732005
I can tell you first hand that IQ don't correlate to anything. If you met me in person you'd think I'm a literal mental retard. I get average grades in most of my classes, don't have any friends, and haven't made anything of myself. I think IQ only measures "potential" or "giftedness" but that's not exactly intelligence, is it.

[Anonymous No.12732070]

>>12732038
Even if we go by this explanation of the metric, that would only account for the possibility of you being "real-life dumb" while being "point smart", but not really the other way around, would it

[Anonymous No.12732248]

So what would be an acceptable IQ in your estimation?

[Anonymous No.12732316]

>>12732248
3 digits

[Anonymous No.12732333]

>>12732316
>100
>acceptable

[Anonymous No.12732360]

you know a test is garbage when most people are getting 120+

[Anonymous No.12732393]

>>12732360
I know at least two people who got 100-110. I wouldn't ever consider them anywhere near dumb, too.

[Anonymous No.12732869]

The Closest Point Questions Confused Me

[Anonymous No.12732895]

t. non-native speaker

[Anonymous No.12733370]

Who #goldfishmemorygang

Actually, with the spacial IQ, I might actually be a goldfish.

[Anonymous No.12733403]

>>12732360
You aren't accounting for selection bias. We're on a forum for scientific discussion that likes to bully people.

[Anonymous No.12733541]

how to improve memory?

[Anonymous No.12733580]

>>12733541
See here
>>12726879
You'll see we have roughly the same EM, but my VM eclipses yours, and significantly boosts memory IQ. A good technique is to chunk the material. Memorize something like "Square, left", and then dedicate the rest of your working memory toward selecting everything else. For instance I would say something like "Tetris, L, 2" and then mark everything but the Tetris piece.

Don't worry about exposure memory. That's something female brains are wired to do.

[Anonymous No.12733699]

>>12732360
>Implying people on /sci/ aren't just smarter than average
>...
Okay, you're right.

[Anonymous No.12734336]

>>12731967
Alright I took the test again without being totally sleep deprived and the scores are around 130. The tasks that produced white noise in my head in the afternoon were extremely easy now, and I am sure I remembered none of the solutions (some stuff like the icons was also different, I think)
Of course, this kind of negates the purpose of an IQ test, but at least gives me an excuse to cope somewhat.

[Anonymous No.12734431]

Who else here 120 iq, king of midwits?

[Anonymous No.12734452]

my mother language is not english so I think i did good

[Anonymous No.12734572]

>>12734431
How can 120 be a midwit if the average, middle IQ is by definition 100?

[Anonymous No.12734710]

the centre of weight should be (4.3,4.5) if we take the vertical coordinate of the top bar as 8 and the horizontal coordinate of the bottom bar as 1. Rounded up should give >>12729561.
>>12729604
>Furthermore, with 11 total squares you need the at the horizontal midpoint between them, so that five are to the right of the center and five are to the left of the center
that's what he did literally

we are focusing on the weight/numbers of boxes in whatever sides too much. keep in mind that the minimum distance point isn't the same as that.

[Anonymous No.12734723]

>>12734572
because those who have 60 iq shouldn't really be counted

[Anonymous No.12734724]

>>12729688
>It says to find the point with minimum average distance, not a centre of mass as I thought.
I thought it was centre of mass too. That's a far more reasonable concept in any case.
>I fucked up, I admit it.
No, the test fucked up.

[Anonymous No.12734726]

>>12734723
or <80 let's say

[Anonymous No.12734728]

>>12723971
The typical /sci/ user will claim to have around 175 IQ, while maintaining that all other users have around 75 IQ or less. But if you want accurate figures, ask Jon Tooker.

[Anonymous No.12734813]

>>12723971
The memory part was pretty hard. English is not my first language, so I did surprisingly well on that part. I guessed a bit, I must admit. "Fid" and "gad" sound like words, for example, so I chose them. I probably guessed some others as well, but, as you see, my memory sucks, so I forgot about them already. My pattern recognition seems to be on point, which is nice. That's probably why I spend more time on /pol/ than on /sci/.

[Anonymous No.12735000]

>>12734813
Goldfishgang! But yeah, I'm from /pol/ too. I think it's the home board of like 30% of 4chan

[Anonymous No.12735040]

>>12723971
>though
>>12726879
>tho

[Anonymous No.12735425]

Not a native speaker and i must say i was completely in the dark when it came to the anagram task.