What is your Intelligents Quotient?

Post Reply New Topic

honestly, you gave away my secret stat formula..

but i was going to divide by 1.467. a commplex formula of random variables led me to that #.

but your admission of subterfuge forces me back to the drawing board. if you can please re-vote an accurate description i will ignore one of the under 110's.

one of my first posts ever was titled;
White Noise: My Background

To which Alex Developer replied about some earphones that substantially diminishes white noise and another which does the same for pink noise.

Start a thread about the topic, he will reply, and offer suitable advice.

I've taken the Wechsler on several occasions and have received between 132 and 141. So I voted between 131-140.

Well, to be honest my last test, where I scored a 146, was in 1979 and there had been no normalization in sometime.

why should one lie about a number that is to remain anonymous?

If I were to meet you face to face, and you asked me mine first, I might choose to say a higher number and lie, in order to be perceived as smart, but not in a situation like this...

Hermit,
I have never understood the need to lie.

the only time that someone should is to sleep.

Its beyond me...

i've scored 149 once, but never trusted it 100%, the lowest I scored was in the 120's, the majority (and what I voted for) was the 130-140 percentile.

Sorry danlo, I'm honestly not trying to harrass you but you keep saying things I find mindbogglingly nonsensical. And this particular comment is as pretentious, sanctimonious and cynical as it is ridiculous. Egocentricism may lead to "unintentional lying" but it can leads to faux humility too. I think you're just not feeling sporty because of the suggestion there are people here with a higher score than you.

Could this be a possibility. i would love to see them distracted by other than white noise

Good for you then. (really!) In this case it was hypothetical, a situation where it might be to one's advantage, pointing out the motivation VS. An anonymous poll, where no such advantage exists. Not directed towards anyone in particular, not even myself.

In that case I wouldn't, but I do lie to escape sometimes. It's gotten me in trouble, and I try not to, but sometimes I can't help it almost. Pathological liar? It's the definition... , but I know the situations that make me do it and I avoid them as best as possible. Having a very strong self-protective shell, being very avoidant at times, and issues with confrontation are all factors that contribute.

Bottom line...

Sometimes, I lie. I'm not proud of it and can think of very few examples where it gained me anything, as it's always to escape, not to take advantage of someone.

Regardless of why the survey results look how they do, Danlo is right in that there are major logistical problems in the survey and the results.

Here are some of the problems:
-IQ's in childhood are notoriously unreliable, and children that score high or low tend to have their scores move toward the mean as they get older.
-IQ tests have different ceilings; the ceiling is usually higher in childhood tests and on some adult tests, but tests such as the WAIS-III have lower ceilings. For instance, the WAIS-III has either a ceiling of 150 or 160, meaning if you score perfectly you will get 150 or 160 (I've heard both numbers quoted). I'd be curious to know what test the person who scored over 200 took, because that's not even possible on most tests. If person A takes a test with a ceiling over 200 and scores 165, while person B takes a test with a low ceiling (150) and scores a 150, person B probably outperformed person A but their IQ will look lower.
-IQ tests are normalized fairly regularly since people are getting better at taking IQ tests. The WAIS-R typically scored an individual about 7-8 points lower than the individual would score on the original WAIS, and the WAIS-III typically scores an individaul 7-8 points lower than the WAIS-R. Someone taking an older test will likely score higher than someone taking a newer version, even if the overall "ceiling" is the same.
-People develop test taking skills on IQ tests, so it's useless to retake the same test. Even by taking different IQ tests, if you've taken them before you're at a much greater advantage than someone who has never taken one.
-If someone has multiple IQ scores to choose from when stating their IQ, that gives them a choice in what to "count" as opposed to someone who has only taken one test.
-Sometimes people go off of internet IQ tests for their score, and internet tests almost always allow the individual to receive a high score.
-On this survey there are many possibilities for high scorers to choose from, and average and below average scores are all lumped together, making it more difficult to "map out" a realistic picture of scores. Someone scoring lower might not vote because of this, feeling the survey is only aimed at high-scorers.
-People that score high are far more likely to look at surveys like this than people who score low, because people who score low will probably feel bad seeing everyone say how high their IQ's are, since IQ scores are often used in a hierarchial fashion.


Personally I don't think IQ scores are important other than possibly determining strengths and weaknesses, though I did pretty well on the one I did take (the WAIS-III).

I tend to think that a high IQ score could mean quite a bit. Regardless of its accurateness.

Do you believe in mind over matter?

Do you believe in the power of suggestion?

Do You beilieve in the power of self worth?

Such a cute wittle avatar, too.

makes me want to cuddle up.

Durn.
In this group I'm barely two standard deviations above the mean

Last edited by Neuroman on 27 Dec 2005, 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It's like a normal distribution that curls up at the ends

My I.Q. is only 119. Does that make me a "dim bulb" among Aspies? I have a close friend I strongly suspect also has A.S. and his I.Q. is 180!