Online IQ test

[jtr1962]

Here's my results on that Super IQ test SteveC linked to:

Joseph, your Super IQ score is 120

Your overall intelligence quotient is the result of a scientifically-tested formula based on how many questions you answered correctly. But it's only part of what we learned about you from your answers on the test. We also determined the way you process information.

The way you think about things makes you a Complex Intellectual. This means you are a highly intelligent and have extraordinarily strong verbal and math skills. Compared to others you are a highly conceptual and complex thinker and are able to understand information in an abstract form. You also show great attention to detail. In fact, it's hard to find something you're not good at.

How did we determine that your thinking style is that of a Complex Intellectual? When we examined your test results further, we analyzed how you scored on 8 dimensions of intelligence: spatial, organizational, abstract reasoning, logical, mechanical, verbal, visual and numerical. The 3 dimensions you scored highest on combine to make you a Complex Intellectual. Only 6 out of 1,000 people have this rare combination of abilities.

I'm guessing SuperIQ and regular IQ are measured on different scales. I've pretty consistently scored in the upper 130s on almost every regular IQ test I've taken.

It's also funny how everyone else who has taken this test so far has some rare ability that only 6 out of every 1000 people have. :wink: Makes me a tad suspicious, to say the least.

 

[jtr1962]

generally it seems that according to these test results, I have an IQ in the low-mid 140's.

now, according to Merc's link and a fair few other papers on the topic on IQ levels , I am supposed to be a genius. I more than happily dispute this. I like to think I’m smart P) but I know this is not true. I'm not being falsely modest, I’m simply not a genius. I don't pretend to be an actual genius nor do I want to be a real genius. anyone that knows me well knows I'm not a genius and I'm perfectly happy with this! the only thing I will accept from the results of my scores is that I have an IQ level that is above average.

why am I saying all this? well I believe there's a flaw in the typical test method used in IQ tests. instead of actually being a genius, I must have a good ability to score high on these types of tests. I'm pretty curious to know if others here have found the same thing. does anyone else score consistently higher or lower than they think they should?

You certainly bring up an interesting point here. Some people are just good test takers and do better at these types of tests than their intelligence in everyday life would predict. For others, quite the opposite is true. And remember, an IQ test only tells about one facet of how your brain works. As Mercutio pointed out, there are different kinds of intelligence that are just as important in life as reasoning ability. Based on my studies of this subject, I've come to the conclusion that very high IQ is mainly important only for a career in academia. Sure, you need an above average IQ(at least in the 130s) to be a doctor, engineer, lawyer. However, past maybe about 150 or 160 the only career opportunity that makes full use of such high intelligence would be one in academia, or maybe designing secret weapons for the government. As much as I hate to sound biased by saying this, but based on my contact with such academics, it appears that IQ is really the only thing most of them have in abundance. Many are woefully lacking in almost every other area.

It's also true that many people who score at "genius" levels neither consider themselves as such, nor want to. For that reason, I generally tend to seek the company of my peers, whether by going to the high school I did or posting on sites like this one. I frankly don't wish to stand out. IQ is but one facet of my persona. I'm good at a lot of other things besides reasoning ability, and I definitely wouldn't want a dry career in academia scrawling figures on chalkboards or giving lectures, even if that is something that I could do if I wanted to. One reason I hate labels like "genius" or "gifted" is the (fallacious) expectation of success that goes along with it. People automatically assume that someone with a 140 IQ will be able to become a millionaire at will. Truth is that many people with lower IQs will perservere more than someone for whom everything always came easily, and in the end have more success just by virtue of having tried more times. Also, for many with higher IQs, the conventional trappings of success(money, fancy cars, lots of consumer gadgets) mean little. I know they don't for me, and I hate any label that implies "success" and all the trappings which go with it.

 

[flagreen]

bill, your Super IQ score is 147

Your overall intelligence quotient is the result of a scientifically-tested formula based on how many questions you answered correctly. But it's only part of what we learned about you from your answers on the test. We also determined the way you process information.

The way you think about things makes you a Visual Linguist. This means you are highly intelligent and have many diverse talents. You have especially strong linguistic talents and are very good at interpreting visual information. You've got your feet on the ground, but your mind is capable of very complex, abstract thought. Compared to others, you are easily able to see situations from many different angles. You also understand how things work in a very practical way.

How did we determine that your thinking style is that of a Visual Linguist? When we examined your test results further, we analyzed how you scored on 8 dimensions of intelligence: spatial, organizational, abstract reasoning, logical, mechanical, verbal, visual and numerical. The 3 dimensions you scored highest on combine to make you a Visual Linguist. Only 6 out of 1,000 people have this rare combination of abilities.

Find out which 3 intelligence dimensions you scored the highest on and how your IQ score compares to others in your personalized, 31-page Super IQ Report. It's ready right now!

See a sample Super IQ Report

I found the test Steve linked to much easier that the first test Merc linked. 31 page report! Good lord!

 

[jtr1962]

Visual linguist, Bill? Now that doesn't surprise me a bit. The whole Giver charade you pulled off was sheer genius. I don't think anyone else here(except maybe Tannin) could have fooled so many people for so long. :mrgrn:

 

[flagreen]

Visual linguist, Bill? Now that doesn't surprise me a bit. The whole Giver charade you pulled off was sheer genius. I don't think anyone else here(except maybe Tannin) could have fooled so many people for so long. :mrgrn:

Thanks jtr but it's too bad BS doesn't put food on the table or a Bugatti in the garage or I'd be all set.

 

[SteveC]

Visual linguist, Bill? Now that doesn't surprise me a bit. The whole Giver charade you pulled off was sheer genius. I don't think anyone else here(except maybe Tannin) could have fooled so many people for so long. :mrgrn:

Thanks jtr but it's too bad BS doesn't put food on the table or a Bugatti in the garage or I'd be all set.

Just become a politician. :lol:

 

[flagreen]

A politician? I do have some shame you know.

 

[ddrueding]

136 - Precision Processor ....also a lower score than mensa.....

 

[e_dawg]

Hmm... I got 131, Visual mathematician. I also smell something fishy, because I suck at math. These math questions are some of the easiest I've seen in a while. I got rocked on the math section of the SAT and the GMAT. I think I got somewhere in the 50-ish percentile range in both, yet 90-95th percentile in Verbal for both.

Another thing I wanted to point out was that after a while of reading that report, I notice that it said my score is actually 121-131, and I think that is the same for all of you as well (I can't seem to access mine anymore despite the fact that I paid for it... morons! ). So, my score is actually 126, not 131... keep that in mind when you look at your scores.

 

[e_dawg]

I notice that it said my score is actually 121-131, and I think that is the same for all of you as well

... of course what I meant by that was that emode reports the upper range of your IQ score and not your actual score.... but then again, you probably knew that because you're all veritable geniuses

 

[GMac]

I got 135 (Visionary Philosopher apparently) - I didn't bother with the report.

GM

 

[e_dawg]

It is interesting that we are all within a tight range... 130-140, mostly. Can we draw any conclusions from that? Perhaps people with lower IQ don't understand what the heck we're talking about, and people with higher IQ don't care about what we're talking about

 

[jtr1962]

It is interesting that we are all within a tight range... 130-140, mostly. Can we draw any conclusions from that? Perhaps people with lower IQ don't understand what the heck we're talking about, and people with higher IQ don't care about what we're talking about

1)We're all 130 or over and the test possibly can't measure over 140, so we all end up in a tight 10-point range.

2)Anyone who took it and scored under 130 was too embarrassed to post their score, and anyone who would have scored over 140 either saw no point in taking it (read some of Mercutio's posts regarding this) and/or wouldn't have posted the score even if they did (again, refer to Merc's posts on the subject).

3)IQs much over 140 are relatively rare, so the chances of a random group of smart people assembling on line with many having scores over 140 would be rare. On the other side of the scale, chances are most people with IQs much under 130 would find most of what we talk about here either boring, or would find that too much would simply go right over their heads. For why this would be so, just check out the level of conversation in some AOL chatrooms. I don't think any of those people would get much out of a site like this.

4)Birds of a feather flock together.

I'm more curious as to why SF (and SR) haven't attracted a whole lot of females. I can't attribute that just to our poop threads. I for one would welcome their viewpoints, and surely there are females interested in the subjects we talk about. Any comments on that one? Perhaps online discussion boards are just a format that doesn't happen to appeal to females.

 

[ddrueding]

I'm more curious as to why SF (and SR) haven't attracted a whole lot of females. I can't attribute that just to our poop threads. I for one would welcome their viewpoints, and surely there are females interested in the subjects we talk about. Any comments on that one?

Perhaps there are more females than you'd think...just none who decide to identify themseles as such. (not me, I'm here.)

Perhaps online discussion boards are just a format that doesn't happen to appeal to females.

I can assure you this isn't true.

 

[flagreen]

Maybe we should try more poop threads not less and see if that works?

 

[e_dawg]

I suspect part of it is due to the subject matter -- no, not poop, but computers. And not just computers... computers at a level that goes beyond the average computer guy in one's group of friends, and an unhealthy obsession with storage. It takes a special and rare kind of woman to enjoy such discussions. In fact, I don't know a single female who actually enjoys talking about this stuff all day -- even my friend who has deployed and managed an enterprise-wide AD system.

Add to that a close-knit group of guys "where everybody knows your name and they're always glad you came" a la Cheers, and it is a bit exclusionary to females whether we intended that or not. But just think of it this way: women on ShoeForum.net are having the same discussion about why they rarely see guys on their site debating the merits of this fall's light burgundy Prada open toe calf skin pumps vs. Gucci's controversial summer collection in terms of the ability to match with the pre-production preview of Donna Karan's spring 2005 collection. :mrgrn:

 

[e_dawg]

Whoops, I meant Spring 2004 (man it's hard to keep all these lies straight)

 

[ddrueding]

I suspect part of it is due to the subject matter -- no, not poop, but computers. And not just computers... computers at a level that goes beyond the average computer guy in one's group of friends, and an unhealthy obsession with storage. It takes a special and rare kind of woman to enjoy such discussions. In fact, I don't know a single female who actually enjoys talking about this stuff all day -- even my friend who has deployed and managed an enterprise-wide AD system.

Yeah, a semi-geeky girl is a hard enough find...but one who is obsessed with something as (insert apropriate verb here - need help) as storage is nigh-impossible.

I am however currently creating a massive spreadsheet that represents the dependancies of feats in NWN so I can beat one of my GF's characters in a one-on-one battle to the death I am satisfied.

Add to that a close-knit group of guys "where everybody knows your name and they're always glad you came" a la Cheers, and it is a bit exclusionary to females whether we intended that or not. But just think of it this way: women on ShoeForum.net are having the same discussion about why they rarely see guys on their site debating the merits of this fall's light burgundy Prada open toe calf skin pumps vs. Gucci's controversial summer collection in terms of the ability to match with the pre-production preview of Donna Karan's spring 2005 collection. :mrgrn:

Jeez, I'm pretty good at the techno-babble, but you just demonstrated far more fasion jargon than I am familiar with!

 

[e_dawg]

Actually, to tell you the truth, i bet most women don't really engage in any fashion jargon. I think as long as it looks "cute", "hot", is the right colour, or matches particular items of their wardrobe, they are happy.

It's not about the specs... somehow you just gotta know what looks good. I think that's another one of those Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus things. Guys intuitively know which car (or computer) is faster or more respected in the automotive establishment, but we don't know why this shoe is supposed to be way better than that shoe.

That's why I always feel uncomfortable when women ask me "what do you think looks better? This one or... (it's worse if you have to wait for a couple minutes while they change, during which time you've already forgotten what the first thing looked like) this one?"

Does it really matter, because the guys will be undressing you with their eyes anyways? (kidding) :mrgrn:

 

[ddrueding]

Does it really matter, because the guys will be undressing you with their eyes anyways? (kidding) :mrgrn:

LOL! (not kidding) :mrgrn:

All I know is this: Dr. Martens for comfort, Armani for style, Costco Tennis Shoes for leisure. Own a couple of each and you're set

 

[Mercutio]

There's more than one kind of shoes?
I wear black new balance, uh, shoes every day. If there are more kinds than that I don't care.

Women's fashion is really very easy because it is very direct. Once you understand something about the woman you are trying to dress it's really not hard to figure out proper interactions of style and color. At one point Amy's friends used to "borrow" me for shopping trips, 'cause I could judge the clothes, at least in terms of look, better than they could. I guess all the time I spend looking at pictures of women really paid off for awhile.

Men's fashion is complicated and very nuanced, and because so few men have any interest in fashion that it's very hard to find an accurate gauge for what's good and what looks good. Every man in the world looks good in a decent business suit, but that's about all I can tell anyone. Me? I don't care. No one will ever be impressed with my appearance to begin with. I do a uniform thing: jeans or khaki pants and a Tshirt. That's it.

Yeah, a semi-geeky girl is a hard enough find...but one who is obsessed with something as (insert apropriate verb here - need help) as storage is nigh-impossible.

I am however currently creating a massive spreadsheet that represents the dependancies of feats in NWN so I can beat one of my GF's characters in a one-on-one battle to the death I am satisfied.

The term you're probably searching for is "esoteric".

I'd love to see that spreadsheet when you're done, too. NWN is pretty much the only game I play.

 

[Tannin]

Bare feet. Every time.

 

[Tannin]

But just think of it this way: women on ShoeForum.net are having the same discussion about why they rarely see guys on their site debating the merits of this fall's light burgundy Prada open toe calf skin pumps vs. Gucci's controversial summer collection in terms of the ability to match with the pre-production preview of Donna Karan's spring 2005 collection.

Beautifully put, my friend. You have not lost your touch, Doggy One.

 

[ddrueding]

The term you're probably searching for is "esoteric".

I'd love to see that spreadsheet when you're done, too. NWN is pretty much the only game I play.

Yes, that's the word. Sorry, I was a bottle in...

I'll post the spreadsheet when I get a but further on it. Mainly I'm just taking the top level feats that I like to have and looking at how best to accomplish them.

 

[e_dawg]

Beautifully put, my friend. You have not lost your touch, Doggy One.

Thank you, my avian-simian friend.

 

[CougTek]

I wear black new balance, uh, shoes every day.

8 inches black mountain boots, summer like winter. Re-inforced cap for ass kicking. In general, I like boots like the Terra Defender style.

Me? I don't care. No one will ever be impressed with my appearance to begin with. I do a uniform thing: jeans or khaki pants and a Tshirt. That's it.

I would be impressed. Never seen a guy without a neck before. We would look like twins, I also always wear jeans and T-shirt. ;-)

 

[Mercutio]

I know what you look like, and I'm utterly certain we wouldn't look like twins.

 

[Howell]

[quote="ddrueding]Yeah, a semi-geeky girl is a hard enough find...but one who is obsessed with something as (insert apropriate verb here - need help) as storage is nigh-impossible.
[/quote]

I have discovered that one of my friends can not only name all the original X-men but knows thier powers. She would choose to be Storm at play time. I think she was more excited to see the Spidey II preview before RotK than I was.

 

[ddrueding]

[quote="ddrueding]Yeah, a semi-geeky girl is a hard enough find...but one who is obsessed with something as (insert apropriate verb here - need help) as storage is nigh-impossible.

I have discovered that one of my friends can not only name all the original X-men but knows thier powers. She would choose to be Storm at play time. I think she was more excited to see the Spidey II preview before RotK than I was.[/quote]

Same with my GF, she plays a game called "hero-clix" or something similar...and can identify even the more obscure characters on site. In addition to being able to identify their powers and affiliation.

 

[ddrueding]

OK, that post was just horrible....here is the better version:

Yeah, a semi-geeky girl is a hard enough find...but one who is obsessed with something as (insert apropriate verb here - need help) as storage is nigh-impossible.

I have discovered that one of my friends can not only name all the original X-men but knows thier powers. She would choose to be Storm at play time. I think she was more excited to see the Spidey II preview before RotK than I was.

Same with my GF, she plays a game called "hero-clix" or something similar...and can identify even the more obscure characters on sight. In addition to being able to identify their powers and affiliation.

 

[Tannin]

We all know you went AWOL for a long, alcohol-induced period, David, but there is no need to say everything twice just to restore your post-count. :wink:

 

[Tannin]

We all know you went AWOL for a long, alcohol-induced period, David, but there is no need to say everything twice just to restore your post-count. :wink:

 

[ddrueding]

LOL. Well, the AWOL was from pure forgetfulness....and the alcohol is still here, and my post count is...quite pathetic...

Oh well

 

[B4RSK]

140, Facts Curator. I did this test a little while ago during a lunch break at work.

The info they have on the page about the different IQ tests is interesting. Different IQ tests work with different scales. Some have a maximum score, some are much more open ended. I couldn't find any information about their maximum score or scale though.

This is the only IQ test I've done, so can't compare with any others either.

Ian