I sucked at this IQ test. How about you?

Post Reply New Topic

I did that test and gave up after question 6.

I couldn't really get myself into a focused state as I kept worrying about whether I had time left, and just thought 'meh' and gave up.

Yea, the binet norm is 15(not 16 now) deviation too, like the welscher test is now, as they changed that.
To extrapolate that score(122) that would be about +1 standard deviation.
These test are dubious at best; I belong to to High I.Q. community and they commented on the D.K. test ( which is very similar) and compared to their proctored score ; it yields exaclty one deviation below that.. what does that tell you?

Silly test really, don't know why I did that all the way through, the timer is badly done. My internet is slow so the timer started before all the squares were loaded and refreshing the timer to see how long you had is a bad design.

Got 109 but was rushing as I didn't know how long I actually had.

People will always be there to point out something negative, it's how the social hierarchy works. "Show off", "liar", "ret*d", etcetera and etcetera, are just telling you who they are if you yourself are only posting the information for truthful and academically comparative purposes.

Is the D.K test that other timed matrix reasoning one?

The one posted here is by far the most inaccurate matrix reasoning one I've tried. It's also very uncomfortable to take due to the design.



That makes a lot of sense. However, I suffer from high anxiety levels (particularly so in the last 3 days since I've been sick and don't know what's wrong). Therefore, adopting the strategy of avoiding as much negativity as possible is often the only way I feel comfortable enough to post at all. Censoring what I share or respond to is unfortunate, but otherwise I would be a nervous wreck, which isn't worth it for any discussion. That's why I suggest PMing if someone wants to discuss actual scores or certain other matters I prefer not to discuss openly.

By the answers you submitted your IQ is

139

The same or a better result is only reached by

5.34% of the people taking the test.

...

That was an exceptionally challenging test. I found the short time limit incredibly off-putting and it cut me off several times just before I was about to choose my answer. I got quite frustrated by the end.

I also found the layout quite confusing. On first glance I would sometimes think some of the possible answers were part of the pattern, or vice versa, which didn't help at all.

Agreed on all counts, Hala. I wondered how another "spelling perfectionist" would fare on this test. It looks like you did well. I wonder if that means that there is any correlation between this kind of spatial/pattern aptitude and spelling? That seems logical.

Perhaps there is a link, I hadn't thought of that. It could be said that spelling consists of many different patterns and rules that can overlap and contradict each other, just like the different sequences in that test. I wouldn't be surprised if the areas of the brain involved in pattern deciphering were also used when spelling, given that written words are really just predetermined patterns of shapes with auditory associations.
You raised an interesting point there.

Yep http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

This one I get a + 1 deviation also(115) and as mentioned before the consensus is that there is a problem with the norming sample .
A proctored test ~145, D.K.~ 130; 130 to 115 etc.
The complaint I hear is it's exactly one deviation down(15).

I got 116, It says it's a pattern recognition test, but it's nothing like the one I've seen used recently to measure autistic IQs. The Globe and Mail had an article about it with two problems. I made an easy mistake on the first one, while I did the second one in a flash. That second one had very clear patterns. NTs normally would test each possible answer, while people with ASDs use the patterns to zero in on the correct answer.

I'm actually quite perceptive about patterns, but I'm not a big fan of IQ tests. I last had one when I was about 7, but I do believe my verbal intelligence is very high.

That's interesting because I remember now, on the DK, I got nearly a SD down on the CFNSE, which was close to ceiling and could have been harder, so that made me suspicious; and, also, the questions on other HR tests are much more challenging than the DK yet I still did poorer in DK. I am pretty sure it's the time constraints they impose that make it even worse for me. It's been found that personality traits become a large factor under timed conditions; for example, it biases against people who are susceptible to stress and anxiety (also see Yerkes-Dodson Law). The test in this topic is an extreme example of that. Also, the greater the time constraint, the lower the g-loading. I suspect most professionals don't take into account individual differences such as this and mismeasure people's abilities.

Last edited by outlier on 21 Aug 2009, 9:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

The Raven Matrices is often good for autistic individuals (not always however), and there's a decent one online (which has been posted here).

Problem with people who have autism is that it's so varied within those who have it (there are patterns, but it's no way as near uniform as the normal population), so it's hard to tell how people will score on each test.

Stuff that tests many areas with subscores is probably the best to pick up certain strengths and weaknesses (doing well at the Raven Matrices only shows that you're good at that type of reasoning).

I'm a good speller (I don't know where this comes from, really), and I did very poorly on this test.

Pretty close, 122 on that one.

^ It is not comparable to your previous score posted because the DK test is calculated on the basis of a standard deviation (SD) of 15. The test posted by the OP has the result based on SD 24 and (in unhighlighted text) the result based on SD 16. Therefore, you scored much better in the DK test.

Doh!