High Level Intelligence Test
I am pretty sure 5-3 is (4,23),(5,22) and I suppose 5-4 might be (16,4),(16,4) - a point, not line.
I have no idea whats up with 5-2.
I didn't want to spoil the test but I guess I can now give some of my answers.
I also have (4,23)(5,22) for 5.3 but I don't think that the point is the answer for 5.4, because they ask for a line. My answer is (19,11)(19,9). And I think 5.2 is (7,9)(7,5).
[...]
Really? 600-800 hours? When they professionally tested me, it took maybe 30 minutes. Of course, then they couldn't determine my IQ and said, "We at least know you're not stupid." -_-
(granted, how much credit can I give to someone who said, "You shouldn't even exist" because I'm a logical and creative thinker?)
_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200
I am pretty sure 5-3 is (4,23),(5,22) and I suppose 5-4 might be (16,4),(16,4) - a point, not line.
I have no idea whats up with 5-2.
I didn't want to spoil the test but I guess I can now give some of my answers.
I also have (4,23)(5,22) for 5.3 but I don't think that the point is the answer for 5.4, because they ask for a line. My answer is (19,11)(19,9). And I think 5.2 is (7,9)(7,5).
You are right about the 5.2, (7,9)(7,5) makes perfect sense! I was sure it has to be some kind of cut line but I tried to make the parts symmetrical, not a sequence and I got stuck because it wasn't possible.
But I still wonder about 5.4.
Edit: I checked and apparently (19,11)(19,9) is indeed correct for 5.4 (score increased). Now I have to think about WHY. LOL
[...]
Really? 600-800 hours? When they professionally tested me, it took maybe 30 minutes. Of course, then they couldn't determine my IQ and said, "We at least know you're not stupid." -_-
(granted, how much credit can I give to someone who said, "You shouldn't even exist" because I'm a logical and creative thinker?)
It is just simple not to take a lot of what he says seriously. It seems that the 600-800 hours have no evidence to back it. A thorough wechsler IQ test takes maybe four hours.
[...]
Really? 600-800 hours? When they professionally tested me, it took maybe 30 minutes. Of course, then they couldn't determine my IQ and said, "We at least know you're not stupid." -_-
(granted, how much credit can I give to someone who said, "You shouldn't even exist" because I'm a logical and creative thinker?)
It is just simple not to take a lot of what he says seriously. It seems that the 600-800 hours have no evidence to back it. A thorough wechsler IQ test takes maybe four hours.
I figured 600-800 was an overexaggeration, but 4 hours is still far longer than the one they had me take. I feel cheated now.
_________________
Your Aspie score: 171 of 200
Your Neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 40 of 200
I am pretty sure 5-3 is (4,23),(5,22) and I suppose 5-4 might be (16,4),(16,4) - a point, not line.
I have no idea whats up with 5-2.
I didn't want to spoil the test but I guess I can now give some of my answers.
I also have (4,23)(5,22) for 5.3 but I don't think that the point is the answer for 5.4, because they ask for a line. My answer is (19,11)(19,9). And I think 5.2 is (7,9)(7,5).
You are right about the 5.2, (7,9)(7,5) makes perfect sense! I was sure it has to be some kind of cut line but I tried to make the parts symmetrical, not a sequence and I got stuck because it wasn't possible.
But I still wonder about 5.4.
Edit: I checked and apparently (19,11)(19,9) is indeed correct for 5.4 (score increased). Now I have to think about WHY. LOL
I'm not sure if my explanation is the good one, but as it seems to produce the right answer, here it is (if you want to know)
Imagine that :
-the vertical rectangles are poles, viewed from the side
-the triangles and circles are the same poles, viewed from the top
-each pole carry one ultra-thin sign, seen as a horizontal rectangle on the profile view
By looking from the top, one can tell the orientation of the signs carried by the triangular poles while it's not possible to do so with the round poles unless a distinctive sign is appended, hence the dot.
I am pretty sure 5-3 is (4,23),(5,22) and I suppose 5-4 might be (16,4),(16,4) - a point, not line.
I have no idea whats up with 5-2.
I had (16,4) (16,4) for 5.4 also, but I guessed that this answer was probably wrong. I'm going back and looking at why the answers are what they are for the ones I missed.
_________________
You don't need to hide, my friend, for I am just like you.
Now that I see what the answers to section 5 are, I was way overcomplicating things, something I do a lot on tests.
_________________
You don't need to hide, my friend, for I am just like you.
Last edited by jimmyboy76453 on 02 Jun 2015, 7:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[...]
Really? 600-800 hours? When they professionally tested me, it took maybe 30 minutes. Of course, then they couldn't determine my IQ and said, "We at least know you're not stupid." -_-
(granted, how much credit can I give to someone who said, "You shouldn't even exist" because I'm a logical and creative thinker?)
It is just simple not to take a lot of what he says seriously. It seems that the 600-800 hours have no evidence to back it. A thorough wechsler IQ test takes maybe four hours.
I figured 600-800 was an overexaggeration, but 4 hours is still far longer than the one they had me take. I feel cheated now.
There are various IQ tests. Some take longer than others. Some are more thorough than others. Some have scores that count less compared to others. I would estimate the if all kinds of intelligences were to be tested it might take a total of 16 to 20 hours split amongst three or four sessions. Wechsler for example only tests spacial intelligence, logical intelligence, comprehensive intelligence and processing speed. These intelligences are only useful in the academic field regarding natural sciences (maths, physics, biology, chemistry, geography, meteorology) and linguistics. Other tests exist to measure creative intelligence, emotional intelligence, bodily intelligence (sports related), musical intelligence, social (intrapersonal) intelligence as well as the controversial naturalistic and spiritual intelligences. Scholars are still on unclear grounds about these things since some argue that intelligence is only general and describes cognitive ability while others argue that there are multiple intelligences.
I would like to say that the test doesn't necessarily measure intelligence as it requires a certain foundation in education to correctly do it. So I wouldn't necessarily count it as effective as it only measures the ability of those who fulfill the prerequisites. So it will actually first differentiate once the cognitive ability of the testee is at a certain level.
Forget the tests, I freaked out mensa 30 years ago got 169 on 2nd test, it means nothing ...if you are HFA you will be 140-170 on the pattern re conization .... intelligence mixed with zero social skills etc... been there donethat.. it is normal...for earth... luckily i do have a space ship that works... ![]()
You scored 169, yet here you are presenting a version of the tired old "autistic people are geniuses." Forget the tests indeed.
Here is what I got (had to cut and paste this from word):
CFNSE
Culture Fair Numerical & Spatial Exam
Your balanced score is 0
This table shows CFNSE performance and portion of the population outscored.
Keep in mind that "Balanced score" is not the same as "number of correct answers".
Performance: General Pop: Within age group (Age in years when taking test): Within sex:
Balanced score: Adults: 16-17 18-30 31-33 34-36 37-39 40-42 43-45 46-48 49-51 52-54 ≥55 Male Female
0 <98,0% <98,3% <97,9% <97,9% <98,0% <98,1% <98,2% <98,4% <98,6% <98,8% <99,00% <99,14% <97,1% <98,8%
1 98,0% 98,3% 97,9% 97,9% 98,0% 98,1% 98,2% 98,4% 98,6% 98,8% 99,00% 99,14% 97,1% 98,8%
2 99,08% 99,23% 99,00% 99,01% 99,06% 99,12% 99,20% 99,29% 99,39% 99,49% 99,57% 99,63% 98,6% 99,53%
3 99,52% 99,60% 99,48% 99,48% 99,51% 99,54% 99,59% 99,64% 99,69% 99,75% 99,79% 99,82% 99,22% 99,79%
4 99,63% 99,69% 99,59% 99,60% 99,61% 99,64% 99,68% 99,72% 99,76% 99,80% 99,84% 99,86% 99,38% 99,85%
5 99,71% 99,76% 99,68% 99,69% 99,70% 99,72% 99,75% 99,79% 99,82% 99,85% 99,88% 99,90% 99,51% 99,89%
6 99,79% 99,83% 99,77% 99,77% 99,78% 99,80% 99,82% 99,85% 99,87% 99,89% 99,914% 99,928% 99,64% 99,926%
7 99,86% 99,89% 99,85% 99,85% 99,86% 99,87% 99,88% 99,90% 99,916% 99,932% 99,945% 99,954% 99,76% 99,956%
8 99,917% 99,933% 99,908% 99,909% 99,914% 99,921% 99,930% 99,941% 99,951% 99,960% 99,968% 99,974% 99,85% 99,977%
9 99,958% 99,966% 99,953% 99,953% 99,956% 99,960% 99,965% 99,970% 99,976% 99,980% 99,984% 99,987% 99,922% 99,9904%
10 ≥99,982% ≥99,985% ≥99,979% 99,980% ≥99,981% ≥99,983% ≥99,985% ≥99,987% ≥99,990% ≥99,9919% ≥99,9936% ≥99,9949% ≥99,96% ≥99,9967%
The statistics are based on submissions from over 300 testees that took the CFNSE during its development.
It took me roughly 25 minutes to do with only a pen and paper (no calculator). My answer to section 5 question 4 was a line from (10,4) to (33, 4).



