Cate Perfect Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 Kensta recommended we have a poll to see where the IQs fall on AVEN. The problem with it is that there are more than one sort of IQ test--so the scores could vary slightly. I'm using the numbers psychologists use to identify the various levels of IQ. Mine was tested by a psychologist when I was 8 and again when I was 12 (that's the age when IQ 'stabilises'). It was 146. On the online tests I always get stupidly high (160-170). I think those tests are more for ego than accuracy. Cate Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 *shrug* I chose normal. I guess. Dunno for sure. I feel mediocre. But the other option that applies to me is "I don't care." Because I don't. I seem to function okay in everyday life. I mean. It's not like I go out and play in traffic. Link to post Share on other sites
Cate Perfect Posted April 30, 2004 Author Share Posted April 30, 2004 Right. It was a HA-UUUUGE deal when I was growing up and I never saw the point. Just another reason to put up a poll. :D Itreally doesn't matter what you have between your ears, just what you do with it, right? Cate Link to post Share on other sites
PlatonicPimp Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 As a Supposedly "Gifted" student, Yes, it only matters what you do with it. It's been four years since I got out of high school, and I my scores keep getting lower and lower as I focus on other things. Actually, I'm convinced that I scored so high in the first darn place because I charmed the hell out of the person giving the test. I find it interesting that 60% of us are in the So called "Genius" catagory. I think only people who scored well know what their IQ is. Anyone who scored below average will either lie or forget. Anyone who got average might remember, but won't care. And anyone in the 15-130 range will probably round up to seem smarter. It's pretty biased. By the way, the standard deviation for an IQ test is 15. This means, if I remember correctly, that every 15 points in either direction from the norm the amount of people in that catagory decreases by 90%. IN other words, for every 10,000 people with an IQ of 100 there should be 1,000 with an 1Q 0f 115, 100 with an IQ of 130 (MIne), 10 with an IQ of 145, and 1 with an IQ of 160. Also 1,000 with an IQ of 85, 100 with an IQ of 70, 10 with 55 and 1 with 40. At least, that how I'm told it's supposed to work. Link to post Share on other sites
snowplow Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 I really try to honor all parts of my life and exercise all parts of my being, but finding that balance is a little rough as a graduate student. But I hang in. So yeah, IQ and "academic achievement" is not everything- it's how one uses one's intellect to better one's own world and that of others that matter. Link to post Share on other sites
Cate Perfect Posted April 30, 2004 Author Share Posted April 30, 2004 I think you're right that people in the average range might not know their IQs. Where I went to school only the abnormally smart kids were even tested in the first place. They only wanted to know if you stood out from the normal people. And when I was tested I recall the person specifically telling my parents not to tell me my IQ. There were a few other kids tested and their parents wouldn't tell them. My parents didn't see what the big deal was about keeping it secret. Cate Link to post Share on other sites
snowplow Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 About the standard deviations... I am not familiar with the 90% thing that Platonic uses, but I am a cognitive psychology graduate student and thus ought to know statistics. Ought to know. *scratches head* Sorry, 10,000 is just not in my league right now, so let's say we have 100 people randomly sampled from the population. The IQ normal curve with mean 100 and standard deviation 15 would predict that 100 people would be distributed as follows: 2 would be below 70 14 would be between 70 and 85 34 would be between 85 and 100 34 would be between 100 and 115 14 would be between 115 and 130 2 would be above 130 Link to post Share on other sites
PlatonicPimp Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 Thanks, Snowplow. knew I was messing up the standard deviations somewhere. Can anyone actually define a standard deviation for me? I don't think I got it right, since it's been years since I had to do comlex math. Link to post Share on other sites
snowplow Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 It's the "typical" deviation of scores from the mean. Roughly the average deviation, but not quite, because of some mathematical tricks they pull. Say you've got the following scores: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Find the mean... 4 Subtract from each score the mean... -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Now, it wouldn't do to add these up and divide by seven to get an average deviation of scores from the mean, because they'd all add up to zero... So you square them... 9 4 1 0 1 4 9 THEN add them up and divide by seven (the number of scores, like with an average)... 28/4 is 7... Since you squared earlier, take the square root of this to "cancel out the squaring" more or less.... square root of 7, whatever that is.. Like I said, it's conceptually like an average deviation from the mean, but not quite, because the mathematicians did the squaring and square root stuff. So it's technically a "typical" deviation from the mean. Your 90 percent method might be right- there is some mathematical function involving a natural log and exponents and pi and some other jazz that equals the normal curve, but I'm too lazy to a) look it up and B) figure out if the 90 percent thing is right. If you type in normal curve on google, it'll pop up on a gazillion mathematical statistics treatises, and then I guess the thing to do is figure out if the rate of decay on either side of the mean is 90 percent per standard deviation. My brain is too full to figure that out... but my gut feeling is that the 90 percent thing might have been more a "rule of thumb" than anything else. Link to post Share on other sites
ApolloSeek Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 Editing.......By the way, the standard deviation for an IQ test is 15. This means, if I remember correctly, that every 15 points in either direction from the norm the amount of people in that catagory decreases by 90%. IN other words, for every 10,000 people with an IQ of 100 there should be 1,000 with an 1Q 0f 115, 100 with an IQ of 130 (MIne), 10 with an IQ of 145, and 1 with an IQ of 160. Also 1,000 with an IQ of 85, 100 with an IQ of 70, 10 with 55 and 1 with 40. At least, that how I'm told it's supposed to work. That's not exactly true. Assuming that IQ follows a Gaussian (bell) distribution, the percentages that lie with an interval (+ or -) are: Mean + or - 1*Standard Deviation = 68% Mean + or - 1.96*Standard Deviation = 95% Mean + or - 3*Standard Deviation = approx 100% Link to post Share on other sites
Bee Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 I've never approved of IQ tests. My answer is who cares? How do you benefit from knowing your IQ? Does it influence your self-esteem to know that you are considered intellectually average or above? It seems to me to be an intellectual snob exercise. I don't think that its positive at all! Link to post Share on other sites
whirlygirl Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 i agree with BB, I've taken Psychometric tests, and felt they don't merit the person as a whole, I don't care, in the UK there are many programmes to prove as a nation how intellectually snobbish we can be. Watch the Weakest Link!!! :shock: Link to post Share on other sites
PlatonicPimp Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 Thanks, Apolloseek. it seems you can always be counted on for the science-y answers. God, its been too long since I've done statistics. Link to post Share on other sites
Kensta Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 The current results seem interesting (if accurate), it seems like the suggested myth that asexuals might have a higher IQ than others (notice i didnt say more intellegent), i wonder why that is? Could it be that we think about intellectual stuff more of the time than sexuals, becuase they also have to think about attraction, who knows? Ben Ken Link to post Share on other sites
Jayann Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 IQ has nothing to do with "thinking about intellectual stuff." It's just a score that's supposed to measure one's capacity for certain mental tasks. It doesn't mean anything about one's education, or what one spends one's time thinking about. And, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I think the claim that asexuals have more free time and free thoughts to devote to other things is bullshit. I realize that many of my (sexual) peers here at my university are far more quick-witted than I can ever hope to be. The fact that they experience sexual attraction in no way distracts their mental processes, nor does it eat up all their free time. Furthermore, I know I have no more free time to devote to nonsexual pursuits than they do. The fact that we have some people here with high IQs, or some who are articulate writers, or some who are highly logical and scientific, does not imply a correlation between asexuality and acumen. It merely means we are the people who decided to seek out information on asexuality, and these are the abilities we happen to have. Link to post Share on other sites
fluffy_hime Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 But the other option that applies to me is "I don't care." Because I don't. I seem to function okay in everyday life. I mean. It's not like I go out and play in traffic. ::pauses on the yellow dotted line:: What? Link to post Share on other sites
Ineptitude Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 LOL Nice one, Fluffy. Ever notice how they tell you to look for cars, but never tell you not to step in front of them? I'm not sure what my IQ is. I was in the "Gifted and Talented" program in elementary school, if that means anything. We usually just played with logic puzzles and such. As far as I can remember, I've never taken an actual IQ test. The online ones vary so much that I either have moments of genius and moments of idiocy, or else they're bullhooey. Too bad they don't have an IQ-type test to measure common sense. So many highly intelligent people are just so clueless when it comes to nonacademic things. That and they have bad people skills. Hey, maybe that explains us... Link to post Share on other sites
Artemis Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 Is it usual to get your IQ done as a child in the US (or anywhere else)? It's not something I've come across here. I don't have a clue what mine is Link to post Share on other sites
Cate Perfect Posted April 30, 2004 Author Share Posted April 30, 2004 As far as I know they only test the kids that teachers recommend for testing because they seem far behind or ahead of the majority. I believe they also test people who want to enter the armed forces. I suppose they don't want anyone too smart in there. Cate Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 I'm in the gifted program at school. *Has spitballs thrown at her* They claim I'm in the top 2% of people, but it might be an error. :P What my IQ is, I dunno. Link to post Share on other sites
Gorax Posted April 30, 2004 Share Posted April 30, 2004 I took an online IQ test years ago. I was proud of my results, but then all my friends tried it and got the same thing. I don't beleive in IQ tests anymore. Link to post Share on other sites
Icarus Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 I voted for "I don't have a ****ing clue." :) Probably 110-130. No gifted/talented classes in school--I think any "giftedness" I had were of kinds that weren't recognized academically. And I'm not too big on placing emphasis on IQ either. It's too much a potential excuse for elitism, especially in light of those who might score less than 100. It's not like <100 is automatically "not as good," at least not the way I see it. Link to post Share on other sites
Vicious Trollop Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 According to IQtest.com, mine is 153. However, I thought that test was ridiculously easy - and not just because apparently I'm a genius. Example: is the word revolver spelled the same backwards and forwards? Anyone could just LOOK at the word... I've never had it professionally tested. I don't know, I think I'm pretty smart, but I don't really care what some test says about my level of intelligence. Link to post Share on other sites
Carsonspire Posted May 1, 2004 Share Posted May 1, 2004 I've had my IQ tested twice as part of admissions to my school's gifted program. The tests were eight years apart. The first time I apparently tested as gifted, which in Pennsylvania is 130 or above. The second time, I scored at least ten points below gifted. So much for scientific reproducibility. Link to post Share on other sites
Bestatued Head Posted May 12, 2004 Share Posted May 12, 2004 My I.Q., at least from the two times I took the test, was around 130-135. People are often stunned to know I had that much "common knowledge". BTW, I.Q. tests are a load of hooey, they are the workings of satanic elves. Link to post Share on other sites
Friendly Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 I never got tested, and I've never seen the tests, so I have no idea what my score would be. All I know about my mental level is that I've been reading above my level for at least 10 years, and one of my friends called me "borderline genius" recently. I don't know whether to believe him or not. Link to post Share on other sites
Silly Green Monkey Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 My sister and I were reading beyond college level since third grade. Link to post Share on other sites
Friendly Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 Cool. I don't know exactly when I started reading ahead, all I remember is that when I was in 5th grade, I managed to get through the unabridged Three Musketeers. Of course, one of my best friends has me beat out. When she was in fifth grade, SHE read Anna Karenina. ;) Link to post Share on other sites
PlatonicPimp Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 BTW, I.Q. tests are a load of hooey, they are the workings of satanic elves. yay! Satanic Elves have never steered me wrong! I never trusted my IQ score before now, but If the satanic elves say I'm a genius, then, Heck, I believe 'em! And they taste delicious! Link to post Share on other sites
Ghastly Beast Posted May 13, 2004 Share Posted May 13, 2004 From what the internet-based IQ tests indicate, I'm usually a 120-125. IQ tests are dumb. All they do is measure your ability to see various types of relationships (numeric, spatial, verbal, ect.). But there are flaws in the method in how they go about this. I don't trust them worth spit. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.