Yes, I was tested as a kid. Yes, I am a genius. 
Do you know your IQ?
- Thread starter Rÿcher
- Start date
A
Amaris
Guest
I was tested when I was a teenager, but I was given a percentile ranking instead of an actual IQ number. I have a copy of the report somewhere, but I'm not going to try and dig it out right now.
It should be noted that there are inherent difficulties in trying to quantify intelligence. The tests that exist now are pretty good, but it's necessary to understand that they test a variety of factors, and the final results are only a deviated projection (usually a deviation of 15 on a Bell curve). Professional tests are usually given three times across a period of time as well, partly for that reason.
Another important thing to note, especially since I would assume that a lot of the people here would score in the gifted range, is that most intelligence tests are, by design, patently unreliable at determining a specific IQ number higher than IQ 130 (the most commonly accepted cut-off for intellectual giftedness).
My point is this; IQ tests are a good indicator of human intelligence, but it would be more prudent (and just as accurate) to say, when asked, that you're either below average, average, above average, or gifted.
It should be noted that there are inherent difficulties in trying to quantify intelligence. The tests that exist now are pretty good, but it's necessary to understand that they test a variety of factors, and the final results are only a deviated projection (usually a deviation of 15 on a Bell curve). Professional tests are usually given three times across a period of time as well, partly for that reason.
Another important thing to note, especially since I would assume that a lot of the people here would score in the gifted range, is that most intelligence tests are, by design, patently unreliable at determining a specific IQ number higher than IQ 130 (the most commonly accepted cut-off for intellectual giftedness).
My point is this; IQ tests are a good indicator of human intelligence, but it would be more prudent (and just as accurate) to say, when asked, that you're either below average, average, above average, or gifted.
A
Amaris
Guest
To address the OP seriously:
Lots of unofficial numbers, one official one, and a comparative number from my school when we took them.
I won't give out the official number since it's probably inaccurate now, but I'll give the comparative number.
When we took the test in school, the scores for the entire district were compared to one another and we were given rankings.
I ranked in the top 98th percentile for the entire district. Not bad, but I've let it all go to waste.
J.
Lots of unofficial numbers, one official one, and a comparative number from my school when we took them.
I won't give out the official number since it's probably inaccurate now, but I'll give the comparative number.
When we took the test in school, the scores for the entire district were compared to one another and we were given rankings.
I ranked in the top 98th percentile for the entire district. Not bad, but I've let it all go to waste.
J.
Then what is considered the average, considering that the average is different everywhere?
It's been a while since I tested my IQ, I do know that the result stated it was above average (Dutch average iirc).
I don't think the youth is necessarily getting stupider. I think the standards and means of measuring their intelligence is getting out of control.The average is 100, and the tests are recalibrated every few years to account for different trends, one of which is that intelligence has been steadily rising in the past 50 years, contrary to what would you'd think given the state of today's youth.
I was watching a news report yesterday morning where so-called "experts" were blaming cell phones for the decrease in academic performance. I wanted to throw something at the TV.
A cell phone?
Or figure out how to get a hair cut. Apparently.
Right. People, in this thread even, keep equating IQ with Smarts.
Two totaly different concepts.
I've been tested twice, once in Italian and once in English.
The Italian test gave me an IQ of 156 and the English an IQ of 154.
In any case I believe these numbers won't help you find a good job or change your life for the better in any possible way. No one will come to you and hand you a few hundred bucks because you have an IQ over 120 or whatnot, so at the end of the day taking the test is just an exercise for your brain.
Buy a Nintendo DS, it's more fun.
The Italian test gave me an IQ of 156 and the English an IQ of 154.
In any case I believe these numbers won't help you find a good job or change your life for the better in any possible way. No one will come to you and hand you a few hundred bucks because you have an IQ over 120 or whatnot, so at the end of the day taking the test is just an exercise for your brain.
Buy a Nintendo DS, it's more fun.
Einstein also didn't speak until the age of two. It's typical for gifted individuals to develop in different ways and at different rates from others. There's also a higher likelihood that they'll have social and emotional problems. Hence the stereotype of the nerd.
A lot of people who are highly intelligent don't function as well in society as those with an average IQ. So it's not necessarily an advantage! You may be smarter, but you might not be as happy!
A lot of people who are highly intelligent don't function as well in society as those with an average IQ. So it's not necessarily an advantage! You may be smarter, but you might not be as happy!
^^Quite right! 
So many intelligent people around here. I agree that there is not one definition of intelligence. What about the wisdom of not boasting? What about acquired knowhow? Being able to use one's brains in practical applications? I have deep respect for inventors, and I'm not sure they have to range that high. Or at least, they do things that equally ranging people don't think of doing.
And what about the element of speed? Needing (or preferring to use) more time to do the same thing (or a little more than that thing, in the end) makes you score lower? I find that stupid. Those tests only quantify (or enhance) one kind of intelligence.
The only time I've been exposed to a form of IQ test was online (pre-Internet "minitel", expensive connection, impractical, never ending, never finished - didn't see the point) and I noticed that those tests focused a lot on math and timing. The predominant math part particularly shocked me because a lot of that was acquired. You had to have had a certain schooling.
Also, I heard that originally, IQ tests were invented to prove that Whites were smarter than Negroes. Of course, it didn't turn out that way, but I think that sheds discredit on the whole thing.
Niorah, is your new avatar Alain Delon? Very nice.
But alcohol and drugs kill a lot of brain cells and underage consumption of them has been rising.
Why bother, then?
So many intelligent people around here. I agree that there is not one definition of intelligence. What about the wisdom of not boasting? What about acquired knowhow? Being able to use one's brains in practical applications? I have deep respect for inventors, and I'm not sure they have to range that high. Or at least, they do things that equally ranging people don't think of doing.
And what about the element of speed? Needing (or preferring to use) more time to do the same thing (or a little more than that thing, in the end) makes you score lower? I find that stupid. Those tests only quantify (or enhance) one kind of intelligence.
The only time I've been exposed to a form of IQ test was online (pre-Internet "minitel", expensive connection, impractical, never ending, never finished - didn't see the point) and I noticed that those tests focused a lot on math and timing. The predominant math part particularly shocked me because a lot of that was acquired. You had to have had a certain schooling.
Also, I heard that originally, IQ tests were invented to prove that Whites were smarter than Negroes. Of course, it didn't turn out that way, but I think that sheds discredit on the whole thing.
Niorah, is your new avatar Alain Delon? Very nice.
I blame this on lazy parenting and the fact that teachers aren't really allowed to discipline kids anymore without getting in trouble themselves.
Plus (and I don't mean to turn this into a political discussion), but since the whole No Child Left Behind thing came into being, teachers themselves have actually gotten a lot more lax in their grading because they are under so much pressure to pass every kid in their class. My mom is a teacher, and the current policies in America's education system have made her almost stop caring. It's less about teaching the kids, and more about just riding it out until she can retire.
An objective observer might consider me the poster child for the above.
And yet I still know a thing or two about a thing or two!
You're talking about the difference between wisdom and knowledge. Most people equate intelligence with the latter (and our culture emphasizes it), unfortunately, but intelligence is actually the capacity to develop both of those things. IQ tests are an attempt to quantify that ability. They're certainly not perfect, and I'd argue that they are probably biased.
When I took the test, the psychologist who administered it allowed me the extra time to complete all of the tasks. He then compared the data between what I had done during the time limit and what I had done afterwards. This was done partly to demonstrate that I not only had ADD, but how it affected me academically.
In the case of children, at least, that's why the tests are tailored for your level of education. Also, math is only one component. Each component is rated separately, you're given the results from each, and then a deviated average is given as a final score. I personally disagree with the use of an average final score (especially an IQ number instead of a percentile ranking). It simplifies it too much and simply leads to a bad perception.
I don't know about that, but you should read this, since it's not only an important cautionary tale, but it supports your argument,
"Few people realize that the tests being used today represent the end result of a historical process that has its origins in eugenics. Many of the founding fathers of the modern testing industry advocated eugenics. The founding fathers of the testing industry saw testing as one way of achieving eugenicist aims. Goddard's belief in the innateness and unalterability of intelligence levels, for example, was so firm that he argued for the reconstruction of society along the lines dictated by IQ scores."
So there ya go. Nothing's perfect.
