I’ve tested numemous times ending up in the 150s via online, or with mensa, or by a teacher’s test in elementary school. It’s stayed pretty much consistant except for one time.
I was walking down the street in downtown Minneapolis when I was approached by a stranger on a street that asked if I wanted to take an IQ test. Well, random testing? Sounds fun. I followed him into the store front with the L Ron Hubbard books lining the shop windows and was directed to a cubicle and took the test. I managed to get a 188 on the test IIRC. Then I stuck around and got to see a film about how Mr. Hubbard was a barnstormer and I was given a vocab list for the movie so I could look up “barnstormer” lest I got confused. It was an amusing day for me.
If memory serves me well, I’ve tested in the 99th percentile for every standardised test I’ve taken.
Among those tests offering an IQ conversion, most converted my score to the 130-135 range.
I don’t rightly remember whether I’ve ever taken an actual IQ test, however.
131 when I was 14, 155 four years later (both Stanford-Binet, IIRC).
But that was 25 years ago, so I expect it’s gone back down a bit, although I did score a 151 on in internet test a few years ago.
I scrored 169 on a pen and paper IQ test that I purchased at a book store. However, a few years later I scored 123 and 130something on two different online tests. I think it has more to do with how well you know the questions that are asked than how “smart” you are.
For instance, I simply cannot do anagrams, give me a scrambled word and I’ll stare at it all day trying to make sense of it. Yet I can easily rotate complex 3d objects in my head that would stump most people, and do it in seconds.
I was never officially tested. IQ tests were given in my elementary school, but my mother objected to me being tested and the school gave me an exemption.
Her rationale was that the tests were useful for children in the very high or very low range, but not so useful for me since it was obvious I was pretty much normal.
I wasn’t the only one. If I recall, there was a lot of controversy about the test at the time and many parents didn’t want their children taking the test.
I kind of want to take the test though, just out of curiousity.
I know what it used to be, but I am pretty sure pregnancy halved it.
I got dumb as a post when I was pregnant, and I’m not sure I recovered much of what was lost.
Believe it or not, my school–a public high school in Los Angeles–admits students based solely upon scores on district-administered IQ tests. Obviously, this is ridiculous. I took the test in kindergarten, don’t remember it at all, and have never been told what I got on it (but I know it’s above 145, because otherwise I wouldn’t have gotten into the school). The whole thing seems pretty damn sketchy to me.
So, yeah, I know this stuff seems so nuts that it shouldn’t matter, but if you’re in the wrong place at the wrong time your IQ can actually affect the way you live your life. I have a 2.5-hour commute every day because of my lovely intelligence quotient.
How does knowing who wrote “Faust” determine your capacity for intelligence. That must have been Mensa, the dumbest smart society around.
Hey, wait a minute! When I tested for Mensa some 25 or so years ago, they emphasized percentile because IQ tests are not standardized! I don’t recall which specific tests I took now (I think one was Welschler or something like that, and for some reason Caifornia Test of Mental Maturity sticks in my head), but in those days you had to take two tests for Mensa and score in at least the 98th percentile on both. The first test I took I scored a supposed 158, which supposedly put me in the top 2%. The second test I scored a mere 139, which supposedly put me in the top 1%.
So, my question is, have IQ test scores become standardized in the last 25 years? Or all y’all making all your scores up?
there sure is some potential that is necessary to solve some problems but the only proof of the potential is the solution itself… you can have mechanical potential (memory, spatial reasoning) so to speak but lacking motivation… your mechanical potential is worth of nothing then… via experience you can change a lot, you can learn good habits for solving logical problems (my case)… yes some people are apparently more inteligent even when asleep (their potential is visible) and some are burried by displaying patterns of senility too soon (my case again)… show your best work you have done up to now… if you do not have anything to show strive for it… it is important… when you are asleep nobody nows how fast you are able to run…
iq tests are very limited types of tasks… it is farfetched to conclude anything from them… yes you can earn surprisingly high scores serving you as a reward if you failed to get satisfying results in any other area… if you are failing completely try something new playing chess, for example… success in chess is again limited but good source for building selfconfidence… when you are lucky you find some useful area you are the best in… beware! do not stay at chess playing even if you are the best at it!..
There is an official scale, at least as far as Mensa is concerned. But I don’t think you’re going to like it.
From Mensa’s website:
“The term “IQ score” is widely used but poorly defined. There is 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 percentile 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.”
When I applied for Mensa membership, I was told I needed at least a 138 IQ on the Stanford-Benet or Katell test, or at least a 147 IQ on the California Test of Mental Maturity. Do you know which IQ test you took, or your percentile?
to base on iq test if you are suitable for some school or work is as though they were judging you on your ability to play basketball…
Well, apparently I am getting stoopider as I age. OR, I stopped learning at age 8.
Just took an online test - 112. Eeek!
However, in elementary school I took one for the gifted program requirements (Los Angeles, natch) and was promptly whisked to the counselor’s office and into a gifted sclassroom. My mom told me I scored in the 140’s.
Also, I am dsylexic, so the whole “unscramble the letters and is it a plant or town?” questions are left blank. Crossword puzzles yes, word scrambles no.
According to one I took in the 4th grade- 155
According to the one I took my freshmen year in high school- 167
The last one I took on the internet was 171
I’m getting smarter!
-foxy
I love RickJay’s post; it was exactly what i was thinking as i opened the thread. As soon as i saw the title, i thought to myself: “Well, i can’t imagine we’ll have too many people admitting to not being geniuses.”
I’m no psychologist, and i could be way off here, but i’ll comment anyway. Having taken an IQ test (WAIS, administered one-on-one by a registered psychologist) about five years ago, and then taking the Graduate Record Exam (GRE) in order to get into grad school on the United States, it seemed to me that there wasn’t a great deal of difference between the two in many respects. That is, they were standardised tests that seemed very culturally biased and that seemed also to test for a particular type of intelligence, taking little or no account of creativity and many other important factors.
I’d be willing to bet that SATs etc. are similar (i came to the US from overseas to go to grad school, so i never took SATs).
How do all you people remember your elementary school test scores? I don’t recall ever taking the test, but I suspect I did.
I scored 65,000 on one of those internet IQ tests. The test looked amazingly like Tetris.
I gotta side with RickJay here, folks. The more scores I’m reading, the more sceptical I become. I know we’re a smart bunch here, but scores in the 150+ range are extremely rare.
The test I took was approved by the Dutch Association of Psychiatry and Psychology (so I assume it fits either the Stanford-Benet or Katell standard), and I STILL doubt whether the score is accurate. My 135 (or 137, I forget) put me in the top 2% of the Netherlands, according to the psychologist evaluating me. Now, I know I’m not dumb. But I sincerely doubt I’m in the top 2% of my country in terms of intelligence. I really do.
Before people start going apeshit over IQ scores, it is important to know just what we’re looking at here. I see a lot of people who took tests in elementary school. The Mensa UK site claims that tests under the age of 10 and a half are meaningless.
Also, from another part of that website:
[quote]
A top 2% mark in any of these frequently used tests below qualifies you for entry to Mensa. The minimum test mark to get into Mensa is:[ul][li]Cattell B - 148[]Culture Fair - 132[]Ravens Advanced Matrices - 135[]Ravens Standard Matrices - 131[]Wechsler Scales - 132[/ul][/li][/quote]
I’m assuming the Mensa lads gave it some thought, since it’s their only criterium for admission. That means that depending on the test you took, your notion that you’re in the top 2% of a specific peer group may be completely off. So what exactly is “gifted”? What tests do schools use?
I could look it up perhaps, but I don’t even know off the top of my head what type of test I took back in the day.
It’s all a rather slippery slope, this IQ business. It’s like saying you did the 100 meter dash in 8.95 seconds, and it turns out you really did 100 yards.
I’ve got either a 165, a 120, a 155 or a 150.
Actually, 100 yards in 8.95 seconds is not too shabby - you’d have been a close second to Tim Montgomery when he broke the 100m record last year. But I’m sure most contributors to this thread already worked that out in their heads.