What is your IQ?

Post Reply New Topic

Because IQ tests weren't designed to evaluate overall intelligence. General intelligence and academic achievement are correlated because "general intelligence" would have been measured by IQ tests in the first place. But people forget that when IQ tests were first invented they were only ever intended to provide a prediction for future academic success. The sheer variety of different types of IQ tests, and different definitions of "intelligence" around today is a clear indication that a single test cannot be a valid measure of the concept of human "intelligence".

Realistically, there is no accurate measure for general/overall "intelligence" - only academic intelligence.



Most tests seem to use standard deviation of 15; therefore, a score of 130 is 2 standard deviations above the mean. The mean is always 100 by definition.[/quote]

Ok, faulty memory playing up again, my apologies. My cold must be interfering with my brain, because I should have said 2 standard deviations (not 3), and I also noted that the percentage should be more closely approximated to 2% (as the 2.5% mark is 1.96 standard deviations away from the mean).

My playful self still says that it's obvious my GENERAL INTELLIGENCE has dropped since having my second child. But in all honesty, I do believe "Placenta Brain" is real. Then after you have kids, when you are wounded where most men would hospitalize themselves for months, women go home within 24-48 hours and then sleep every other hour or so as a newborn needs to eat every 2 hours. This goes on for about 3 months (not days of sleep deprivation, but months) before you can start seeing maybe 4-6 hours of sleep at a time. The more kids you have, the less sleep you will see. MInd you that in that 3 months, you were bleeding more than a fresh gun shot wound for the first 6 weeks. Meanwhile, its takes 4 years to replenish all the nutrients (fully heal) from childbirth, and some women like myself have a second and third kid before that 4 years happens. So, we do get a little more "stupid" for a while after having kids, not because our kids really stole our brain cells, but because of a variety of things. I can easily see how it would take years to replenish nutrients as well as taking years of normal sleep to undo the effects of that kind of sleep deprivation. We are not talking no mere Marine Corps Crucible or Navy Seals Hell Week...no this is much harder on the mind and body...this is motherhood.

As far as the IQ test being a predictive measure with academic achievement... First off, why call it the Intelligence Quotient when it's not even about that? I can only assume back in the day that book smart was considered highly intelligent. Maybe it still is and all the people who fell below the average was like, "yeah, I might be stupid when it comes to school work, but I'm street smart." But as far as predicting success in school, it reminds me of the movie Mean Girls. The blonde friend who is really dumb can predict the weather with her boobs. Well, her boobs will tell you when it's already raining. Then you see her in the end standing in the rain with an umbrella saying there's an x% chance that it's already raining. Considering most of the questions on the IQ test are about things taught in school, I would say you would score high if you are already successful in school (already learning and paying attention). Maybe it was just the first version of the CTBS and WESTEST.

I do think there has to be a way to measure general intelligence when we decide to agree on what that would consist of, because it's obvious some people are better at somethings than others, but I don't think it should be treated like low scores don't stand a chance of improvement as much as to help identify areas that need improvement for your own records. In addition, if that test was written well enough, it could possibly help factor different disorders when in context with the person (for instance, an Aspie will probably score lower in certain areas such as social intelligence or something to that effect, but that wouldn't mean a low score would say you are Aspie as much as just becoming one extra consideration in the diagnosis).

Either way, people still use the IQ test. Your results can determine if you get to be in regular school or special education. Once I tutored this kid who was diagnosed ADHD, and his IQ was 70. Math was one of his weakest subjects. He was in 7th grade special education, and within an couple hours, I had him doing basic functions (addition, subtraction, etc.) in binary code. Doesn't sound like a 70 IQ to me. Well, he actually didn't have ADHD. His mom always gave him his meds before school (where his behavior was at its worst), and then when he got home, she didn't give him any meds and he was always an angel. So, I pointed her to a better shrink (one of the best in town working with children), and I know she took him off those meds, and maybe prescribed something different with a different diagnosis, but either way, last I heard, he was back in regular classes making straight A's. I'm sure his IQ would reflect that as well. To me, a low IQ score indicates a problem that needs solved (whether it can be solved or not is a different story), but the general population seems to misuse those scores IMO consistently.

As a child I was told I tested with a borderline genius IQ.

In my 20's I took a test for a job interview and I tested in the 155ish range....above average.

I agree that the word intelligence has no proper definition. When you first mentioned general intelligence, because there is no adequate verbal definition of it, I assumed you were referring to g. I think the word intelligence should be discarded in this case, and this is what many psychometricians would concur with. The word also comes with a large amount of baggage, such that discussing it can be like handling highly combustible materials.

However, when you say that the tests can only accurately measure academic intelligence, this is not the case. Like you said, the tests were originally designed to measure scholastic abilities, but what was found was that even if you broaden the tests to include as wide a variety as possible of cognitive/mental ability measures, the individual mental abilities are still correlated.

Scores in very diverse cognitive areas such as spatial, musical, mathematical, object recognition, memory, and verbal ability are found to be correlated. Tests such as the Raven matrices even exclude verbal, mathematical and other such components associated with school, and are found to be highly g-loaded. In addition, some tests involving elementary cognitive tasks (which exclude specific skills) show a correlation with IQ. These tests cannot be described as measuring academic intelligence, but something underlying all cognitive variables.

What always emerges in the general population is the common, general factor, named g, (and this is similarly the case with athletic ability; a general factor emerges). This is why measuring IQ is useful for detecting neuropsych. problems. And, as long as the various IQ tests have high g loading, they can differ in regard to which individual variables/mental abilities are measured.

Because the cognitive abilities such tests are tapping into involve problem-solving, judgement, reasoning, perceiving relationships, reaction time etc., they would be expected to have an impact on many areas of life, not just the narrow area of academic achievement. Not surprisingly, correlations have been found with a number of other societal measures, some of which are causally related to g. Therefore, what underlies academic performance also underlies diverse aspects of life. However, this is by no means saying that there are not other, extremely important, variables that contribute and interact in those specific areas.

Yes, I wasn't referring to g, but I see where you're coming from. I was a bit "past heavy" in my original post because it suited the point I was trying to make.

There is a problem with the definition of the word "intelligence" - and I think most people who take IQ tests have the wrong definition in their head. I personally disagree with current theories that try to categorize intelligence into 7 categories, then calculate an overall g factor by averaging scores, because I personally believe intelligence is more fluid than that and in truth the categories should also be fluid and not divided (sort of like the ASD spectrum, hahaha). I think the theory of "fluid" and "crystallized" intelligence is pretty spot on though, (where crystallized intelligence consists of your inbuilt knowledge - you memory, and fluid intelligence is your 'motor' intelligence like how quick you are at solving problems), because it doesn't categorize intelligence according to outward "types" or social typing, but categorizes intelligence according to brain function.

:D
yeah, I attribute my increase in scatter-brainedness to managing an ADHD child. I laugh about it because it seems like such a recipe for disaster (AS mom, ADHD kid). it's a good thing she's cute. she wears me out, but as she gets older, my brain cells seem to be growing back.

I did take a couple of extra years off for what in hindsight seems like a long series of meltdowns, because I didn't realize a spouse could actually become more abusive and damaging after the divorce for the sake of revenge. silly me.

So 2% voted 200+ lol
This is what's wrong with these polls. The odds that anyone who voted is actually above 140 are slim.

Yeah, I'm kinda in a similar boat. I think my child is Aspergers, but her overactive qualities make her appear ADHD, so similar recipe for disaster...also my kids are 1, 2, and one on the way, oh, and the husband is 24 so that puts him right at 16-17 in man years. So, I got my work cut out for me, and I don't foresee anywhere, not logically, not psychic, not on my palm, that I will ever grow back any lost brain matter. I'm sure it's about to get worse before it gets any better, but hey, ignorance is bliss right?

I was truthful. I know that my IQ is above 90, but I don't have an actual number. The last test I did online I got 99. It was a test I had to receive my answer through e-mail, so it wasn't one of those phone or Facebook ones.

Well that's a believable score. Apparently, it's more common to have an IQ of 160-169 than be underaverge here lol

If it asks for your email doesn't that just mean they'll put you on a list for spam?

They wanted me to buy the whole report of my IQ test, but I just wanted the score. Didn't think about the spam thing. Might explain a few things.

Yeah I hate when they ask for email and then ask you to buy the full report because you know you will get unwanted emails now. What I hate the most is the facebook phone one because it keeps telling me what my friends scored on it, including my husband who never took it, meaning it probably tells all my friends some phony score that I scored. Since I'm pretty competitive with some of my friends on facebook, I will be highly upset if they have me down with a score lower than what I had when I took the test in a standardized form, and I'm sure they have me at much lower than that. I should be able to sue for defamation of character.

Yes. If I were to take a test that relied heavily on cultural and similarly acquired knowledge I'd be pretty stuffed because, while I have grown up in this society, I've really been existing in my own "little" world.

My general knowledge sucks for reasons mostly not related to intelligence.

EDIT: Dammit, I'm using the i-word again.

I don't know my IQ but i doubt that anyone on this forum or in the world has an IQ of 0 haha

well i picked the 140 - 149 bracket.
this is because i took a test online some years ago that told me my IQ was in this range.
i want it to be known that i have not taken an oficial test and proper conditions.
I would like to take a properly conducted test some day but the problem for the time being is my depression. It leaves my mind heavily clouded.