IQ

[Ice wolf]

Re: IQ

Yeah, I probably should not have posted those.

The word part was actually not too bad difficulty wise. I had to dig REALLY deep in my mind for one of the words, though. Other than that, you just had to think about the wording of the question and what it means in simpler terms.

I think the longest question had the easiest answer.

I sort of wish I had tried the sequence part of the test; I feel like I did well on the word part.

Is the newest test that Reach posted working for anyone else? I can't get it to load.

[Reach]

Re: IQ

Yeah, I probably should not have posted those.

The word part was actually not too bad difficulty wise. I had to dig REALLY deep in my mind for one of the words, though. Other than that, you just had to think about the wording of the question and what it means in simpler terms.

I think the longest question had the easiest answer.

I sort of wish I had tried the sequence part of the test; I feel like I did well on the word part.

Is the newest test that Reach posted working for anyone else? I can't get it to load.

Well, it's not like you can't try the sequence part. o_O The competition isn't over for a long time yet.

The newest test I posted seems to be having some sever issues today. It loads sometimes and not others. Just give it a chance if you're interested. It's significantly harder than the cerebrals competition.

[Ice wolf]

Re: IQ

So I can submit my personal information again? (It does not really matter to me, though. It is not as if I am going to get in the top 50 or something. :P)


Alright, the newer test loaded for me. It looks like it is going to be really fun.

[Reach]

Re: IQ

So I can submit my personal information again? (It does not really matter to me, though. It is not as if I am going to get in the top 50 or something. :P)


Alright, the newer test loaded for me. It looks like it is going to be really fun.

Oh, you jumped straight into the electronic version and submitted your answers? Silly. I know you get your results via email from the test creator, so you could probably send him an email requesting to submit the second half of the test.

And you never know. You won't win - some absurdly intelligent people submit (i.e. psychologist verified IQ over 185), but you could place fairly well.

There are only 5 scores up so far, all of which are pretty bad XD

[Ice wolf]

Re: IQ

I guess I got a little carried away. (Especially with the pdf open on the other side of my screen.)

[Mulie]

Re: IQ

Two of them, but one of them was one of answers I am not confident in - it was an inkling, but it could be wrong. These are 5 of the harder problems on the test.

12 is baffling. I also can't get anywhere with 15 or 8. If you figure out any of these I would be interested in knowing via PM.

I guess 14 is the answer you're unsure of. If you can both get an answer for 9 and postulate an answer for 14, I think it's safe to assume I won't be able to help you with any of them... Could you please PM me what you came up with for the one you solved?

I can't help but think that most of these sequences are beyond me - that I'm uselessly picking at straws, as I can't even begin to see the patterns in some of them (IE 12). D; Then again, these questions are for an ongoing online competition. Maybe I'll keep working on them when I'm bored. What do you guys think?

[Shouka]

Re: IQ

Darn. I finished early, checked over my answers, and thought I had them all right. No idea what I got wrong. =(

[Ice wolf]

Re: IQ

Darn it... Guys, I just realized that I stopped typing in all caps after a few questions for the word section of that test.

rofl

[Reach]

Re: IQ

Darn. I finished early, checked over my answers, and thought I had them all right. No idea what I got wrong. =(

I wouldn't make a sad face - you only got 2 wrong, as the maximum possible score is 145, and only 1 in 260 people score as high as you did.

However, if you really want to know what answers you got wrong, and you remember what you put, send me a PM with your answers and I can tell you.

[VegetaRobGT]

Re: IQ

My IQ is high enough to know that those online IQ tests aren't a reliable method of calculating Intelligent Quotients. Think about it- you get a QUOTIENT by dividing one number by another. The average IQ is 100. If you take all of the measurement results from a group of peoples "IQ Test" and then divide it properly- most people should be near the 100 range. The majority of people who take this test seem to score much higher. Also- INTELLIGENCE is your CAPACITY TO LEARN. Some RANDOM APTITUDE TEST, that measures a very select group of possible intellectual skills- is hardly adequate. --If you must know I've had a real legit mental evaluation, and scored way above average in everything (without even trying because I was so depressed and nervous at the time.) Know what IQ means before you try to brag about it- there are many different skills and trades in the world.

[xjouve]

Re: IQ

Hi guys

Shrewd bastard.

I did beat you by 3 points, but I should point out that the ceiling is 145. If you're at all familiar with a ceiling effect, you'll know it depresses scores that come too close to it.

As such, your IQ could be higher than that.

http://www.cerebrals.org/tests/tri/TRI52.html

You could try that test. It's the only one with psychometric value on the internet capable of measuring high IQ. It is incredibly hard (I felt the need to warn you). Even then, the ceiling of this test is about 164 (SD 15). Beyond that, you're essentially alone. Issac Newton, Galileo Galilei...the Unabomber. Go put that brain to good use.

Thanks for sharing. Well, I won't call it an 'IQ test' btw. A 'reasoning test' makes more sense to me; even though inductive reasoning is pretty close to g. Anyway, talking about 'IQ' is language-abusive: the acronym itself (for clinical use) tends to disappear; most of the recently revised/prepared cognitive ability scales use 'indexes'.

Interestingly, on very difficult tests like this, how long you take doesn't seem to matter (assuming you continue until you start having problems). It seems that once you reach your capacity cap, you start to get too many wrong for it to matter how long you spend.

Apparently true.

For those that are interested:

http://www.cerebrals.com/tests/cpic/CEREBRALS%20SOCIETY%20INTERNATIONAL%20CONTEST.pdf

I breezed through the verbal items in a few minutes. I found them simple, though I am unsure of one of the answers.

The number sequences are more difficult. I can't seem to solve a number of them...actually, some of them are highly difficult. I haven't spent much time trying to solve them yet though.

Verbal items are designed to be trivial. Last contest was made of sequences only, but this time I wished to make it more attractive.
Nevertheless, I hope the difference in rankings to be chiefly a matter of reasoning score.

I'm interested. =)

I see what you mean about the number section. Here are the first five I couldn't solve in fiveish minutes each:

8. 12345, 423, -12, ( ?)
9. 12, 1314, 13271329, ( ?)
12. 77, 16.5, 1414, 33, 88888, ( ?), ( ?)
14. 311165, 21143, 1121, 0, 2112, 43112, ( ?), ( ?)
15. 12345, 12345, 21354, 52341, 12345, 54321, ( ?), ( ?)

I think I could solve 9, 14 and 15 with more time.

The vocab part is trivial; you fill out what you know and can't help the others. Writers, or people with experience in literature, have a big advantage.

edit:

Those are two questions I couldn't answer. Gn___ was foggy in my mind - I've seen the word maybe three times in my life - and Ch___ is a word I've never heard.

Could you please don't discuss items? I please you not to do so, publicly or privately. It's a matter of respect. Anyway, brainstroming surely helps, but only up to a certain point...

Darn it... Guys, I just realized that I stopped typing in all caps after a few questions for the word section of that test.

rofl

Guess I got you.

And you never know. You won't win - some absurdly intelligent people submit (i.e. psychologist verified IQ over 185), but you could place fairly well.

Nah; not too much. The winner of the last contest (who is someone with stratospheric level of general cognitive ability) may not participate this time. The place is to be taken...

Well, I must say; this is a contest for fun guys; not an 'IQ test'. Kind of food for your brain.

Have fun.

[Reach]

Re: IQ

Hey Xavier. Thanks for the information.

Hopefully nobody else will discuss answers here, though it's nice to see people giving the contest a try, since it's fairly fun.

Well, I must say; this is a contest for fun guys; not an 'IQ test'. Kind of food for your brain.

I would assume it correlates highly with 'IQ' or 'g' fairly well anyway, no? It resembles in part the CCAT. Such item types seem like they would be a reasonable measure of these things.

I'm going to assume you won't be giving score -> IQ conversions then.


Also,

My IQ is high enough to know that those online IQ tests aren't a reliable method of calculating Intelligent Quotients. Think about it- you get a QUOTIENT by dividing one number by another. The average IQ is 100. If you take all of the measurement results from a group of peoples "IQ Test" and then divide it properly- most people should be near the 100 range. The majority of people who take this test seem to score much higher. Also- INTELLIGENCE is your CAPACITY TO LEARN. Some RANDOM APTITUDE TEST, that measures a very select group of possible intellectual skills- is hardly adequate. --If you must know I've had a real legit mental evaluation, and scored way above average in everything (without even trying because I was so depressed and nervous at the time.) Know what IQ means before you try to brag about it- there are many different skills and trades in the world.

Indeed, about 68% of people will score between 85 and 115, but this only applies to a randomly sampled group of people. Scores posted here are subject to sample bias - 1. Stupid people aren't going to take the test, and 2. Only people that scored highly are going to post their scores. So of course most of the scores are high.

Also, it's not really a random aptitude test - Ravens Progressive Matrices is a fairly commonly used test in professional practice, as far as I know. Scores it in correlate with scores from other tests like the WAIS that test you on a wide variety of topics.

However, obviously, Mensa Denmark hasn't posted any of the data on the test, so it's impossible to say how valid or not valid this particular variant is.

[mhss1992]

Re: IQ

Well, most IQ tests I do can only measure up to 140 or 160 IQ, and I often get maximum score, so...

[xjouve]

Re: IQ



Yep you're right. Actually, these sequences are quite good at assessing general cognitive functioning level.

I've already worked with this type of items for the publication of a psychometric instrument which is now restricted for clinical use. If I correctly understand, you've taken courses in psychometrics, so I assume you know a part of the tests that are used in psychology. So, this type of items correlates pretty well with Raven's, Cattell's, Wechsler's, Slosson's, etc.

By the way, preparing items is only a small part in the whole process of psychometric test 'building'. I'm no longer a college researcher, and I've stopped my psychologist office for working in a completely different area. That is to say I don't have money and time to supervise field-testing (for validity studies for instance). Also, I don't have the time to perform item analyses, such as IRT or MDS to discard/revised faulty items.

I'm obviously not a beginner in psychological tests design, but I'm not a sorcerer/wizard. Perhaps I did a perfect job, but even if I did, both the reliability and the validity of a questionnaire must be checked prior to draw conclusions.

Hey Xavier. Thanks for the information.

Hopefully nobody else will discuss answers here, though it's nice to see people giving the contest a try, since it's fairly fun.



I would assume it correlates highly with 'IQ' or 'g' fairly well anyway, no? It resembles in part the CCAT. Such item types seem like they would be a reasonable measure of these things.

I'm going to assume you won't be giving score -> IQ conversions then.


Also,



Indeed, about 68% of people will score between 85 and 115, but this only applies to a randomly sampled group of people. Scores posted here are subject to sample bias - 1. Stupid people aren't going to take the test, and 2. Only people that scored highly are going to post their scores. So of course most of the scores are high.

Also, it's not really a random aptitude test - Ravens Progressive Matrices is a fairly commonly used test in professional practice, as far as I know. Scores it in correlate with scores from other tests like the WAIS that test you on a wide variety of topics.

However, obviously, Mensa Denmark hasn't posted any of the data on the test, so it's impossible to say how valid or not valid this particular variant is.

[Reach]

Re: IQ

Indeed, I've taken courses in psychometrics and some higher level statistics. I'm familiar with Item response theory and multidimensional analysis.

I'm obviously not a beginner in psychological tests design, but I'm not a sorcerer/wizard

There for a bit I thought you might have been

Indeed, obviously working on tests like this takes a lot of time, and that time you do spend is appreciated by those that take the tests.

Personally, I am rather interested in the Figure Design test.