[QUOTE=Jet Jaguar]
On the radio show “Loveline”, whenever they ask a caller’s height and/or weight, they do “radio math” to arrive at what their probable actual height and weight are. They knock a couple of inches off the height and add a dozen or so pounds of weight, depending on how the caller responds to other questioning.
[/QUOTE]
Makes me wish Adam was still on that show…does Drew still do the radio math?
[QUOTE=Secret Volcano Lair]
Makes me wish Adam was still on that show…does Drew still do the radio math?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know, I stopped listening shortly after he left.
Back from IQ over to OP… Flossing. Most people claim to “floss regularly” but somehow manage to still have that same, little, free pack of floss their dentist gave them, untouched by their next apointment.
[QUOTE=Staggerlee]
Also, I remember when studying psychometric testing in college that as well as measuring say introversion/extroversion or neurosis/psychosis, they would have a batch of questions specifically designed to identify lying, so candidates would come out with a ‘Lie’ score which could be taken into account at the end. I can’t remember the questions to test lying, but I think they tended to include implausibly virtuous characteristics which people would ‘own up’ to having.
[/QUOTE]
I was able once to ask the test-giver which ones where the questions where I’d been marked as a liar.
Turns out I’d told the truth in all three of them - d’oh 
Cellphone, “once a year” is regularly. I ain’t flossed in my life (in Europe it’s generally Not Done) - that’s regular too, ain’t it?
[QUOTE=MaxTheVool]
I see what you’re saying, and I certainly don’t take 190 or 188 all that seriously. BUT, 135?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t doubt we have some 135s. I was using that as an example of how inflated the scores are. There seems to be this misunderstanding that IQ score distribution isn’t a very dramatic bell curve, that there’s lots of people along the scale right up to Marilyn vos Savant. There’s not. Cervaise’s 135 is about where I’d expect most of the smartest Dopers to be because that’s about the point at which higher scores are (a) excedingly rare and (b) less statistically reliable.
No, but is there any reason they would be? Very few people, relatively speaking, post regularly on this message board. None of the very smartest people I know are on this board.
I’m sure we have spome smart folks, but IQ score is something people exaggerate or misrepresent to an absurd degree, really.
You’d think the smarter ones would have, you know, jobs. 
Curious, I’ve not researched these things (or really cared that much either) but aren’t there probably several IQ tests and scales that people would be referencing? Certainly there’s not just a single standard and everyone participating in an equivalent, normalized process.
The one I took was when I was a youth, probably back in the late 60s or early 70s. I’d expect it’s range to vary somewhat from ones developed later or possibly even from subsequent iterations of the same test.
As for the OP, I either had a 149 or a 147. I can’t remember which so I choose to list the smaller number.
My guess is that the range in reporting may have as much to due with legitimate scales variances as with someone fudging. There’s some tres smart folks here and I’ve no problem with falling in under their statistical ranges. It’s not like it’s worth compromising your integrity over.
Seriously, it’s quite possible to know comparatively you’re no dummy, for that to be enough and, therefore, to be so unenamored with a number so as to actually remain truthful to it.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
I’d bet that I - an honor student, winner of a scholarship and offered money by schools I didn’t stoop to going to, graduate of an extremely well regarded university - was usually one of the 2 or 3 smartest kids in any senior high school class, which gives me an IQ in the general vicinity of 115 to 125. And I’m self reporting, so take that with a grain of salt, because I’m uncomfortable claiming it THAT high. I’m leaning to 115. Unimpressive? I’m still claiming to be a full standard deviation above the norm, so you should still be skeptical.
[/QUOTE]
Well, IQ is a funny thing. People with high IQs are not necessarily honor student’s, win scholarships, get offered $$ to go to school, etc.
I know this with certainty because:
a) I’ve never been an honor student, won scholarships, been offered $$
b) I have a very high (by your description) IQ
I was tested about 4 years ago and my IQ was 138. I did a WAIS - Wechsler Adult Inelegance Scale - the full 3 hour test with the blocks, and the math-in-the-head problem solving, and the word definitions, etc, etc. Administered by a PhD in Psychology. Not on the internet. 138. This was not particularly surprising because in elementary school I was put in remedial spelling and they had to run a battery of tests to determine how “dumb” I was to devise a plan. After the tests I was taken out of remedial spelling and put in the “Smart Kid” enrichment IEP program. End result - I’m still a crap speller, but I know how a court case with the characters of Little Red Riding Hood would play out.
I’m willing to bet $50 that NOBODY on these boards would have guessed that. Most people probably don’t believe me. I’m certainly not touted as being a “super-smart poster.” Some people have actually called me stupid.
So, the point I’m trying to make is that IQ doesn’t actually translate into "Wow - s/he’s super-smart!"itude all the time. Furthermore, a high IQ doesn’t mean that a person is going to get a PhD and cure cancer. I have a BA. It took me 10 years to get it. I have a slightly higher than average income but I’m not the queen of the world.
I agree that when people are posting that their IQ’s are in the 170s or 180’s or 200s that skepticism is warranted. I’m sure a lot of these scores were obtained on online “Test Your IQ” sites. However, posting history isn’t necessarily indicative of IQ.
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
I agree that when people are posting that their IQ’s are in the 170s or 180’s or 200s that skepticism is warranted. I’m sure a lot of these scores were obtained on online “Test Your IQ” sites. However, posting history isn’t necessarily indicative of IQ.
[/QUOTE]
Gosh, I would never, ever try to guess someone’s IQ from their posting history. Someone may seem smart, but that’s not something you can attach a specific number to. And I certainly am not saying all high IQ folks did well in school, although there’s a strong correlation to it (people on the boards have actually claimed there’s an inverse correlation, which is absurd.)
Like I said I don’t doubt we have some smart folks, I’m just saying that IQ is something statistical that people exaggerate.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
Gosh, I would never, ever try to guess someone’s IQ from their posting history.
[/QUOTE]
No, I know. Just upthread you alluded to specific numbers cited by specific posters with specific scores - ie Coldfire, 135, seems pretty smart - and I agreed with you, but then it occurred to me that I don’t come across as a particularly smart poster so there you go.
I guess I was just responding to your post outside of the context of the thread - however, your point that 115 is still an entire SD above the mean and people were calling 115 “dumb” was a very good one.
That might be an interesting exercise for a totally different thread, on a totally different message board, in a parallel universe. Estimated IQ based on posting history vs. actual tested IQ. Well, I think it would be interesting.
[QUOTE=Swallowed My Cellphone]
Back from IQ over to OP… Flossing. Most people claim to “floss regularly” but somehow manage to still have that same, little, free pack of floss their dentist gave them, untouched by their next apointment.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t use the dentist’s floss because it’s the wrong kind - I like my waxed mint floss, of a particular brand. I will put the dentist floss in the car for emergency flossing, mind you.
[QUOTE=featherlou]
I don’t use the dentist’s floss because it’s the wrong kind - I like my waxed mint floss, of a particular brand. I will put the dentist floss in the car for emergency flossing, mind you.
[/QUOTE]
And what, prey tell, constitutes a “flossing emergency?” Popcorn consumption?
[QUOTE=alice_in_wonderland]
And what, prey tell, constitutes a “flossing emergency?” Popcorn consumption?
[/QUOTE]
You know how you get something stuck in your teeth and you can’t leave it alone so you work at it with your tongue until it’s sore? That’s a flossing emergency. 
Came up on a vanity search:
[QUOTE=RickJay]
Cervaise’s 135 is about where I’d expect most of the smartest Dopers to be
[/QUOTE]
Don’t recall ever posting any IQ claims. (Don’t recall ever owning a droid, either. ;)) I mean, I don’t know if this was intended as a compliment or what, since I didn’t follow the thread, but
BTW, the rule is to knock off five IQ points for every smiley…
RickJay, I wonder if you realize that you’ve in essence called a number of people here, many if not all of whom are probably innocent of such an accusation, “liars.” The absurdness and inappropriateness of such an assertion aside, I sincerely hope in the future you’ll restict such wide sweeping accusations to merely wide sweeping accusations which don’t unfairly implicate innocent individuals, wholly disregarding any specific instances that might be considered, you know, “justification”.
Numbers don’t follow your preconceived notions? Fine. Make a generalized statement. Have specific examples of deceit? Fine. Include them as well. Brand some folks who’s intent was little other than being forthcoming as “dishonest” and you’re not only being dead wrong but a jerk as well.
I hope your intent was something less malicious. I rather liked thinking well of you before and would prefer some inane incident not cause that perception to be inaccurate.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
Plausible, perhaps, but I don’t think there can be as many as have been claimed. An IQ of 160 is enjoyed by only about 1 in 10,000 people; the SDMB probably does not have 10,000 regular participating members (more than that have signed up but I’d guess the vast majority are inactive.)
Even if we assume SDMB members trend above 100, and even granting that self-reporting will tend to draw out the people with high scores, the number of really huge IQs presented in the “What’s your IQ” thread defy rational belief. Here are a list of actual claims and the approximate frequency with which such IQs occur in the population on the Stanford-Binet scale (I am taking the lowest number cited if someone cited more than one, and disregarding reports of childhood tests.)
Nichol_storm, 147 (1 in 600)
lieu, 147 (1 in 600)
Cyrin, 151 (1 in 1400)
Lute Skywatcher, 190 (1 in 100,000,000)
CRorex, 188 (1 in 52,000,000)
ultrafilter, 157 (1 in 5,400)
Angel of the Lord, 160 (1 in 11,000)
tracer, 148 (1 in 741)
Meros, 165 (1 in 40,000)
LifeOnWry, 157 (1 in 5,400)
Coldfire, 135 (1 in 70)
Chimera, 162 (1 in 19,000)
I don’t believe it. Not all of it. It just cannot be.
[/QUOTE]
Please note that mine was only an estimate. All I know for sure is that I was off the upper end of the chart of whatever test it was that I took in high school.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
Chimera, 162 (1 in 19,000)
I don’t believe it. Not all of it. It just cannot be.
[/QUOTE]
Tested in elementary school, in high school, just after high school (1980) and in my late 20’s, always in the 160 range.
Back in 2002 I went through a Career Assessment Thingy run by the University of Minnesota Psychology Department. I think it was half to help you figure out what careers would work best for you, half for them to collect data and see how that all worked out. This process included an IQ test.
Result: 175.
The problem is that Intelligence is NOT the opposite of Stupidity. It’s quite easy for extremely intelligent people to be stupid too, as my own life well demonstrates. Not an Intelligence vs. Wisdom thing either. No, there’s just no guarantee in life that great intelligence means that you will always be able to figure things out, that you will be a success in life, that you will never make mistakes or that you will never be a complete fucking moron from time to time.
[QUOTE=lieu]
RickJay, I wonder if you realize that you’ve in essence called a number of people here, many if not all of whom are probably innocent of such an accusation, “liars.”
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, it did come across that way and wasn’t meant to. I’m not accusing any individual of lying, merely saying that on the aggregate IQ is a number that’s frequently exaggerated - usually, I think, inadvertently. I don’t think people realize that juvenile testing, online testing, “Test Your IQ” books and stuff like that don’t correctly predict the actual IQ of an adult, nor do they realize how unlikely extremely high scores are (and so don’t think to be skeptical if a less-than-rigorously-applied test pops out a high number.) Given enough estimates, I’d take a bet on each one being a full standard deviation too high, and given enough of a sample size and some magical way to get free, scientifically administered IQ testing, I’d win a lot more than I lost.
However, citing names definitely made it sound like I was accusing people of being liars, and that was the wrong thing to do, and I apologize for doing that.
Then you really do fit the scholar and gentleman role rather nicely. Thank you.
[QUOTE=Arien]
Is it this thread: What’s your IQ?
[/QUOTE]
ha! I just looked through that and realized I posted to that thread. My answer was a joke. At least, I assume it was a joke. Even I don’t get what the hell I was referencing which kinda makes it funnier.