Is an IQ test from the time I was four be still valid?
that should be “would be”
Personally I doubt it captainQwark, I think such tests are usually meant to be predictive but alot can change mentally from the time you are four. Using such a test to say anything about your current intellegence is like using last weeks weather forecast to tell you about the weather today.
They are fairly accurate when used for their intented purpose, which is to identify people with certain mental handicaps and learning disabilities.
Valid for what? Mensa might accept it, I’m not sure what their rules are. But if you’re asking if the IQ scores of small children are an accurate predictor of the IQ scores of those same people as adults then the answer is “no”. Had you been tested as an adolescent, or even a school-aged child, you could reasonably expect the score to be fairly close to what you would make on the same test now.
IQ tests richly deserve much of the criticism they have received, but they do not deserve to be judged on the basis of “pretend” online tests. Online IQ tests are to real IQ tests what a middle schooler’s Pokemon fanfic is to Crime and Punishment. Due to technological limitations if nothing else, many of the kinds of questions found on the IQ tests that are accepted by the general psychological community could not be adapted for an online test. Even if you could find a complete online version of one of these tests, it would still be worthless. A proper IQ test must be administered and scored by a trained professional.
Why does not having a trained professional present make an IQ test worthless? Would we somehow answer the questions differently?
And I think it is awfully presumptuous of you to say that online tests are to real tests what blah blah - While it is probably true in most cases, how do you know there are not at least some that (assuming the testee is honest) would give a reliable, or at least similar score to the one the testee might get on a real test.
[pedantic teachery head on]
“would be” doesn’t seem to fit. Try “Would” in place of “Is” and swap your “still” and “be” around.
[pedantic teachery head off]
[pedantic teachery head off]
[damn. It won’t come off]
sorry. Looks like that’s proof of my bad IQ 
No captainQwark I was just being pedantic.
If your IQ was in the 80s when you were 3 then, unless I am mistaken, that would suggest your IQ would be high now
while it is possible that someone is using a standardised Stanford-Binet or WAIS online, it is doubtful because these tests are usually guarded. by and large, online tests may have face validity, but may leave a lot to be desired on reliability and/or construct validity. to be a little extreme about this, answer my personality test below. your options are True or False.
Q: Have you told lies, even white lies, sometime in the past month?
My analysis: True? you’re a stinking, rotten liar who doesnt deserve to be trusted EVER!
False? oh you angel! let me give you all my money because i kow it’ll be safe with you!
see what i mean?
- the number of questions may not be adequately representative of the construct in question.
- standardised IQ tests have many sub-scales. are they present in the online version?
- who’s the analyst? I.M. Smart, PhD? are you sure the PhD doesn’t stand for Pudding-Headed Dude? scoring and analysing the responses to an IQ test requires training.
and so on.
captainQwark, IQs increase with schooling and even life experience (based on the alternate definitions of inteliigence i provided in a post somewhere above). Lamia is right in that a middle school/high school IQ test would be more predictive of your adult IQ.
You made your point aasna. Basically you are saying that real tests are closely guarded and are unlikely to make it onto the internet (at least I think that was your point)
However, I think my original point has some validity (if I am remembering what it was correctly) - If you score highly on an online IQ test (one that seems reputable) then it is reasonable to assume that you will score higher than average on a real test.
Heck, I am not sure if that was my point. Oh well.
While I am in the presence of an expert (not sarcasm) - How does one go about reliably testing a 3 year old? given that it’s pretty difficult to make a 3 year old draw a circle.
seems fair to me. so long as practice, prior knowledge of the questions, etc., weren’t involved. after all, if you’re smart, you’re smart. HOW smart is a different question.
if you meant me: blush oh you do go on, you flatterer!
if you didnt: blush i just made an ass of myself. dang.
anyway, this is what i know. the Stanford Binet asks kids to define words, understand numbers, string beads, build with blocks, and some other stuff i can’t remember. as you can make out, they’re testing cognitive development, physical development, spatial understanding and memory.
i can’t remember about the WISC.
and they control for limited attention spans by breaking up the test into two parts.
about your example of a 3-year old drawing a circle, well, it would relate to Vygotsky’s zones of proximal development. so, if at the age of 3, it is expected that all kids will know what a circle is and atleast approximate it somewhat, then a 3-year old who does the same is considered normal.
actually, nevermind Vygotsky and nevermind his ZPD. it’s common sense: if a kid can do mostly everything his peers can, he’s pretty much okay. if he’s lagging behind too much, something’s not very okay. if he’s far ahead of them, well, bully for him.
aasna reluctantly drags herself away from the SDMB. “must go library. must study.”, she gasps. “exaaaaams!!”, she hyperventilates.
I just wrote a nice long post I wrote carefully explaining the limitations of the online format, the complex nature of the IQ tests currently accepted by the psychological community, and the importance of having a professionally trained test administrator, and now I have erased it. I’d hate for you to think me presumptuous for sharing factual information on a subject I actually know something about. In the future I will be sure to ignore threads on all such subjects. Wouldn’t want to accidentally fight any ignorance.
There’s a certain lovely irony in making posts with strange mistakes like this in a thread on IQ tests.
Lamia I simply meant that you can’t say online tests are a load of rubbish. Some might be very good tests of intelligence even if they are not a patch on the real tests.
Oh and I think the irony you talk of is called Gaudre’s Law
No, I believe I can say that. If an online IQ test exists that is not, in fact, a load of rubbish it is certainly keeping a low profile. Many are not merely rubbish but outright scams that charge people for to take a meaningless test.
The entire concept of a “very good test of intelligence” is questionable. Frankly, I do not think even the Stanford-Binet or the WISC are “very good tests of intelligence”, although as I said before they do a pretty good job of identifying learning disabilities and mental handicaps. There is no online IQ test that can claim the same. I have never even seen an online test that had a sufficient number of questions (a real IQ test takes hours to complete), much less questions of sufficient depth and diversity.
I hope you don’t feel that I’m picking on you now, but since I’m replying I felt I should correct this statement:
**
The scoring system of all the standard IQ tests I am familiar with take the age of the participant into account. Someone with an IQ in the 80s as a child should, in theory, have an IQ in the 80s as an adult. A child who scored in the 80s may have a higher IQ as an adult due to the inaccuracy of childhood IQ tests in predicting adult scores, but a childhood score in the 80s certainly does not suggest a higher adult score.
And I did it again! I suppose I could try to pass this off as dialect, but the real problem is that my vision in my right eye is very poor and it screws up my proofreading on that side of the screen. Or maybe I’m just stupid…time to have another IQ test and see! 
Well it doesn’t feel like you are picking on me, but it does feel like you are touchy on the subject. It looked a bit like predjudice when you said [not in these words] internet tests are rubbish, so I commented on that.
Usually when people say things like that they are being presumptous. Since you seem to be an expert I stand corrected.
(even so. Have you really seen every IQ test on the internet to come to your conclusion? The web is awfully big you know.)
aasna I did mean you.
Lamia I like those kind of mistakes. They make you seem more human.
(I sometimes leave mistakes in my own posts deliberately, if they are funnier than the correct version)
We have the same number of posts!!
(until now(except when you post again))
I didn’t used to be, but it seems that every time an IQ question comes up someone has to mention online IQ tests. I’m a little tired of having to make the same point again and again.
**
I am related to and friends with quite a few genuine trained experts, but would not claim to be one myself. I don’t have a degree in psychology, and am not qualified to administer an IQ test myself. I am merely an enthusiastic amateur, although I do have the rather rare experience of having taken every major IQ test in current use in the US multiple times.
Designing and calibrating a serious IQ test is a Very Big Deal and it involves the participation of thousands of people, including many professional psychologists. If there were an online IQ test out there that even came close to approximating a professionally acceptable IQ test, I am certain it would not be hidden away in some obscure corner of the web. But if you ever think you’ve found one, feel free to send me a link. I’m perfectly willing to change my mind in the face of evidence.