[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 87 KB, 554x400, 110.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9764549 No.9764549 [Reply] [Original]

This test is roumored to be the most accurate online. Are you truly the genius you claim to be?
http://sifter.org/iqtest/

>> No.9764552

All online IQ tests are inaccurate.

>> No.9764639

156. 27/33, got 13, 15, 18, 19, 24, and 28 wrong.

>> No.9764766
File: 77 KB, 645x729, 1514888715070.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9764766

>>9764549
>don't answer anything
>get an IQ of 75

Really accurate test if I say so myself

>> No.9764810
File: 564 KB, 1000x800, suomi25.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9764810

Got this
> This implies an IQ of approximately 150 on the European/Cattell scale (stdev 24),
or about 133 on the Stanford-Binet/USA scale (stdev 16).
And I have been tested by both mensa and by a psychiatrist when I got tested for autism and both times I got 132 with stdev 15

>> No.9764902

Got 25/33
150 European
133 USA
I'm pretty tired though. How good is that result and is it accurate at all?

>> No.9764924
File: 7 KB, 598x89, image.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9764924

Fuck I think the time either ran out before I could answer the last question, or I accidentally pressed the button to get the results.

Anyway this is definitely not accurate. The last time I checked my IQ was 125 or so.

>> No.9765043
File: 176 KB, 1242x2208, image.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765043

Am I in the club, m8s?

>> No.9765374
File: 32 KB, 1052x565, axes.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765374

>>9764549
>being a brainlet that doesn't label axes
no idea what the y-axis is supposed to be

>> No.9765504

I never claimed to be a genius.

In fact, I tell myself the opposite every day.

>> No.9765523
File: 81 KB, 1080x1920, Screenshot_20180524-232108.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765523

I'm alright with this, and I can make an argument for the one I got wrong to justify it to myself.

>> No.9765537

>This implies an IQ of approximately 150 on the European/Cattell scale (stdev 24), or about 133 on the Stanford-Binet/USA scale (stdev 16).
Didn't realize it's on a timer so didn't bother to answer quickly

>> No.9765570
File: 14 KB, 668x111, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765570

this shit is fake yo

>> No.9765607

>>9765570
>4 correct
>92
How is this not in the 70s

>> No.9765632

>>9765607
because 70s are literal drooling retards who couldn't answer shit

>> No.9765715
File: 86 KB, 1080x1920, Screenshot_20180525-160038.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765715

About what I usually get.

>> No.9765740

I got 11 out of 15. I skipped the rest because I'm tired and in bed. I think a 105 is fair for the shape I'm in

>> No.9765756
File: 112 KB, 1440x2560, Screenshot_20180525-093746.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765756

>>9764549
This was too easy I think, I'm hung over as fucking shit still lying in bed

>> No.9765758

>>9765756
Yeah reading the thread I must say it gives you way too high of a score

>> No.9765762
File: 53 KB, 436x289, Cat_demonstrating_static_cling_with_styrofoam_peanuts.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765762

>>9764549
>>9765756
>Europeans measured with stdev 24
>USA with stdev 16
Are europoors really such brainlets that they need an IQ boost of 50%?

>> No.9765771
File: 448 KB, 1440x2560, Screenshot_2018-05-25-02-53-37.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765771

>>9764549
Online IQ is always bullshit, but that's my score. Of the 6 wrong, I agree that 2 might actually be wrong and I have either a simpler solution or they have a typo. Either way, this test measures like 3 techniques and isn't worth it.

>> No.9765789

>>9765771
>Of the 6 wrong, I agree that 2 might actually be wrong and I have either a simpler solution or they have a typo.
Or you just got 6 wrong.

>> No.9765791

>>9764639

Wow those are almost my exact same results.

Were you pooping while you did it as well?

>> No.9765792

>>9764549
>rumored to be

Is that anything like Trump saying "Everyone says X?"
Rumored by whom? Did they start this rumor themselves?
Bored minds want to know.

>> No.9765796

>>9764810
Seems pretty accurate, then: you're about 2 SD above the norm.

>> No.9765825
File: 61 KB, 1800x369, REEEEEEEEEE.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765825

These tests are so dumb. I get good scores on these types of things but I can't even function in society.

>> No.9765874
File: 52 KB, 1366x768, uhm ok.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9765874

>>9764549
i usually get ~135 but this one was retardedly easy. this might be the worst test yet...

the puzzles feel "harder" and more diverse so perhaps i got a bit lucky, but at the same time everyone else here must have gotten "lucky" as well

>> No.9766064

>>9765825
These don't test autism.

>> No.9766071 [DELETED] 

>>9764924
Online tests tend to overestimate your IQ

>> No.9766076 [DELETED] 

>>9765632
Fun fact, niggers in America used to score below 80 consistently around the time of MLK and the civil rights movement. 80 used to be considered complete retard, but they changed the IQ definitions so complete retard was about 60-70 as to not embarrass nig nogs.

>> No.9766092

>>9764549
This is fucking trash, I got 28 right and even those that were wrong had options that could be justified.

>> No.9766826

Why is 28 ad?

>> No.9766880
File: 168 KB, 727x682, 1493847902001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9766880

Im a jack shit retard that didnt have any idea how to answer anything on this and i just went with instinct and i got a 108

>> No.9766893

>>9766076
>trusting in biased tests like these

If you were truly as intelligent as you think you are you would notice that this test is extremely biased towards those who are more educated. The first problem deals with sequences, at one point a sequence of decreasing squares. How in the hell do you expect an uneducated person in Africa to know what a square is?

Further some of these matrix questions have a bias for someone who understand Algebra.

Of course blacks are dumber than whites, but it's not because they score lower on these tests.

Extremely biased test. You either trust it because it's beneficial for you to trust it, or you trust it because you're too stupid to see the bias in it.

Kill yourselves, all of you.

>> No.9766943

>>9764549
Did this on my third dram and got 117/111, ran out of time for the rest but got 14/17 i did correct.

>> No.9766951

The Mensa IQ test is quite accurate considering I've already taken full IQ test that had both Verbal and Performance tests included, where I scored 132
On the free online Mensa test, I scored 131
http://test.mensa.no

>> No.9766959
File: 84 KB, 1000x929, 7e2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9766959

>randomly clicks everything
>somehow scores 105
yeah, very accurate...

>> No.9767061

>>9766951
Got 125 on that one but had to rush to the last 6 question in like 40 seconds because I took my time with earlier questions. This test seems to be a lot better.

>> No.9767081

>>9766959
Do it 100 times

>> No.9767306

>>9766959
>random chance in multichoice can get you above average results
Who woulda thunk.

>> No.9768910

Your scored 31 correct (out of a possible 33).
This implies an IQ of approximately 168 on the European/Cattell scale (stdev 24),
or about 145 on the Stanford-Binet/USA scale (stdev 16).

My incorrect answers were 14:a/d and 18:c/d.

>> No.9768915

>>9767061
This uses an outdated IQ scale however so 150+ is around 135 in the current Mensa one.

>> No.9768918

>>9764924
It's another scale, of course it is's not the same.

>> No.9768966

>>9768915
What was your reasoning for 28 = a/d?

>> No.9768968

>>9768966
Fuck, meant for >>9768910

>> No.9768980

>>9764549
>the European IQ Test
what...
>cattell
>not weschler
cattell isn't even used anymore. yet another shitty online IQ test.

>> No.9769303

>>9764549
Answers: 1:m/m 2:14/15 3:7/8 4:6/6 5:5/5 6:8/4 7:1/1 8:1/2 9:b/b 10:d/d 11:c/c 12:c/a 13:a/c 14:a/d 15:c/c 16:c/c 17:b/b 18:b/d 19:d/d 20:d/d 21:c/c 22:c/c 23:d/d 24:b/b 25:a/a 26:ad/ad 27:bc/bc 28:ce/ad 29:ad/bd 30:a/d 31:c/c 32:d/b 33:c/c

Your scored 21 correct (out of a possible 33).
This implies an IQ of approximately 138 on the European/Cattell scale (stdev 24),
or about 125 on the Stanford-Binet/USA scale (stdev 16).

>> No.9770250

Your scored 33 correct (out of a possible 33).
This implies an IQ of approximately 174 on the European/Cattell scale (stdev 24),
or about 149 on the Stanford-Binet/USA scale (stdev 16).

Is this test for real? I was told I had an iq of around 115 by my mom and was tested at the age of 7.

>> No.9770308
File: 20 KB, 1667x345, iq2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9770308

Eat my dick, brainlets

>> No.9770314

>>9764549
>pickle Rick
>>>/reddit/

>> No.9770484

>and optionally, what's your and Myers-Briggs type

I stopped there

>> No.9770492
File: 17 KB, 1348x194, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9770492

>>9764549

I'm well :)

I know this is another shitty IQ memetest, but I was bored.

>> No.9770496
File: 17 KB, 1289x173, Capture.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9770496

epic test

>> No.9770497

>>9770492
I'm >>9770492
Didn't realize the test had a timer, fuck

>> No.9770513

>>9770492
while this is supposed to be centered around the average person getting like 8 questions right aka 100iq, its actually centered around the average person getting like 25

>> No.9771784

>>9768915
So I'm apperntly a brainlet after all

>> No.9771786

>>9764549

It's rumored that OP is a fucking retard.

>> No.9771796
File: 10 KB, 596x174, big iq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771796

high quality iq test

>> No.9771897
File: 19 KB, 915x144, Screenshot_2018-05-27 European IQ Test Results.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771897

I got around 130 on the IQ tests often linked here and got something between 120 and 130 on an actual test a few years ago

>> No.9771901
File: 4 KB, 543x89, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9771901

So what would I say my IQ is? 140 or 127?

>> No.9772316 [DELETED] 

>>9766893
>>>/lgbt/

>> No.9773607

>>9771901
brainlet

>> No.9773766

>>9764552
This might (or might not) be the case in practice, but there is no reason in principle why this must be so. Suppose I somehow acquired the written materials used for "real" tests, put them on a webpage, and added an explanation listing the conditions under which one must take the test (time limit etc).

A user who follows those requirements will have completed the same problems as someone who went to a professional test centre, under the same conditions, and there is no reason to suggest that the result would be inaccurate. Of course it couldn't be used as evidence for anything since there would be no way to prevent cheating, but for the purposes of finding out one's own IQ, it would be accurate.

>> No.9773834
File: 412 KB, 1080x1609, Screenshot_20180528-185450_01.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9773834

i'm apparently smart nao.

>> No.9773921

>>9765374
probability density

>> No.9773930

>>9765762
What boost are you talking about? Europeans are just smarter, dumbass. The standard deviation is not something that people decide on, it's estimated from data

>> No.9774002
File: 20 KB, 550x92, IQ.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9774002

>>9764549
I must have spent too long because it went to the results screen whilst I was still on the section section yet it's giving me a good result.

Does this mean I got the first two sections all right or something? I'm confused.

>> No.9774003
File: 7 KB, 1467x34, answers.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9774003

>>9774002
Forgot this bit at the top, I presume bold means I got it wrong

>> No.9774080

27/33 correct
Weird because I thought I had them all logicked out

>> No.9774361

144/129 u____u

>> No.9774639
File: 974 KB, 915x1084, la luz extinguido.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9774639

>>9764902
>>9764924
>>9765523
>>9765715
>>9765756
>>9765771
>>9765825
>>9765874
>>9770308
>>9771897
>>9771901
>>9773834
Fuck all these smart niggas here making us brainlets feel insecure about ourselves.

I'm only at 126 European/Cattell, 117 on Stanford-Binet/USA. Pretty accurate, my Mensa IQ test results were 115.

But if you ask me I'd put myself at 102.

>>9765825
Hello there autistic brother.

>> No.9774642

>>9764549
obvious data gathering is obvious

>> No.9774665
File: 72 KB, 1099x560, middle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9774665

>>9774639
I am also a 115-let.
Pic unrelated.

>> No.9775302
File: 4 KB, 225x225, screeching_pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9775302

>>9766064
>>9774639
I'M NOT AUTISTIC YOU NEGROIDAL MEMESTERS!

>> No.9775629

162 / 141

>> No.9775677
File: 11 KB, 1265x179, brainlet.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9775677

In my defense I had some pizza midway and ran out of time before I could answer last two question sets

>> No.9777272
File: 4 KB, 537x113, Knipsel.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9777272

Eat shit

>> No.9777286

>>9764549
just so everyone is aware.. the statistics for this test show that the mean score is ~25/33 which is like an iq of 150

the test was meant to have a mean score around 8/33 (100 iq) but it doesn't work out that way since all you faggots cheat