Take this little test. I found my score to be consistent with a longer test I took some years ago. You can post your score if you wish or just indicate it via the poll. The test: http://www.emode.com/tests/uiq/index.jsp
Interestingly enough, the test pegged me right where I thought I was all along. So is it a good test because it matched my expectations? I found that a bit interesting though, because I've always scored lower in visual areas. Perhaps my brain has gotten better at processing that type of information through too much 3D gameplay and 3D tetris.
Tests like these are too sketchy. From Mensa: The term "IQ score" is widely used but poorly defined. There are a large number of tests with different scales. The result on one test of 132 can be the same as a score 148 on another test. Some intelligence tests don't use IQ scores at all. Mensa has set a percentage as cutoff to avoid this confusion. Candidates for membership in Mensa must achieve a score at or above the 98th percentile (a score that is greater than or equal to 98 percent of the general population taking the test) on a standard test of intelligence. Here is a general table of accepted standards: Intelligence Interval - Cognitive Designation - Common Possessors* 85 - 114 - Average - Pupils at junior high school 115 - 124 - Above average - Pupils at senior high school 125 - 134 - Gifted - University graduates 135 - 144 - Highly gifted - Intellectuals 145 - 154 - Genius - Professors 155 - 164 - Genius - Nobel Prize Winners 165 - 179 - High - genius 180 - 200 - Highest genius >200 - "Unmeasurable" genius I have heard anywhere from 1 - 2% of the world population being over 135. Look into Howard Gardner and his groundbreaking "multiple IQ standards" for the most recent challenge to even more standardized (non-internet) IQ tests. So, I don't put much value in this test (or tests like this), even though it put me in a very high percentile and called me a "visual philosopher," which is basically true given my field. Oh well.
It told me I am a visionary philosopher as well, but this has to be wrong because the test is way too short to determine the full extent of my genius...
Perhaps a truer test of intelligence (or your sucker-IQ) is whether you decided that you needed to hear more about your intelligence and ordered the $15 analysis of your results
This test is pretty acurate, well acurate with the other tests I have done, I guess that makes all internet tests Valid. Although It always suprises me when I get my results
Mrs JB, Glad you liked that...I was hoping somebody would. giddy...I am guessing that "supreme critic" was for me. Very clever. Well, if you must know - and if you clicked on that Moe link- in that other test I got a 159, putting me on the genius level with nobel prize winners. This test gave me a 146 - putting me on the genius professor level. I have taken others that put me in the high 130's, various 140's, and 150's. So, basically, I have an IQ range of 20+ "points" based upon internet and paper IQ tests. Seems to prove my point about them being erratic. Internet IQ tests like these are generally inflated so that you feel good about yourself and (they hope) will then be suckered into buying their "real reports." Sure, I have taken "real" IQ tests, but I generally think those are silly as well...again, look to Gardner. Brains are vastly different and there cannot be one standardized way of measuring "intelligence." And it certainly does not measure any natural ability - as I do not really feel there is any such thing - barring a few real genius abnormalities (but even many of them are just products of their upbringing/environment ala JS Mill). So, yeah, call me critical for not putting to much weight on things that are either trying to sell you something or are saying that there is only one way of determining "natural intelligence." I tend to have a more positive outlook for all human potential.
I scored a 126. I wish it would tell you what you got wrong so I could go change my answers and score higher . I always considered myself an intellectual dumbass anyway. So, it seems the shoe fits... It says I'm a Visual Mathematician. Huh? Thing is....I suck at math. I consider myself average at math....had trouble with Calculus in college only scoring Cs in the courses. Oh well...
Well I must confess that you were the primary inspiration. All your criticisms about IQ tests are valid, but we probably all know that. I didn't mean it in a mean-spirited way... just low-grade sarcasm. It is hard to post something here without having it sliced and diced and re-assembled with new parts.
142 - I am usally in the high 130's. Guess you get a little smarter with age. "Visionary Philosopher" Check this IQ chart out http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/IQtable.html
I got a 132 on the one from moestavern link above. Considering that and the 126 I got on the one in this thread, I would say I am in the upper 120s IQ-wise. Checking that IQ with the average IQ for my occupation...it's almost(if not) dead on. Computer programmers, from Wink3Cat5's link which leads to an occupational IQ averages chart, are said to have IQs in the upper 120s. Amazing . Surf
I got a 140. Not bad for no college. Although I attended, I do have some time before my hours pass my age. --we can tell your Intellectual Type is a Facts Curator. The first thing we can tell you about that is you've fed your brain a unique collection of facts and figures over the years. You've got a good hold on words and numbers. But that's just scratching the surface. They forgot to mention all the useless crap I have in my head.
