Online IQ tests and normalization

[Anonymous No.5915131]

The other night there was a thread on here about someone who thought he was doomed as an intellectual because his IQ is 107. I ended up taking the IQ test here

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

and was shocked when my result was 106. I then took the test at www.iqtest.com (and, yes, paid $10 for the results--a bruised ego can be a powerful motivator) and scored 147. Interestingly, I scored 152 (the ceiling?) on all but one of the subscores, except "computational speed", on which I scored 93 (!). I also paid $10 to take the test here

http://www.iq-test.com/

three times. My results were 135, 138, and 147. Then I went back to retake the test that I bombed, but with a few minutes left my fire alarm went off and I had to exit the test. I felt like I did much better the second time, probably because I was pretty tired when I took it the first time.

Some thoughts on the three tests:

The iqtest.com test is almost certainly only valid for English-speaking adults, and your level of education will affect your result. When I scored so much higher on this test than I did on the first one I took, my first thought was that it's just a vanity test. However, my report CLAIMED that I scored higher than 99.91% of test takers to get a score of 147. On the other hand, they say that the average score is 108. (Their explanation is essentially that retards can't into the internet.)

The other two tests are quite similar, though the questions near the end on the one that I bombed seem much harder than the ones near the end on the one that I did well on. Two of the three tests won't give you your score unless you pay them, which must have an effect on the average score. The most difficult of the three tests is completely free, so I imagine that some people take it over and over again to see how high they can score (or just for fun). I also believe that it should be possible to increase your score by quite a large amount on the Raven's-type tests through practice.

What does /sci/ think?

[Anonymous No.5915132]

>>5915131
>Interestingly, I scored 152 (the ceiling?) on all but one of the subscores, "computational speed",

fixed

[Anonymous No.5915133]

>>5915131
If you paid money to take an IQ test I'd say the first result is a lot closer to your true IQ.

[Anonymous No.5915134]

>>5915133

har har har

[Anonymous No.5915136]

>>5915131
the only people who would pay for the IQ test probably have high results already

i wouldn't trust it

[Anonymous No.5915137]

Online IQ tests are invalid because you can practice for them. No idea what actual IQ tests are like. Personal experience tells me that there may be aspects of intelligence that are fixed, but in almost any application to the real world it can be increased.

[Anonymous No.5915139]

>>5915131
OP you can buy genuine IQ tests at barn's and noble's. they're on paper and timed. but be honest with yourself if you want a real score

[Anonymous No.5915140]

>>5915136
>>5915137

Both of these arguments would suggest that you should score LOWER on an online IQ test than on a real IQ test. Don't most people think that the opposite is the case?

[Anonymous No.5915142]

>>5915140
that's why i said i wouldn't trust it

[Anonymous No.5915143]

>>5915136

This might be the case for the second test, because you have to pay to take it. The third, though, only charges you for your score. The site can use the scores of people who take the test but don't pay for their results. Better yet, they can norm the test rigorously before putting it online so that people's scores aren't skewed by their competing against people who take the test many times.

[Anonymous No.5915144]

>>5915140
Except it doesn't. It just implies online tests are completely different from the actual thing.

[Anonymous No.5915146]

Should I be concerned that my "computational speed" subscore was four standard deviations below all my other subscores? I take medication for OCD and ADHD, but that still seems like a drastic discrepancy to me.

[Anonymous No.5915149]

>>5915144

No, both of those arguments suggest that the average raw score on an online test will be higher, so that the IQ scores given out will be depressed. I have no idea if the conclusion is true, but the arguments imply that conclusion.

[Anonymous No.5915150]

>>5915131
just buy a home test and you'll have many sources to certify your IQ without the stigma of doing it online

[Anonymous No.5915151]

>>5915149

Clarification: the first argument, if accepted, only implies that conclusion if the site only uses the scores of people who pay. This applies to sites that charge before you take the test, but probably not to sites that only charge for your score.

Also, by "those arguments suggest that" I obviously mean "if accepted, those arguments imply".

[Anonymous No.5915152]

>>5915149
Think about it. It implies nothing about the relative scores on real and online IQ tests since they may or may not be graded on the same scale.

[Anonymous No.5915157]

>>5915152

You're right. You'd need an additional "all else being equal" premise. I'm sure some online IQ test providers try to make their tests as similar as possible to real ones, but I can't be sure that any given provider does so.

[Anonymous No.5915158]

>>5915133

Paying for an IQ test doesn't mean that the OP is stupid, it just means he's an insecure fag.

[Anonymous No.5915163]

>>5915131
i dunno but iqtest.dk was recommended as being accurate in a psychology magazine i read

[Anonymous No.5915235]

>>5915163
>a psychology magazine
And in GQ I read...


My little brother do more than 130 at iqtest.dk
and he is...5

He just looks and says "this one is the more 'beautiful', I feel it". He has no rationnal explanation of what he's doing.

And he's not a genius at all. He has been tested IRL.

So...
Fap yourself if you want, but it's only because of your insecure feeling that you do this.

[Anonymous No.5915288]

Here's the question I have:
Why the fuck are you so worried about what your IQ is? If you are smart you already know it. You can do what is required of you and in due time, if you stick to your guns (And if you want it) you can be doing docoral level research as well.

I've never taken an IQ test in my life (Save for the poo poo online ones which were bullshit anyways) and when I got into the agency, no test was done.

It seems to me like you are more worried about bragging rights than actually putting whatever talents you have to work.

Get over it, your IQ only matters to you.

[Anonymous No.5915323]

What's the strategy to solving IQ tests where there's a 3 by 3 grid? Is the relationship only between rows and columns or can there be other relationships?

[Anonymous No.5915346]

>>5915323
I read on certain designs, they include temporal/sequential logic, that the solution to one puzzle is actually based on the way the puzzle changed from the last one to the current one.

Probably not very common as Jesus Christ that would be annoying, but how are normalfags supposed to test temporal logic when they can't even figure out video games?

[Anonymous No.5915351]

>take identical IQ test 3 times
>get a higher score every time
>did my mental faculties suddenly improve me from a probably >90% percentile to a greater than 99.9%?
You should probably stop eating all those paint chips

[Anonymous No.5915353]

>>5915323
Solving matrix reasoning puzzles is all about finding out if and where the rotations, translations, and transformations occur. Simple puzzles will involve just rotations or example, but the ones that "only geniuses can solve" involve all of them to some extent. Since the nature of the solution to those puzzles is pretty predictable though, the intelligence bit comes in when sifting through the possibilities more quickly than others.

[Anonymous No.5915398]

I just love how u murricafags mental masturbate on these IQ threads. Seriously, here in Europe no one would even think to evaluate a person based on his IQ.

[Anonymous No.5915413]

>>5915398
I agree (EUfag too), but don't forget you're on /sci/...
Don't infer too quickly

I must admit I never understood this "mensa" thing...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International

[Anonymous No.5915436]

>>5915288
>Why the fuck are you so worried about what your IQ is?
>If you are smart you already know it

The problem is that most people can't judge their own level of intelligence so IQ is a way to remove some of the cognitive bias.

[Anonymous No.5915445]

I've already taken a real IQ test at school, I gave your websites a try, 110 on .dk, 145 on the free test on .com, its bulllllllshit, part of the problem is that there simply aren't enough questions for a smooth Gaussian curve(particularly for .dk), and the type of questions relies a lot on knowledge and not much on actual cognitive intelligence(particularly for .com).

[Anonymous No.5915464]

>>5915436
That's a fair argument. It leaves a problem though:
Why should they measure their own intelligence? See, when you are going for a job, they judge you based upon your accomplishments. For instance, I do Signals engineering. ard shit, broke my brain several times over. When I applied for a new job (The contract closed on my one back in Japan) they asked me things like "Why should we hire you and not some other guy" so I told them straight up: Well look, I scored in the top 5 percentile in my class. No big deal. I was program lead for a project that initiated telecoms service for over 20,000 people in one area, then I was able to interlink that shit and solved X,Y,Z bandwidth issue and then when it came to data loading I used this method to accomplish it."
Tl;dr
Nobody asks you for your IQ. They only want to know your accomplishments.

[Anonymous No.5915488]

>>5915464
You're just doing it wrong... you act as if anyone thinks IQ will make you bill gates or something, it's just a measure of a type of intelligence, which so happens to correlate with academic success, and a couple other things.

[Anonymous No.5915497]

>>5915413
>mensa

To me, it seems like a thinly-veiled autism support group.

[Talimar No.5915529]

I've done different kinds of IQ tests online, and can range from 94 to past 220.

Like, OP said previously, already having the knowledge helps. As well, any which ask for "age" will affect your score alot. One I tested that was online, and given being 10 years older, I got to loose 15 IQ points for the exact same set of answers. Comparing one set of IQ from tests from another can be difficult since they aren't all derived from the same formula.

[Anonymous No.5915908]

>>5915131
tl;dr
>wasting your time on iq test
pleb

[Anonymous No.5916171]

>>5915235
it was psychology today. and there's no reason to believe it's not possible to get a high score by guessing. it's common sense. i'm not insecure i was just stating a fact. i haven't even taken the test

[Anonymous No.5916205]

>>5915131
OP, why the hell didn't you just pay for the MENSA test on their website?

[I know everything !!YdLOcfTM1j5 No.5916324]

>>5915131
>I used the full time allotted and had 6 seconds left

Don't feel bad, I've never had a girlfriend and I'm 31 ;_;

[Anonymous No.5916334]

>>5915488
Again, so what? Do you think that if you get a lower IQ according to one of these tests you will be less successful in life?
Here's a clue: The only one holding you back is not your IQ test results. It's not your family, it's not your standing on /sci/ if you get a certain score.
It's you. You are the only one holding yourself back. So fuck what an IQ test says and fuck what /sci/ will think of you. If you want to be an academically successful person, then put forth the effort like I did.

I might have said this earlier, but I've never taken an IQ test. I just walked forth and did my own damn thing. I busted my ass during college, I worked my ass off in Japan, and I earned that degree and gained that valuable experience without ever worrying about how smart I was.

So grow the fuck up and stop worrying about some damned IQ test.

[Anonymous No.5917532]

>>5916324
I wouldn't date you because I'm only attracted to men smarter than myself. And I scored 145 on iqtest.dk

[Anonymous No.5917620]

>>5917532
>>5916280#p5916380

[Anonymous No.5918582]

In my experience, fluid IQ is normally 1 standard deviation lower than your full IQ score. This is because crystallized intelligence is more education than innate ability. So if your score was 106, it is 106+15=121. You mention you were tired so I'd 4-9 points more, which would be 110+15=125 and 115+15=130. Your IQ would be 125-130. You can stop pondering and worrying now. Your IQ is 125-130. Glad I helped.

[Anonymous No.5919167]

>>5917532
>And I scored 145 on iqtest.dk
Is it possible to score higher?

[Anonymous No.5919173]

>>5918582

>In my experience, fluid IQ is normally 1 standard deviation lower than your full IQ score. This is because crystallized intelligence is more education than innate ability.

how does one follow logically from the other?

[Anonymous No.5920099]

>>5919167
No. 145 is the best. There was a thread yesterday or the day before) with a guy who answered to all the questions we asked about

[Anonymous No.5920115]

>>5918582
why the fuck did you miss off hufflepuff??
<<<

[Anonymous No.5920118]

Being smart doesn't mean you can't be an idiot.
Just saying.

[Anonymous No.5920120]

>>5920118
only stupid people say this. the correct sentence would be having a high IQ doesn't mean you can't be an idiot.

[Anonymous No.5920122]

>>5920118
nah, correct that.
"being smart doesnt mean you dont occasionally do idiotic things
and
"being an idiot doesnt mean you dont occasionally do smart things."

[Anonymous No.5920160]

>>5920120
If you were intelligent you would've gotten what I was trying to say, yet you want me to use different words to say the same thing so you understand it. A smart person should be able to handle abstractions.

>>5920122
I don't mean occasionally. There are somewhat educated or otherwise intelligent people who make stupid decisions on daily basis and I'm not talking about high function autism.

[Anonymous No.5920163]

Answers to these tests were provided in a thread last week, faggot. You didn't get those scores.

[Anonymous No.5920171]

>>5920160
>circular logic

[Anonymous No.5920175]

>>5920171
Please elaborate on your observation.

[Anonymous No.5920202]

IQ testing is not a general device for determining mental worth.

Get over it and read a book if you're so worried about your fucking "intelligence".

[Anonymous No.5920293]

>>5915131
>106

I just took it and got 142. I really didn't know what i was doing tbh, just putting what looked to fit the best, pretty sure i wasn't doing it the right way either.

[Anonymous No.5920316]

>>5915131
>not saging the 5th iq thread of the day on principal

[Anonymous No.5920333]

OP, I wonder why people would ever consider results from short tests.
You have to ask a LOT of questions in very different ways to get anything like a real value.

Does anyone ever consider those online tests aren't really from Stanford-Binet or Wechsler structures?

[Anonymous No.5920760]

107

I assume I ran out of time. I'm half asleep.

Answered 29/39

Will automatically losing ~25% available marks affect the final score by much?

[Anonymous No.5921252]

>>5920760
You should avoid sleep deprivation. It is bad for your health.

[Anonymous No.5921255]

fuck

[Anonymous No.5922277]

>>5921255
Install a flash player.

[Anonymous No.5923163]

>>5920333
>Does anyone ever consider those online tests aren't really from Stanford-Binet or Wechsler structures?
They are isomorphic in the category of IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.5923566]

>>5921255
joking, right ?
http://iqtest.dk

And actually
>>5920099
The guy who answered also provided sauce
of the swf

[Anonymous No.5923637]

>>5922277
I refuse to install a malware vector
and why does a simple test require more than html?

[Anonymous No.5924295]

>>5923637
>and why does a simple test require more than html?

Because it is not as simple as you think.

[Anonymous No.5924923]

>>5924295

HTML5

Long live the GNU flesh

[Anonymous No.5924935]

!

[Anonymous No.5924971]

>>5924935

to be honest I fucked guessed on that one.

>105

I will try tomorrow when I am not so sleepy.

[mtp !EKFQOBEsKo No.5924977]

>>5924935
thats B, cross turns to circle, circle turns to triangle, triangle turns to cross, for each subsequent pattern in the line they move 1 to the right. havent done that test in like 2 years, give me a minute or ten

[Anonymous No.5924981]

>>5916334
So Inspirational :)

[mtp !EKFQOBEsKo No.5924992]

>>5924977
last time i did it it was like 146, time before that like 132, i think it just fluctuates depending on how tired you are, currently i havent slept in about 20 hours

also for once ill say something on topic: iq tests are bullshit. all of them, no exceptions.

[Anonymous No.5925014]

At about halfway through I stopped being able to understand the questions and quit.

[Anonymous No.5925015]

>>5921255
Same thing here. I keep Chrome installed just for flash content so I had to open it there.

[Anonymous No.5925548]

>Online IQ scores
>Accurate

I've had anything from 116-140 depending on what test I'm doing.

[Anonymous No.5925552]

IQ is invalid for MOST people. Don' take it too seriously.

[Anonymous No.5925555]

>>5925548
I've gotten a much larger range from like 80 to 160

[Anonymous No.5926566]

>>5925552
You are not "most people" and just because you don't like your score it doesn't become invalid.

[Anonymous No.5926587]

Took this and got 112.

Then I took a comprehensive psychological exam (mostly to determine if I had autism) and I got 120.

[Anonymous No.5926698]

you paid for a IQ test

that means you have low IQ: congratz.

mods take care of this unscientific thread for me pls

[Anonymous No.5926732]

Here is a reaction time test

http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime/

I scored 249.4 out of 5 tries.

[Anonymous No.5926747]

>>5925552

I got tested and my IQ is 150, which apparently is pretty high. So I like that people still give it credibility because it benefits me.

[Anonymous No.5927442]

>>5926698
>unscientific thread
IQ is the scientific measure of intelligence. Take crackpot conspiracy theories to >>>/x/.

[Anonymous No.5929080]

>>5926587
>Then I took a comprehensive psychological exam

How different were the questions compared to online tests?

[Anonymous No.5930804]

>The iqtest.com test is almost certainly only valid for English-speaking adults, and your level of education will affect your result.

I don't think that's a good test.

[Anonymous No.5930810]

>>5915131
o look, its this thread again

[Anonymous No.5932148]

>>5930804
A good IQ test should provide results on both fluid and crystallized intelligence.

[Anonymous No.5933562]

>>5932148
What is the difference?

[Anonymous No.5934702]

>>5933562
They are the same thing at different temperatures. Like lava and ice.

[Anonymous No.5935843]

>On the other hand, they say that the average score is 108.

By definition the average is always 100.

[Anonymous No.5935907]

All you high IQ faggots (>130) take this un-timed high range test:

http://www.etienne.se/cfnse/

The floor is slightly above 130 and ceiling is slightly above 150.

[Anonymous No.5935923]

>>5935843
WRONG CUNT

[Anonymous No.5937455]

>>5935923
Why is it wrong?

[Anonymous No.5937463]

>caring about iq
its not about how high your iq is, its about what you do with it

>not backing up a high intellect with wisdom

[Anonymous No.5937649]

Took the same test just now, got 104.

So either I am a filthy pleb, or this test is weird. It got really fucking hard towards the end at least, and I ran out of time. Also what are the exact rules here? Can patterns exist both horizontally, vertically and diagonally?

Last time I took an online IQ test I was 16, and scored 124. It was slightly different though, and involved more stuff than only matrices. So either getting half a decade older and going into uni has MINUS TWENTY serial rekt my brains, or the test I originally took was shit, or iqtest.dk is wrong, or all of the above and you come to the realization that potato is 42

[Anonymous No.5937670]

>>5937463
this.

Why haven't these geniuses solved any world problems yet.

[Anonymous No.5937860]

>>5937670
what makes them obligated to solve problems. what makes you think "world problems" have solutions and not just tradeoffs.

[Anonymous No.5938659]

>>5937670
Because capitalism.

[Anonymous No.5939382]

>>5937670
There are no problems. Stop spreading disinfo.

[Anonymous No.5939398]

>>5937670
>Why haven't these geniuses solved any world problems yet.

Very simply, having a high IQ doesn't give you:
political power
opportunity
money or influence
credibility
effective positions
social leadership
etc, etc.

[Anonymous No.5939400]

>>5915131
you're obviously retarded OP
enjoy living your life as a mong

[Anonymous No.5939402]

>>5938659

[Anonymous No.5939403]

I would guess that doing paid IQ tests would be more likely to be inflated because they want to boost the ego of the people who are paying. They would be more likely to do it again if they get a high score.

[Anonymous No.5939434]

I did 115 on that .dk test.

I am a Mensa member.

[Anonymous No.5939439]

Did that test just now.
I generally consider myself just a bit above average, considering where I work
I did answer in 2 questions in random though, and did not completely focus on it.
I don't think IQ tests reflect intelligence or anything, it is just pattern matching..

[Anonymous No.5939868]

Yeah yeah

Everyone here is an underachieving genious who is absurdly more intelligent then the rest of the non-4chan website people in the whole world.

Yeah yeah /thread

[Anonymous No.5939956]

>>5939868
Most likely, no, you're not. Neither am I. I am an achieving one.

[Anonymous No.5940134]

>>5939398

BUT, there is a solution:

listen to people with a high IQ (much more than celebrities)
give their opinions some more attention
let them take better positions than people who are less qualified
don't hold them back for emotional reasons like perception of race or gender

[Anonymous No.5940684]

>>5939868
You sound envious.

[Anonymous No.5941044]

I knew how to get 145 always, I orgot now, I only get 138 always, fuck

[Anonymous No.5941158]

>126

I rushed through and guessed some of the last ones. If I had more patience I think I'd be a few points higher.

>tfw smartest person in classroom room on avg.
>implying I didn't know this already

[Anonymous No.5941244]

iq-test.com demo estimated me at 133-149. by the iqtest.dk I got 135. hmmm...
I'd say it's best to worry less about IQ and more about ones tangible capabilities. know what kinds of problems you're good or bad at solving and you'll be a lot better off.

[Anonymous No.5942570]

>>5941044
Good. It is an intelligence test, not a memorization test.

[Anonymous No.5944396]

>>5941158
>I rushed through and guessed some of the last ones.
You should take the test serious.

[Anonymous No.5944450]

Okay, online IQ tests are bad.
Where is the proof that RL IQ tests are better?
One thing I read is that you should not be able to improve your score, but you can online. I'd bet my life you can improve how you do on RL IQ tests too. If there was a prestigious IQ test World Championship people would practice all day for it and they'd have ridiculously high scores.
Another things is that online scores differ too much for the same person. Has someone taken many different RL IQ tests and compared the results?

[Ananamoose™ No.5944457]

>>5915133
/thred

[Anonymous No.5946590]

>>5944450
>Okay, online IQ tests are bad.

Not all of them are bad. Some are more reliable than an IRL IQ test.

[Anonymous No.5947792]

>>5944457
*thread

[Anonymous No.5948829]

>The iqtest.com test is almost certainly only valid for English-speaking adults

Why? Does it test vocabulary only adults can know?

[ineo No.5950726]

If you score 100, 115 or 130 it WILL say something about your capability to reason. If you score low here, you might be better at other things: like remembering number patterns. This is only 1 part of an IQ test. Some people are good at this part and worse at the language part, and they might end up with the same IQ score as someone else, though they scored very differently on different parts of the test. But, studies have also suggesest: "If you score good/bad on 1 part of an IQ test, you are likely to score just as good/bad on other parts." ofcourse dyslexia and dyscalculia is ignored here Funny how the Dunning and Kruger effect applies here. People that scored around 130 here, consider themselfs 'just a little bit above average.

[ineo No.5950734]

>>5950726

ofcourse dyslexia and dyscalculia are ignored here Funny how the Dunning and Kruger effect applies here: People that scored around 130 here, consider themselfs 'just a little bit above average'.

sorry I typo'ed

[Anonymous No.5951181]

>>5950734
"Dyslexia" and "dyscalculia" are just fancy euphemisms for "stupidity".

[Anonymous No.5951336]

Well, /sci/? What's your IQ?
125 here.

[Anonymous No.5951339]

>>5948829
it contextualizes questions in a middle class American fashion (such as asking a logic question about a yacht)

[Anonymous No.5951350]

A- am I stupid?

[Anonymous No.5951354]

>>5951181
except that part of the diagnostic criteria for dyslexia is high intelligence with poor reading ability. Read a book some time.

[Anonymous No.5951361]

Get on my level

[Anonymous No.5951380]

>>5951350

no, you're retarded.

there's a difference.

[Anonymous No.5953346]

>>5951350
Depends where you live. In murrica you are highly intelligent.

[Anonymous No.5954705]

>>5951361
Why would I lower myself to your level?

[Anonymous No.5954742]

I guessed every answer, I guess I'm just lucky.

[Anonymous No.5956044]

>>5954742
The chance of getting that score was 33.34%

[Anonymous No.5956631]

>>5920115
Which one is the hottest? Scientifically speaking :P?

[Anonymous No.5957162]

>>5956631
Hufflepuff.

I have an IQ of 172.

[Anonymous No.5957174]

did you know that IQ tests are different depending which country you take them in? each countries national averedge is weighted to be 100, meaning if you take a British test you will score a couple of points lower

[Anonymous No.5957176]

>>5956631
ravenclaw all day every day.

[Anonymous No.5957189]

>>5957174
Oh well I understand now why I scored 135+ in US, while in UK I was average 95.

Thanks for the explanation

[Anonymous No.5959102]

>>5915131
I scored 90 :(