NationStates Jolt Archive

Answer the poll.

Internet tests are not credible. However if you want to skew the results then here (http://www.highiqsociety.org/) is one pretty close to being pretty close.

Give me a credible online test so I can have a self-esteem fueled depressive episode after taking it. After that I'll give you a score.

Skalvia cant find the poll.....

But, his IQ is 127...

EDIT: Ah, there is the often mythed poll, lol...

Somewhere in the realm of 96-112.

On the internet everyone's a genius.

On the internet everyone's a genius.

That's what I was saying in the other thread, but people think I'm mistaken. :rolleyes:

On the internet everyone's a genius.

Possibly, the damn tests useless however, it doesnt do what its purported to do...

It really examines your ability to take Tests...Like, i always do well on these kinds of standardized tests, but, like, word problems, and real life style questions always fuck me up, lol...

Don't know. Don't know my penis size, either.

Probably not that impressive. I'm just some dude.

134 according to the International High IQ society. Although in the analogies round I was a bit stuck because I didn't know whether to chose "Naturalist" or "Evolution" for Darwin, and I had no idea who the guy mentioned in reference to Mark Twain was.

From what I know of friends, family, etc. 130s is fairly standard for internet tests, though.

I don't care. IQ tests are a load of bollocks anyway, 70% of your performance depends on training and experience with them, 15% on luck, and maybe 15% on actual ability. When done in school in the same class, an IQ test might show good correlation with the abilities, otherwise it's not even that; you could just as well use any other test, from chess puzzles to crosswords to Zombie Apocalypse tests.


I'm doing pretty well in life, so I guess if my job involved taking IQ tests, I'd be doing well with them, but with no need to take them, I can't be bothered to train my "IQ" or test it. Training your penis (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=558696) would be a better way to spend the time, since it at least has some certain practical uses, unlike IQ test results.

It's also interesting how you don't include an option for below average - is it saying "I don't imagine how it's even possible", or rather "I don't believe anyone would admit it on the internet anyway"?

I can't think of a way taking an IQ test would help me.

On the other hand, I can think of plenty of ways taking an IQ test might affect me negatively... whether I score well or poorly (relatively speaking).

So I won't do it.

148. I think. It's been a while.

11 years ago my sister and i took a "test" in the sunday edition of the phoenix newspaper.

we both got "140"

i will never take another iq test.

Well, I took mine at school, it was an 'official' IQ test...To be honest though, that was a few years ago, its probably lower now, it was before my drinking days, lol

Less than my bra size. That's for sure.

Last time I had an IQ test (via the psych dept on campus. yay for optional class activities), I got a 146. I did throw off one of the alternate tests,though, partly because of speed-reading and partly because of my synesthesia -- it had a memory test section, and I wasn't supposed to be able to remember the entire list, but I did somehow. Hell, I think I still remember that list. Only explanation the professor offered was that by way of my synesthesia creating multiple-sensory reactions to the words, they were encoded into long-term memory already. Meh, whatever.

According to WAIS-R, I'm moderately gifted.

Two-something. Never got the exact number, and never actually cared.

two-something. Never Got The Exact Number, And Never Actually Cared.

23?

24?

;)

23?

24?

;)

Those sound about right.

I am the immortal god emperor of mankind. So what does that make me?

I am the immortal god emperor of mankind. So what does that make me?

delusional.

I am the immortal god emperor of mankind. So what does that make me?

Dead by the hands of Gork and Mork!!!

ORKS IS DA BIGGEST AN DA STRONGEST!!!

My IQ is Green. *nod*

I am the immortal god emperor of mankind. So what does that make me?

*Giggles, points.*

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t166/Spinningfox/Internet%20Fads/OVER%209000/9000cat.jpg

Enough said.

That picture rules...

I'm smart enough to be an astrophysicist (unless I fail out of grad school). This is what matters to me. :p IQ tests are silly in general and intelligence is a poorly defined concept.*


*I don't say this because I've been tested and scored low, I've never been officially tested. The closest I came was when one of my friends who scores off the charts on IQ tests administered one that he'd memorized over the phone. But anything a person can study for and drastically improve their score on probably isn't something that can be a good way of determining raw intelligence... unless the definition of intelligence is performing well on IQ tests, in which case it's a fairly meaningless concept, imo.

There's no option on the poll low enough for me

Somewhere between 129-132. I don't recall the exact number since it's vacillated over the years.

It's above average.

My IQ is Green. *nod*

I actually read somewhere that most geniuses are eccentric.

That would explain Howard Hughes Jr.

That would explain Howard Hughes Jr.

Fine line, genius, insanity. I think the whole "watch Ice Station Zebra 150+ times" thing firmly pushes him towards insanity.

I actually read somewhere that most geniuses are eccentric.

That would explain Howard Hughes Jr.

Bah! Amateur. The only reason he built that airplane out of wood is because he couldn't figure out how to build it out of cake. *nod*

I'll never understand the whole 'IQ' thing.

Plenty of people with high IQs are the stupidest douchebags you'll ever meet.

Then again, so are some of those with low IQs.

Since a high IQ doesn't reasonably eliminate douchebagginess, what point is there in measuring it?

Since a high IQ doesn't reasonably eliminate douchebagginess, what point is there in measuring it?

Hey, there's a difference between being in the top 1% of douchebags on Earth and the top 0.0001% of them.

Hey, there's a difference between being in the top 1% of douchebags on Earth and the top 0.0001% of them.

I think it's a crutch.

Especially considering the flaws in 'intelligence testing', particularly in relation to culture.

I think that people who prattle on about their IQs define themselves poorly.

Fine line, genius, insanity. I think the whole "watch Ice Station Zebra 150+ times" thing firmly pushes him towards insanity.

Eh, his OCD actually helped him at first, because of his OCD, he built some amazing aircraft, as well as made some awesome movies. However, it then started working against him, and it didn't help that he had Misophobia and dementia. Dementia came later due to him getting syphilis and failing to get it treated.

Well, I took mine at school, it was an 'official' IQ test...To be honest though, that was a few years ago, its probably lower now, it was before my drinking days, lol

:D Yeah that always knocks of a few points.

As for mine, I was last officially tested about 13 years ago and my parents never told me what it was.

After doing the test supplied by Smunkee, I got 133, how accurate that is or not is another matter.

Earlier this year I was applying for various graduate jobs with investment banks, I had to take many cognitive reasoning tests as part of the process. I got back the results for one of these tests, and it said I was in the top 3% of people within the finance sector, for cognitive reasoning ability. Of course that doesn't mean much maybe many people who are within the finance sector are just poor at cognitive reasoning, who knows.

My brain has begun to spread across the world and shall consume all life as we now it.

Someone actually told me that I seem more elitist by going so far out of my way to downplay my intellect. I gave him a wedgie.

I like being underestimated. More to the point, when I think of how much of a geek I'd be if I weren't an insane attention whore with little regard for my own well being I give myself wedgies. :p

Someone actually told me that I seem more elitist by going so far out of my way to downplay my intellect. I gave him a wedgie.

I like being underestimated. More to the point, when I think of how much of a geek I'd be if I weren't an insane attention whore with little regard for my own well being I give myself wedgies. :p

:D

There are different kinds of intelligences. Some people seem confused by this, and believe that their 'intelligence' or position in life makes them expert in all things. But a doctor doesn't necessarily know shit about wine, or fixing bicycles...pretending she does is...well a little embarrasing.

Oh noes! You don't know when some dead, white, male European did something that living, white, male Europeans consider important. You must be unintelligent.

I took the online test Smunkee linked in the OP.

I got 156 for the first test, and 115 on their more advanced test(No doubt due to not knowing anything in the math section...)

No clue. I took an IQ test at school as a kid (somewhere around the fourth grade) which placed me in advanced-curriculum classes, but the results were supposed to be known only by parents and teachers. While I'm sure it isn't true, my parents told me I had scored at the "genius" level - not that I advocate dishonesty, but it really did motivate me to take advantage of those classes more than I would've otherwise. The so-called "pygmalion" effect was pretty well evinced in my case.

Like I said in the other IQ thread, I wouldn't have any reservations about convincing my (hypothetical) kids they were geniuses, if it weren't too obviously untrue. :tongue:

How come there isn't an option for "I'm Below Average and I'm not going to pretend otherwise"?

I got a phone call before I got to the last section and my IQ is at 102... I don't want to do it again but I want to be smarter than 102....

My brain has begun to spread across the world and shall consume all life as we now it.

I think I saw your brain on Living Lohan.

YOUR IQ SCORE IS:

123

A score of 124 or higher is required to qualify for membership in the Society.

This is from the advanced test, and makes me :(. I should have tried harder on some of those first questions.

Where's the option for below average? My IQ is around 68.

I demand to know what Smunkeeville got on this test!

Where's the option for below average? My IQ is around 68.

Well, there's a bright side. Instead of being insulted when someone else says you are mentally retarded, you can say "sure I am. Are you discriminating against me for that?"

Can't be arsed to look it up right now, but the one I took split the scores between Verbal/Language skills and Pattern recognition type things. My verbal score was juuuuuust shy of genius level (despite my poor spelling), the other half was just above moron. It averaged out IIRC to high average.

Edit: This wasn't on online thing, this was actually administered by Voc Rehab. Due to my learning disabilities they needed to know if I was actually capable of college before I got financial aid. Unfortunately they didn't give me a lazy bastard test and find out the IQ test was irrelevant to my ability to pass.

:D

There are different kinds of intelligences. Some people seem confused by this, and believe that their 'intelligence' or position in life makes them expert in all things. But a doctor doesn't necessarily know shit about wine, or fixing bicycles...pretending she does is...well a little embarrasing.

Oh noes! You don't know when some dead, white, male European did something that living, white, male Europeans consider important. You must be unintelligent.I thought you were being you. But then I got all these questions about which architect built the white house, and pick the right european painter, and then the right european philosopher. It all felt very international.

I got 136 for one and 125 for the other, and 107 when I answered randomly. Yes, I'm bored.

Where's the option for below average? My IQ is around 68.
... which is as common as 132, which is only in the third category. Smuuuuuuunks! Bad poll! No cookie!

... which is as common as 132, which is only in the third category. Smuuuuuuunks! Bad poll! No cookie!

I was sleepy!

I didn't want your cookie anyway. :p

I got 123 (I did the second test on that site). Made me lol as their entry qualification is 124.

Still, I took a "Cognitive Ability Test" a few years back (which I think is a similar thing) and got just under 80, so I'm fairly happy with that result

146

I just made the cut for highly gifted!

Whoot! Whoot!

Mine was 132 when I was tested in kindergarten. All I remember from the test was yellow blocks. I don't remember what test it was but it was the test they were using to see if I could be in the gifted program.

157 recently on the Cattell III B test

Dunno, don't care.

I'll never understand the whole 'IQ' thing.

Plenty of people with high IQs are the stupidest douchebags you'll ever meet.

Then again, so are some of those with low IQs.

Since a high IQ doesn't reasonably eliminate douchebagginess, what point is there in measuring it?

So everyone can be placed into nice little groups. Stereotyping is fun! :rolleyes:

Anyway, I agree with you. Some of the stupidest people I've ever meet had high IQs and vice-verse. I measure people's intelligence by their actions and words not what they get on some stupid test that will have no real bearing in life. I also take into account that there are different kinds of intelligence.

If you haven't guessed by now, I voted Don't know, Don't Care.

139 apparently. . . I didn't think I was that smart though

Around 140, but it depends a lot on the type of questions asled. I don't do as well with the visual "find the pattern" type of test.

I thought you were being you. I'm never anything else:tongue:


But then I got all these questions about which architect built the white house, and pick the right european painter, and then the right european philosopher. It all felt very international. Hahahaha...my undergrad is in Education...I've seen pretty much every standard 'intelligence/skill' test out there...some are better than others but pretty much every one is skewed towards a specific cultural paradigm. There are oodles and oodles of very detailed criticisms of IQ testing, but many people I think just want to feel good about themselves. Me being me is in pointing out that you hopefully aren't basing all of that good feeling on something as biased as these tests.

I'm never anything else:tongue:

Hahahaha...my undergrad is in Education...I've seen pretty much every standard 'intelligence/skill' test out there...some are better than others but pretty much every one is skewed towards a specific cultural paradigm. There are oodles and oodles of very detailed criticisms of IQ testing, but many people I think just want to feel good about themselves. Me being me is in pointing out that you hopefully aren't basing all of that good feeling on something as biased as these tests.

The Cattell Culture Fair test is not skewed (I thought it was rather non-cultural).

I got 114...I feel stupid :(

SNIP

I think someone got a low score :wink:

I'll never understand the whole 'IQ' thing.

Plenty of people with high IQs are the stupidest douchebags you'll ever meet.

Then again, so are some of those with low IQs.

Since a high IQ doesn't reasonably eliminate douchebagginess, what point is there in measuring it?

Very well said, the whole thing's a farce in my opinion.

Answer the poll.

Internet tests are not credible. However if you want to skew the results then here (http://www.highiqsociety.org/) is one pretty close to being pretty close.

That test can't be accurate. I took it twice and randomly clicked on answers, I got 119 and 123. I'm either really lucky or it's skewed to get people to join it's society.

Answer the poll.

I find it odd that so many of Abroadistanians, especially anglophones, have measured it. Silly people...

I find it odd that so many of Abroadistanians, especially anglophones, have measured it. Silly people...

I don't particularly care what anyone "thinks" their IQ is. I started the thread to prove a point to TJ, but my poll apparently sucks..... except it's working for my purpose so it rocks.

I don't particularly care what anyone "thinks" their IQ is. I started the thread to prove a point to TJ, but my poll apparently sucks..... except it's working for my purpose so it rocks.

That doesn't particularly address my point.

I don't particularly care what anyone "thinks" their IQ is. I started the thread to prove a point to TJ, but my poll apparently sucks..... except it's working for my purpose so it rocks.

It shows most people in the moderately gifted area. Not a crew of geniuses by any stretch. Though I have to say the people who ticked the top two IQ choices make me laugh.

If they were that brilliant they'd be stunning the world with their research, not wasting time here. Unless Stephen Hawking posts here.

Less than my bra size. That's for sure.

You're either really dumb and small, or not quite as dumb and well-endowed.

I'm hoping you're well-endowed.




We should talk more.

That test can't be accurate. I took it twice and randomly clicked on answers, I got 119 and 123. I'm either really lucky or it's skewed to get people to join it's society.
Conjecture: Test results are based on response time. Clicking pell-mell through them means a higher score than clicking slowly and randomly.

You're either really dumb and small, or not quite as dumb and well-endowed.

I'm hoping you're well-endowed.




We should talk more.

Maximum bra size is still well into the profoundly retarded area of the scale.

That doesn't particularly address my point.
Oh, sorry. My point is that people notoriously lie about this on the Internet.
It shows most people in the moderately gifted area. Not a crew of geniuses by any stretch. Though I have to say the people who ticked the top two IQ choices make me laugh.

If they were that brilliant they'd be stunning the world with their research, not wasting time here. Unless Stephen Hawking posts here.

It's actually a misconception that high IQ people would naturally be ambitious or really care about doing anything other than what they want.

Most high IQ people I know are "underachievers" both because they have figured out how to coast and because such bullshit high expectations are placed on them.

Case in point: I do almost nothing worthy of my supposed high IQ.

Conjecture: Test results are based on response time. Clicking pell-mell through them means a higher score than clicking slowly and randomly.

The questions had 4 possible answers. 25% at any speed should still show you as a 'tard.

Oh, sorry. My point is that people notoriously lie about this on the Internet.


It's actually a misconception that high IQ people would naturally be ambitious or really care about doing anything other than what they want.

Most high IQ people I know are "underachievers" both because they have figured out how to coast and because such bullshit high expectations are placed on them.

Case in point: I do almost nothing worthy of my supposed high IQ.

Or, you can do what I did, and take several IQ tests over and over again until you learn what they're looking for, and get a great score.

It's meaningless.

Oh, sorry. My point is that people notoriously lie about this on the Internet.

People notoriously lie about everything on the Internet.

Or, you can do what I did, and take several IQ tests over and over again until you learn what they're looking for, and get a great score.

Case in point.

If they were that brilliant they'd be stunning the world with their research, not wasting time here. Unless Stephen Hawking posts here.

are you saying all these people who revolutionize their fields and change the world are smart?

smart people give up on life and drink ;)

Maximum bra size is still well into the profoundly retarded area of the scale.

yeah but would you care?

Case in point: I do almost nothing worthy of my supposed high IQ.

are you saying that posting on the internet is meaningless? :eek:

People notoriously lie about everything on the Internet.

so why should we believe you? :wink:

Oh, sorry. My point is that people notoriously lie about this on the Internet.


It's actually a misconception that high IQ people would naturally be ambitious or really care about doing anything other than what they want.

Most high IQ people I know are "underachievers" both because they have figured out how to coast and because such bullshit high expectations are placed on them.

Case in point: I do almost nothing worthy of my supposed high IQ.

Ditto. I figured out in third grade that I could work really hard and get yelled at for not living up to my IQ or I could barely pass and get yelled at. One took a lot less work.

Maximum bra size is still well into the profoundly retarded area of the scale.

Well, it'd be like my ex, Michelle...only with bigger boobs.

Well, it'd be like my ex, Michelle...only with bigger boobs.

That's really really sad.

I don't particularly care what anyone "thinks" their IQ is. I started the thread to prove a point to TJ, but my poll apparently sucks..... except it's working for my purpose so it rocks.
Bah. The peak is maybe... 10 points higher than I initially conjectured... I could blame the way the poll is written, but another day, Smunks! *shakes fist*

It is actually interesting to me to see the poll results. And fiddle with the online test. I scored 133 the first time working normally, then 124 on the "hard" test taking my time (problems were similar), and then 112 trying not to think at all. I'm interested in trying to explain things, and the phenomenon of self-reported IQs being so high is one that has an intriguing number of possible sources.

so why should we believe you?

You're not supposed to. You should know as much this side of 1997.

Bah. The peak is maybe... 10 points higher than I initially conjectured... I could blame the way the poll is written, but another day, Smunks! *shakes fist*

It is actually interesting to me to see the poll results. And fiddle with the online test. I scored 133 the first time working normally, then 124 on the "hard" test taking my time (problems were similar), and then 112 trying not to think at all. I'm interested in trying to explain things, and the phenomenon of self-reported IQs being so high is one that has an intriguing number of possible sources.

Ignoring the spatial orientation part of that test (which I suck at anyway) I scored 124. If I took time to figure them out I'd get higher I'm sure. Unless I'm an uncannily good guesser.

Also intriguing? Hardly. It's the same phenomenon as self reported penis measurements. They're always larger than average.

You're not supposed to. You should know as much this side of 1997.

So you're actually a heterosexual homophobic grocery clerk in Minneapolis, Minnesota?

That's really really sad.

Yes she is.

So you're actually a heterosexual homophobic grocery clerk in Minneapolis, Minnesota?

More importantly, if Fass is lying about people lying on the internet, then people don't lie on the internet.





This statement is false.

So you're actually a heterosexual homophobic grocery clerk in Minneapolis, Minnesota?

I may as well be, for what you know. Trusting people on the Internet is silly - all there can ever be is an acceptance of their stories as not contradicted.

The questions had 4 possible answers. 25% at any speed should still show you as a 'tard.
Should, yes.

After a session of completely blind high speed clicking, and possibly a little [bad] luck, I have confirmed that it is possible to get an 83.

Ignoring the spatial orientation part of that test (which I suck at anyway) I scored 124. If I took time to figure them out I'd get higher I'm sure. Unless I'm an uncannily good guesser.

Also intriguing? Hardly. It's the same phenomenon as self reported penis measurements. They're always larger than average.
Ah, but multiple surveys have shown that self-measured penis measurement surveys are roughly 1 inch over. A certain amount comes from the tendency to round up rather than down, and then a little comes from mishandling the measurement tape, and then there's a certain amount that has to be from people outright lying or deluding themselves.

So, by quantifying this average shift, you can then adjust for it in further studies. I suspect that the IQ reporting phenomenon is slightly more complex than the penis shifting because multiple distinct measurement techniques exist which have basically independent errors from one another. We then have a combinatoric shift from reporting a "true" or mean value, to reporting the high value (nth order statistic), plus a certain dishonesty (penis self-measurement) factor. So, by how many inches do we lie, on average, and how much is due to people simply reporting their highest measurement as a matter of unconscious selection? :-P

Anyway, I agree with you. Some of the stupidest people I've ever meet had high IQs and vice-verse. I measure people's intelligence by their actions and words not what they get on some stupid test that will have no real bearing in life. I also take into account that there are different kinds of intelligence

Oooh yes, one of my friends called me the stupidest clever person they know.

It seems I'm stereotypical clever, but absent minded person. It's seems like I'm destined to be come and institutionalised academic. :(

I'm never anything else:tongue:Woot! A schizophrenic Neesika would probably not be a good thing.

Hahahaha...my undergrad is in Education...I've seen pretty much every standard 'intelligence/skill' test out there...some are better than others but pretty much every one is skewed towards a specific cultural paradigm. There are oodles and oodles of very detailed criticisms of IQ testing, but many people I think just want to feel good about themselves. Me being me is in pointing out that you hopefully aren't basing all of that good feeling on something as biased as these tests.I would never base my good feeling on an IQ test. But I do find the detailed break downs and analysis interesting. It remains that online IQ tests can be a decent way to pass the time when you're bored though.

Anyway, seeking validation from friends and family is a much better way to feel better about yourself than from a test. Plus you can make a it mutually beneficial activity too, which is nice.

Um... I think I lost the plot here. So I finish with, IQ tests: good for when you're bored.

Ah, but multiple surveys have shown that self-measured penis measurement surveys are roughly 1 inch over.
[...]
So, by quantifying this average shift, you can then adjust for it in further studies. I suspect that the IQ reporting phenomenon is slightly more complex than the penis shifting because multiple distinct measurement techniques exist which have basically independent errors from one another. We then have a combinatoric shift from reporting a "true" or mean value, to reporting the high value (nth order statistic), plus a certain dishonesty (penis self-measurement) factor.
Basically, self-reported IQ measurements are wrong by a much greater factor than penis length.


1. First of all, through taking a number of online tests, I found out that most of them always give high results, even when given to people known to have low intelligence. Part of the reason is perhaps that you're much more eager to give links to a test which gave you an IQ to boast: positive emotions + chance to show off, as opposed to one that has let you down.

For a moment, I thought this one is different, but...
Should, yes.
After a session of completely blind high speed clicking, and possibly a little [bad] luck, I have confirmed that it is possible to get an 83.
It produced 81 when I tried the same. And I didn't even read the questions, although I didn't intentionally throw a dice, maybe just went for the answer that caught the eye first (the best looking picture, the most familiar word, etc).
The only ones where I could subconsciously answer right are the memory pattern ones, because you can't skip the memorization time. But even then it's only 6/36, the rest 30 I didn't read about.
So NO intelligence at all at this "hardest" test corresponds to about 80 points. A cactus or a cauliflower could get 80.
This is far from a hard test, though - http://www.ellhnas.com/iqtests.htm reports it as medium-difficulty among internet tests, i.e. much like others. Generally the more popular the test, the higher are its scores.


2. Second, the people here actually do have an average IQ over 100, but not because they're super-smart - rather because their age group's average IQ is >100. IQ tests are normalized to yield 100 average among the population, but due to the Flynn effect, the newer generation has a higher IQ. The old generation has a lower IQ, and tests include all population, including the elderly.
(2.1) They only renormalize the tests once in a while, plus, especially in free sources, you usually get an older one anyway. So you're comparing not just to the current average 15..85-year-olds, but to the average of 15..85-year olds 10-20 years back.
(2.2) Additionally, most people here are white males from developed parts of developed countries, and coming from the upper-middle class. They all have decent education, further selecting a higher-IQ group.


3. Third, all IQ tests are strongly skewed towards young white people.
Young people have less "hard-coding" in their brains, or, in other words, fewer synapse links, or a simpler synapse link structure. This makes it easier for them to quickly adapt to the absolutely impractical task of taking an IQ test. A good professor is surely smarter than his average student, but is likely to get a lower IQ result, because his brain will think of a dozen complex concepts and call associations, while the test requires you to think as simply as possible.
(3.1) Additionally, these tests include school-taught math and school-taught terms. Obviously, someone who is in school, has just finished school, or is at college, will remember it all better than someone older, who rather remembers more important things.


4. Fourth, training matters a lot. People who are eager to talk about their IQ are clearly the people who have interest in it - and, as such, they have taken more tests than those not interested. Test scores increase greatly with training, even if you train with different tests, because they all are essentially the same.
For instance, there's only maybe a dozen principles on which the 3x3 squares with figures are built. Ranging from no repeats in any row to magic square. Once you get the principle, you remember it, and easily answer when you see a similar task again. Plus taking IQ tests routes your synapses to the kind of thinking they require. Each pass counts. +10 can be reached in just a few tests.


5. Fifth, there's the self-reporting factor you've mentioned.
(5.1) Taking the highest measurement,
(5.2) Not being serious or true.
And, (5.3), the factor that some hesitate to report.
Based on the penis analogy, which adds an inch to average of 6-7 inches, we have about extra 15%.

The significance of the (5.1) self-reporting factor is easily proved by the fact that the Giga Society, with one in a billion admission threshold... has more than 6 members. And that's considering that less than 1 billion people in the world have ever taken an IQ test at all, much less a qualifying one, and not all of them far would want to join - so the chances for Giga to have even a single member are just a few percent. Or would be, if not for the inflation of scores by the (5.1).


Now, let's try to draw a bottom line, just for fun.

We're taking people for whose age the average real IQ is 105 including immigrants, impaired, hoods, Harlem kids, etc., or 115 excluding, give them fresh school memories for better test handling, train them for a while, and run them through tests from the times when average IQ was 95, many of these tests furthermore inflating IQ for extra popularity. Then we select the best results, inflate a bit to account for "I could do it if I really tried", spice with just plain boasts and jokes, and include only those who wanted to report their IQ.
What are the chances we'd come to an average of 100? I'd say none.

Or, for the numbers:
Starting at 100, leaving (1) for later, and taking pretty reserved expectations:
(2) +5; (2.1) +5; (2.2) +2
(3) +5; (3.1) +2
(4) +5..+10
(5.1) +5..+10; (5.2) +3 [that's quite reserved for both factors]
...Thus we end at 125+ true average for the self-reported results of young white mostly males.
And at least a half have only taken Internet tests, which skew results up, thus the average could be even higher.
So the average should be 125-135, say 128.

What does the poll tell? Well, it by definition cuts off everyone below average, and one person has 68. Then we have 68 plus 3*97 plus 7*122 plus 23*137 in relatively trustworthy section. People who claim over 159 and some who have 145-159 are almost certainly not true or not serious. So plus 9*152. That is 5732/43=133.3.


And, taking in account the population selection, we get that this forum's users have about 5% higher IQ than the average young white male high school or college student.
Of these, (2) and (2.2) reflect objectively higher intelligence (g), so the properly renormalized and standardized tests would give the typical Internet user an average inherent IQ of 107, and this forum an average inherent IQ of 112.
[ * By inherent IQ I don't mean actual intelligence, which can't be measured by an IQ test, but rather the set of abilities the IQ tests intend to measure, but unskewed by training, test bias and self-reporting. ]

An inherent IQ of 112 splits off 80% of the people, thus estimating that most denizens of this forum are in the top 40% of the population.

Note this is an estimate, and we'd need to conduct polls at other forums to get better statistics about their typical reported IQ. Boastfulness of the forum and form of the poll would also count, e.g. an emo forum or an anonymous poll would have lower overreporting, a thread on a MMORPG forum higher overreporting.

I was tested when I was 11 and it was 117 then. So I'm just barely bright. I scored a 177 on a bullshit online test once, though.

Awesome, all this thread has done is solidify my previous theory that all internet IQ tests over-report by about 30 points. I swear, most people I know who have taken one get 130s.

That means I am average; you are average; we are all average.

Answer the poll.

Internet tests are not credible. However if you want to skew the results then here (http://www.highiqsociety.org/) is one pretty close to being pretty close.

Saw the "wedge" "brainteaser, kicked it to my kids. they had a good laugh, too!

I can't think of a way taking an IQ test would help me.

On the other hand, I can think of plenty of ways taking an IQ test might affect me negatively... whether I score well or poorly (relatively speaking).

So I won't do it.

This, pretty much.


Although I was "tested" into the "gifted" program at my elementary school when I was a tiny one. I suspect that has more to do with me not being black/hispanic then any kind of test score, though. Just judging by the dumb but white kids in the "gifted" program and the smart but not white kids in the "regular" program. *rants to self*

I'm a solid 148.

According to this test, I am "bright", a.k.a. "why are you wasting your time with this? go draw a nice picture or something."

It measured me at about 20 points lower than the psych-administered test I took as a child. Maybe I'm really not as smart as I thought.

I mostly got irritated with the spatial questions and visual patterns and ended up just guessing more than anything. Not surprising, really, because I have no spatial ability whatsoever. It's incredibly difficult for me to picture a 3-D image in my mind, to rotate it on various axes (sp?), to figure out how the light would hit it and where shadows would fall, etc. Probably why I run into walls that have been around me for 14 years and use containers that are way too big or too small when storing leftovers. :-/

Mine's 137, but IQ's pretty much BS anyway.

EDIT: And that was a real IQ test, not an internet one.

Awesome, all this thread has done is solidify my previous theory that all internet IQ tests over-report by about 30 points. I swear, most people I know who have taken one get 130s.
Well, the other poll didn't go well enough to give us sufficient material for a correlation study, but still:
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=23584

15%, 2 of 13: Large
54%, 7 of 13: Above average
30%, 4 of 13: Average
0%, 0 of 13: Small

But objectively, according to Lifestyle (condom manufacturer), only 0.8% have a large penis and 10.4% above average. 86.5% have it average.
The average self-reported penis size on NSG is 1.25"-1.5" above real-life average size.

Now, with IQ one can argue, and rightly so, that the people here indeed tend to have slightly higher than average IQ, since the game involves a bit more intelligence than WoW and other stuff. However, the game is not related to penis (it's not even permitted to discuss it), so there's no objective correlation, and high length is due to self-measurement and self-reporting.

Interestingly, the Internet Enlargement Factor (let's call it so) is about the same for IQ (128/105) and penis size (7.75"/6.25"), further confirming its existence and significance.

I can't say I know my IQ but I do know my intellectual capabilities and with the grades I'm getting without even trying I'm guessing I'm pretty smart.
Though I've never truly bothered with school so I guess 'cause of that I'll never be as smart as I could be.

you realise that at least one of the large penis people was a woman, right? One was Smunk. Didn't get to see who the other was.

Mine's 137, but IQ's pretty much BS anyway.

EDIT: And that was a real IQ test, not an internet one.

Internet IQ tests are unreliable and not trustable.

Internet IQ tests are unreliable and not trustable.

Just like internet sources for 12 foot tall mummies are unreliable and not trustable. If you'd read my post, you'd see I didn't take an internet one.

Internet IQ tests are unreliable and not trustable. Most IQ tests taken "for the sake of it" (i.e. where they don't affect serious matters) are unreliable. And none are really reliable.
Above, in the breakdown, most of the factors apply both to Internet and RL tests.


you realise that at least one of the large penis people was a woman, right? One was Smunk. Didn't get to see who the other was.
Well, and have you noticed that here at least one person has voted IQ>176, and being CthulhuFhtagn, it's clearly a joke too?
Jokes and untrue reporting are present in both penis and IQ measurement cases.

Well, and have you noticed that here at least one person has voted IQ>176, and being CthulhuFhtagn, it's clearly a joke too?
Jokes and untrue reporting are present in both penis and IQ measurement cases.Whoops, should have realised you were being facetious when you used the case study of less than 10 people. I suck at reading people on the internet. No damn facial expressions of vocal intonations. :(

And I really don't know about CthulhuFhtagn. Maybe he could be a genius, but likes to take time off and visit NSG. I haven't picked up enough on his personality to know either way.

My IQ is apparently 135-138 in various official (non-Internet) IQ tests I have participated in, though who actually cares? My mother also has a 'high' IQ.

And how come penis-size has come up several times in an IQ topic?

you realise that at least one of the large penis people was a woman, right? One was Smunk. Didn't get to see who the other was.

My penis is huge.

Well, and have you noticed that here at least one person has voted IQ>176, and being CthulhuFhtagn, it's clearly a joke too?
Jokes and untrue reporting are present in both penis and IQ measurement cases.

There's no reason that score has to be a joke, and from what I remember of CF's posts, I don't believe it is.

A test on facebook said I'm 141. For my internship applications I also needed to do a few tests very similar to IQ ones, but I didn't find out my results. Whatever they were, they were good enough.

All of this is of course irrelevant, because IQs don't translate to success, money or relationships.

All of this is of course irrelevant, because IQs don't translate to success, money or relationships.
A college degree doesn't translate into any of that either though, and it's not "irrelevant" or I wouldn't think so. I would much rather have a doctor who passed medical school and the boards than random man on the street who once saw the surgery channel.

A college degree doesn't translate into any of that either though, and it's not "irrelevant" or I wouldn't think so. I would much rather have a doctor who passed medical school and the boards than random man on the street who once saw the surgery channel.

That's not the greatest comparison, though, because a medical degree represents something very clearly defined and specific - this person has taken and passed certain specific classes. An IQ test result is a lot fuzzier about what it certifies. Basically, all one can really say about someone who scores very well on an IQ test is that they are smart in the ways that lead to high scores on IQ tests - like me, they can still be a complete loser in plenty of other ways. :tongue:

A college degree doesn't translate into any of that either though, and it's not "irrelevant" or I wouldn't think so. I would much rather have a doctor who passed medical school and the boards than random man on the street who once saw the surgery channel.
Well, a college degree ideally gives you some sort of knowledge or skill that you can then put to a specific use that other people come to you for. Intelligence doesn't quite work that way, and IQs are just attempts at finding a proxy for that.

Anyways, all I'm saying is that a high IQ doesn't tell us anything about a person's 'worth' and as such wouldn't really work as something to show off. A college degree at least has an element of effort and commitment to it.

Or maybe my perspectives are just warped right now. I've just come back from uni where they had a interview to get into the Economics Honours program (it's a big deal in the Australian system) and they had me and four others together in a group because we were "the best our university has to offer", being told how awesome we were for half an hour straight. Everyone else who wants to get into the program has to be interviewed alone and justify why they want to do it and why they think they can manage. I don't consider myself particularly special or gifted (though this week has been kind to me), so being told essentially that throws me off.

There's no reason that score has to be a joke, and from what I remember of CF's posts, I don't believe it is.

One gets the impression that anyone with an IQ of more than 176 wouldn't be wasting their time here. :tongue:

My penis has an IQ of 163.

One gets the impression that anyone with an IQ of more than 176 wouldn't be wasting their time here. :tongue:

Eh, people with IQs in that range aren't some sort of special super-genius beings who magically have great ways to spend their time. I doubt many of us could tell the difference between someone with a 130 IQ and someone with a 180 IQ without seeing their test results.

That's not the greatest comparison, though, because a medical degree represents something very clearly defined and specific - this person has taken and passed certain specific classes. An IQ test result is a lot fuzzier about what it certifies. Basically, all one can really say about someone who scores very well on an IQ test is that they are smart in the ways that lead to high scores on IQ tests - like me, they can still be a complete loser in plenty of other ways. :tongue:
This is true.
Well, a college degree ideally gives you some sort of knowledge or skill that you can then put to a specific use that other people come to you for. Intelligence doesn't quite work that way, and IQs are just attempts at finding a proxy for that.
I have great knowledge and skill when it comes to solving visual spatial puzzles and recognizing relationships and patterns. IQ scores aren't based on "nothing", they are not a perfect or even complete way of measuring anything, but they do quite well at telling people exactly how good they are at figuring out the answers on IQ tests.

Anyways, all I'm saying is that a high IQ doesn't tell us anything about a person's 'worth' and as such wouldn't really work as something to show off.
Nobody in thier right mind would say that an IQ score or a college degree or what kind of dog you have or how big your penis is would tell them anything about your "worth".

A college degree at least has an element of effort and commitment to it.
Solving puzzles requires effort, even for a super mega genius like me. :p (or maybe if I were a super mega genius they would not.....:confused: *ponders her stupidity*)

Or maybe my perspectives are just warped right now. I've just come back from uni where they had a interview to get into the Economics Honours program (it's a big deal in the Australian system) and they had me and four others together in a group because we were "the best our university has to offer", being told how awesome we were for half an hour straight. Everyone else who wants to get into the program has to be interviewed alone and justify why they want to do it and why they think they can manage. I don't consider myself particularly special or gifted (though this week has been kind to me), so being told essentially that throws me off.
You sound about right, I'm just having fun screwing with people.
One gets the impression that anyone with an IQ of more than 176 wouldn't be wasting their time here. :tongue:
You'd be surprised. I do lots of idiotic things. *not that my IQ is that high

Or maybe my perspectives are just warped right now. I've just come back from uni where they had a interview to get into the Economics Honours program (it's a big deal in the Australian system) and they had me and four others together in a group because we were "the best our university has to offer", being told how awesome we were for half an hour straight. Everyone else who wants to get into the program has to be interviewed alone and justify why they want to do it and why they think they can manage. I don't consider myself particularly special or gifted (though this week has been kind to me), so being told essentially that throws me off.

You have to do an interview to be able to do honours?

I am asking because I was told by the Honours coordinator at my university if I wanted to do honours (which coincidentally is economics) all I have to ensure is that my results for the courses I am doing this semester stay as high as all the rest and I am guaranteed a place in the program next year. I wonder if I will have to do an interview, of course it may just be your university.

As for the results on the tests you did you must have done a hell of a lot better than me, though I only got results back for one of them which placed me in the top 3% of all applicants (it was APRA) as I only proceeded through that initial stage for a few companies. So make that of it if you will, you might be in the top 1% or something.

Eh, people with IQs in that range aren't some sort of special super-genius beings who magically have great ways to spend their time. I doubt many of us could tell the difference between someone with a 130 IQ and someone with a 180 IQ without seeing their test results.

Well, okay. They might be here, but they'd stick to the spam threads.

One gets the impression that anyone with an IQ of more than 176 wouldn't be wasting their time here. :tongue:

Anyone with a 9" penis probably wouldn't either ...

Well, okay. They might be here, but they'd stick to the spam threads.

Even smart people can still be masochistic enough to enjoy repeatedly arguing about abortion, gay marriage, evolution, and why Christians/atheists/Muslims suck! :tongue:

*presses buttons with long, dextrous fingers*

Anyone with a 9" penis probably wouldn't either ...

Are you calling me a liar? My penis really is huge.

Are you calling me a liar? My penis really is huge.

And mine's, like, inside itself. It's an innie!

My IQ has an 11 inch penis. *nod*

You have to do an interview to be able to do honours?
They changed it this year so that they could meet everyone in person. It wasn't really targeted at us (ie GPA of 6+) though, more at the people who were below that. They've been raising the standard and difficulty of the program every year with all the new fancy staff they've been getting in - the idea is to have the graduates from the program qualified to go straight into Masters and PhD programs at the top universities in the world.

So make that of it if you will, you might be in the top 1% or something.
Who knows. It was two phone interviews, two stages of tests (one was the reasoning, verbal and numerical skills, the other one the personality test) and a flight down to Sydney for a third and final interview. I guess they have a lot of applicants.

On the plus side, I hear that the pay for interns is actually virtually the same as it is for graduate analysts, so 12 weeks there will put me in good stead for the year to come. :p

They changed it this year so that they could meet everyone in person. It wasn't really targeted at us (ie GPA of 6+) though, more at the people who were below that. They've been raising the standard and difficulty of the program every year with all the new fancy staff they've been getting in - the idea is to have the graduates from the program qualified to go straight into Masters and PhD programs at the top universities in the world.

Yeah fair enough, it may just be your university, my GPA is over 6 at the moment (though I went directly to the honours coordinator and spoke to him about it in February), in order to have an automatic place for my honours program a GPA of 5.75 is required.

Who knows. It was two phone interviews, two stages of tests (one was the reasoning, verbal and numerical skills, the other one the personality test) and a flight down to Sydney for a third and final interview. I guess they have a lot of applicants.

If you don't mind me asking who was it for and were you successful?
That process sounds very similar that many companies use, if you were successful congratulations. Most of the large companies do have a lot of graduates and very few spaces, which is why they have a lot of interviews, tests etc in order to whittle the pool down. There was one program stream for an investment bank that I applied for which only had 15 graduate places for the coming year, considering they would have had well over 100 applicants, it is hardly surprising that they have a lot of stages in their selection process.

On the plus side, I hear that the pay for interns is actually virtually the same as it is for graduate analysts, so 12 weeks there will put me in good stead for the year to come. :p

:)

And how come penis-size has come up several times in an IQ topic?
Po-tay-to, po-tah-to.


There's no reason that score has to be a joke, and from what I remember of CF's posts, I don't believe it is.
I'm not sure I can recall a single post from him that wasn't a joke.


Are you calling me a liar? My penis really is huge.
PROOFPIC!
I currently have an 8 1/2" penis, and it's not a joke, a month ago I had an 8 1/8" one, two months ago it was almost but not quite reaching 8". Quigong won't push it more than a couple inches over the base, but it will reach the full potential of how much its skin and corpora cavernosa can be stretched. Practice makes perfect.
IQ test training, however, is much more effective in raising it.
Proofpix on request.

I currently have an 8 1/2" penis, and it's not a joke, a month ago I had an 8 1/8" one, two months ago it was almost but not quite reaching 8". Quigong won't push it more than a couple inches over the base, but it will reach the full potential of how much its skin and corpora cavernosa can be stretched. Practice makes perfect.
IQ test training, however, is much more effective in raising it.
Proofpix on request.

I'm at 7.5", and being just over 5'10" (technically, right under 6' in my shoes), I'm quite happy with this size. Also, being 2" wide is a nice little bonus. And having foreskin is, well, just so right.

Hey, it wasn't intended to be a penimetric thread. It will be locked if anyone else continues to post like that. I only mentioned penimetrics to show that iqmetrics are just their subclass.

If you don't mind me asking who was it for and were you successful?
I'll send you a telegram.

Hey, it wasn't intended to be a penimetric thread. It will be locked if anyone else continues to post like that. I only mentioned penimetrics to show that iqmetrics are just their subclass.

Eh, I suppose. I'm just bored.

Are you calling me a liar? My penis really is huge.

Well, my joke had a serious edge to it. Yes, people will lie about their physical proportions (yep, I've seen women, or supposed women, do it too) and about their IQ.

But, bodgy internet tests aside (Vault 10 correctly states that more 'generous' tests will be more popular) I would expect NSGers to be above average in verbal skills in particular. It is simply easier to 'win' arguments if you have the discernment to find faults in what others say ... and how often do you see slighting comments about posters' "lack of reading comprehension" as though that is some kind of moral failing?

(Actually, what we're most snobbish about is moral discernment, but that's another matter.)

The serious edge to my joke was this: the average poster is probably more intelligent, but less physically endowed, than an average person. That probably skews whatever result you were hoping to prove with the thread.

Some of us have shown pictures, but can we doubt that many of us don't think that would make us more popular, and prefer to be known by our words?

I'm perfectly happy with my high IQ and complete absence of penis. :tongue:

I want to take an official one. I scored pretty high on this one when I took it but it can't be verified so.

i'm average.