What is your Intelligents Quotient?

Post Reply New Topic

actually I was shootig for a lima bean with a hat.

I keep staring but my mouth isn't moving. Oh, wait...never mind.

Your poll is flawed because it depends which IQ test you take. For example, an IQ of 132 on one test may correspond with one of 148 on another. You need to look at it statistically, and present the IQ as a percentile, to get a meaningful comparison. (and I'm sure there are people here qualified to explain that in more depth; but I'm not, so feel free)

I'm sure many people don't bother voting because they know it will either contribute to a number of individuals' superiority complex, or others' inferiority complex — perhaps both. Neither being particularly desireable.

Last edited by ascan on 24 Dec 2005, 6:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

You are right of course! But it's flawed for a lot more reasons than that. And I assume all those scoring 110+ can think of several reasons why it's flawed?

Worldwide, IQ scores appear to be slowly rising, a trend known as the Flynn effect. However, tests are only renormalized occasionally to obtain mean scores of 100, for example WISC-R (1974), WISC-III (1991) and WISC-IV (2003). Hence it is difficult to compare IQ scores measured years apart.

In any event to be accurate your poll should include numbers below 110, as 100 is the statistical average and the poll skew implies that there is something somehow deficiant in being part of the 68% of the population that has an IQ between 85 and 115. The "normal" range, or range between -2 and +2 standard deviations from the mean, is between 70 and 130, and contains about 95% of the population. Don't feel so bad Musical_Lottie.

I voted below 110,it's below 80,once tried to see if that 'IQ tests can be learnt" theory works,but I have never gotten different.

but what poll isn't flawed?

also there are different ways to break down #'s.

if there is enough participation then you can make some sense of it.
hold off, sit back and prepare to be....

.... oh, its ascaan!

....pissed off and disagree.

..too intelligent to waste my time on futile irrelevant puzzles.

That my friend, is a subjective reply.

also the time wasted to type then click would be more of a waste then to just click.


hmmmm.....

typing and clicking are fun activities for me.

Whomever put 201+, LIEZ!

The particular test used was an exceptionally reliable design though, composed of extremely relevant puzzles and scientifically accurate questions.

I designed them myself

i am beginning to admire...





...your humor.

Well I've voted just now, it was the first time I viewed the thread.

I'd love a variable dimmer switch to use in social situations.

Being able to babble nonsense sounds great sometimes.

I'd use it for going to bed, too.

I put below 110, just to average it out. Fact is, most of you all are probably unintentionally lying, letting your egocentricity interfere and thinking you're smarter than you are. If we were to get a true stat, we should probably normalize the stats and put everyone one class lower than what they voted.

the marketplace of ideas creates yet another useful invention.

i see a wristband which senses anxiety, then it puts off this high ptched noise that only NT's can here, and its annoying to the point of causing them panic attacks as well.

Welcome to my life NT elite.