# Post your iqtest.com results here :D



## PeterNewton (Dec 25, 2009)

I haven't posted in a while, so to start again, I'm making this thread. I just took an IQ test for the first time in years and was very surprised to see the results.
Here is a link to one one I took: http://www.iqtest.com/

Score: 142

Looking forward to seeing the scores of fellow cubers .

This is not the point of the thread, but I'm just waiting for someone to say that IQ tests are not standardized and the results mean absolutely nothing xD.


----------



## Dionz (Dec 25, 2009)

120


----------



## DavidWoner (Dec 25, 2009)

420


----------



## Cyrus C. (Dec 25, 2009)

I don't feel like taking the test, but my score on an IQ test when that I took when I was 6 to skip grades was over 160.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 25, 2009)

Over 9000.

And I would recommend to change the thread title to _"Post your *iqtest.com* results here"_.


----------



## shelley (Dec 25, 2009)

IQ tests are not standardized and the results mean absolutely nothing xD.

Oh wait, is the xD supposed to be part of my post?


----------



## PeterNewton (Dec 25, 2009)

stefan: Why? I took the test there, but other people might not have.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 25, 2009)

Looks like Shelley can read Peter's mind and types faster.


----------



## daniel0731ex (Dec 25, 2009)

86

just clicked "yes" for every single question xD


----------



## (X) (Dec 25, 2009)

I didn't understand the second last question, but I think this is a bad IQ test, there is no hard questions to seperate the smart from the über smart


----------



## Stefan (Dec 25, 2009)

The whole thing is relative. If everybody in the world except you would suddenly get a lot more "intelligent", then *your* IQ would drop even though you didn't change at all. And because it is relative and because like Shelley said different tests aren't quite comparable, talking about numbers from different tests is pretty much meaningless. Especially the rather primitive tests often found online. They're fun to do, though, and as they're easy to do they're good because then everybody can do the same test. What these tests really measure is another issue, but at least if everybody does the same test, it's much better than if you compare numbers from random independent sources.

I'll go do that iqtest.com test now, I admit I thought I knew it but it at least looks different than the one I had in mind.


----------



## (R) (Dec 25, 2009)

185... No joke
No surprise.. im a sociopath


----------



## MistArts (Dec 25, 2009)

126

Non-native English speaker though...


----------



## Stefan (Dec 25, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> What these tests really measure is another issue


Ugh... I forgot my own reasoning. The only thing that such a test unquestionably does measure is how good you were at that particular test. That was actually my reason to suggest the title change. Because no test will give you your "true IQ", but at least if we pick a certain test we can get our true results for that test can compare. Just be aware that that's all it means, someone with a higher score was better at that test, not necessarily more "intelligent", whatever that means.


----------



## PeterNewton (Dec 25, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > What these tests really measure is another issue
> ...



Ok yea that makes sense. So how do I go about changing the title...? Sorry, I haven't been on this forum for a long time.


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 25, 2009)

I was reading wikipedia, although not very reliable as a scientific resource, i found this "The study demonstrated that general human intelligence appears to be based on the volume and location of gray matter tissue in the brain, and also demonstrated that, of the brain's gray matter, only about 6 percent appeared to be related to IQ."

I've never been a true believer that IQ measures "intelligence" as this is something i believe will NEVER be a measurable quantity. 

i got a 145.


----------



## fanwuq (Dec 25, 2009)

All false: 83
All true: 88
LOL


----------



## Stefan (Dec 25, 2009)

fanwuq said:


> All false: 83
> All true: 88
> LOL


I guess that proves optimism is smarter than pessimism.


----------



## tlm1992 (Dec 25, 2009)

i got 117, but i guess i would be higher if the questions were Norwegian...


----------



## ElderKingpin (Dec 25, 2009)

how about a real iq test. the answers and questions for that iq test are always the same.


----------



## stiwi griffin (Dec 25, 2009)

I tried, but finally it asks me to pay 9.99$ to get the results


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 25, 2009)

stiwi griffin said:


> I tried, but finally it asks me to pay 9.99$ to get the results



if you typed in an email address your results should have been sent there.


----------



## Dene (Dec 25, 2009)

Well, seeing as Mr. Pochmann has decided to be all passive in this thread, I'll be the one to say it. This test is a complete load of crap. I did not check the website, nor will I bother. I have taken many online IQ tests, and I always get a high score, but then so does almost everyone. All the tests take questions that are generally used in "proper" IQ tests, and just puts them all together. Unfortunately, this is not how a normal IQ test works. 

_Nor do IQ tests actually standardise intelligence._


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 25, 2009)

Dene said:


> _Nor do IQ tests actually standardise intelligence._



+1!


----------



## endless_akatsuki (Dec 25, 2009)

You guys all just dropped my self-esteem.


----------



## stiwi griffin (Dec 25, 2009)

bwatkins said:


> stiwi griffin said:
> 
> 
> > I tried, but finally it asks me to pay 9.99$ to get the results
> ...



it went in my email to the spam box :fp

oh, btw, i got 104


----------



## qqwref (Dec 25, 2009)

I tried to get them all wrong, but I got a score of 83. I think this test might be biased.


----------



## shelley (Dec 25, 2009)

qqwref said:


> I tried to get them all wrong, but I got a score of 83. I think this test might be biased.



You did it too fast. I chose all the wrong answers and tried to average more than 20 seconds per problem and got a score of 18.


----------



## Owen (Dec 26, 2009)

121.


----------



## Slowpoke22 (Dec 26, 2009)

I also got 121 hah


----------



## janelle (Dec 26, 2009)

123
But I think this test was kinda stupid.


----------



## Meisen (Dec 26, 2009)

127


----------



## MW1990 (Dec 26, 2009)

143. I didn't really like the only true/false aspect... Each question on the last IQ test I took has 5 answers T.T


----------



## Zane_C (Dec 26, 2009)

IQ tests are not standardized and the results mean absolutely nothing xD.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

148
I liked it, was different from the tests I've done before.



Zane_C said:


> IQ tests are not standardized and the results mean absolutely nothing xD.


You do realize we're all taking the same test, right?


----------



## tkcube1 (Dec 26, 2009)

129. Yet my GPA is 2.5. Obviously I have the potential to get good grades because I know 129 is well above average. Not to the people in this forum but yea....


----------



## Caedus (Dec 26, 2009)

151. Lol. I seriously do not think this is a very accurate test. There should be no way I get a higher score than Stefan.


----------



## Hyprul 9-ty2 (Dec 26, 2009)

I got 147. Why is it all just true or false


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> The "Q" in "IQ" means "quotient". The whole thing is relative.


Gotta take that back, "quotient" refers to something other than I thought and doesn't lead to the relativity I had in mind, at least not directly. And it's not the important point anyway, which is that comparing results from different non-standardized tests is meaningless. Particularly the short online ones.


----------



## Logan (Dec 26, 2009)

115... 

Although I am 14 (so my brains not fully developed), and I put my age as 19 (in case you had to be >18 (idk if putting in a higher age matters though).


----------



## (R) (Dec 26, 2009)

Your IQ is how much you can learn, it never changes... I scored 185
EDIT: I am 13


----------



## Yichen (Dec 26, 2009)

My English is poor...


----------



## Logan (Dec 26, 2009)

(R) said:


> Your IQ is how much you can learn, it never changes... I scored 185
> EDIT: I am 13





...except that i'm in 3 honors classes, and double honor math!


----------



## (R) (Dec 26, 2009)

Im in 7 honors classes and double honors math
Edit: sorry if I sound cold, I have a medical condition


----------



## Dene (Dec 26, 2009)

(R) said:


> Your IQ is how much you can learn, it never changes...



Wrong, unfortunately.


----------



## Cyrus C. (Dec 26, 2009)

Logan said:


> 115...
> 
> Although I am 14 (so my brains not fully developed), and I put my age as 19 (in case you had to be >18 (idk if putting in a higher age matters though).



Your IQ doesn't change, a 6 year old >*cough*< me >*cough*< will get the same score if they take the test again when they're 12.


----------



## (R) (Dec 26, 2009)

^^ Exactly http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070624175556AAan4Od


----------



## Edmund (Dec 26, 2009)

Like they told me in little league "You are to good to do this, it just wouldn't be fair." The computer detected me.


----------



## Zane_C (Dec 26, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> 148
> I liked it, was different from the tests I've done before.
> 
> 
> ...



Just highlight the bottom of the first post of this thread and you will see what I mean


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

Tried again, giving the same answer (I think), but did it faster and entered a younger age (15 instead of 32). Same result, still 148. So if others get 180+, I guess I must have made quite a few mistakes. Can you guys tell me where I'm wrong? These are my answers:

TTFTT (1-5)
TTFTT (6-10)
TTFFT (11-15)
FTFFF (16-20)
FFFFT (21-25) (Edit, had 24=T earlier)
TTFTF (26-30)
TFFTT (31-35)
FFF (36-38)



Zane_C said:


> Just highlight the bottom of the first post of this thread and you will see what I mean


Ah. So he was wrong about that, too. And finally I understand Shelley's post. Thanks.


----------



## shelley (Dec 26, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> Tried again, giving the same answer (I think), but did it faster and entered a younger age (15 instead of 32). Same result, still 148. So if others get 180+, I guess I must have made quite a few mistakes. Can you guys tell me where I'm wrong? These are my answers:
> 
> TTFTT (1-5)
> TTFTT (6-10)
> ...



My answers differ from yours by one (#24) and I had a 150


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

shelley said:


> My answers differ from yours by one (#24) and I had a 150


Oops. I wanted to say 'F' to that. Street doesn't have an opposite starting with R, the other words do, right? (I admit I only found some for grasp and unwind with google, but of course only for the retry, not my original attempt where I had to guess and apparently guessed wrong (i.e. "True")).


----------



## kooixh (Dec 26, 2009)

106


----------



## Musturd (Dec 26, 2009)

Logan said:


> 115...
> 
> Although I am 14 (so my brains not fully developed), and I put my age as 19 (in case you had to be >18 (idk if putting in a higher age matters though).



I think reporting a false age will affect the IQ score (and I reported my age to be 17 with no issues).

EDIT: I got 137


----------



## Logan (Dec 26, 2009)

Logan said:


> 115...
> 
> Although I am 14 (so my brains not fully developed), and *I put my age as 19* (in case you had to be >18 (idk if putting in a higher age matters though).





(R) said:


> Your IQ is how much you can learn, i*t never changes*... I scored 185
> EDIT: I am 13





the link you gave said:


> in respect to age



So what you're saying (R) is: If you gave a person this test when he was 5 and 45. It would be the same. AND that everyone except you is wrong...


----------



## Caedus (Dec 26, 2009)

Easy solution: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/559366.html


----------



## KubeKid73 (Dec 26, 2009)

I got 146.


----------



## nlCuber22 (Dec 26, 2009)

Caedus said:


> Easy solution: http://tinyurl.com/yhg3knq



Don't lmgtfy.
Also, your post is misleading.


----------



## Caedus (Dec 26, 2009)

nlCuber22 said:


> Caedus said:
> 
> 
> > Easy solution: http://tinyurl.com/yhg3knq
> ...



How so? If this had been searched for, the entire argument would have been resolved. The very first result was very clear. Even so, I realize the lmgtfy is obnoxious. I'll change it.


----------



## nlCuber22 (Dec 26, 2009)

Caedus said:


> nlCuber22 said:
> 
> 
> > Caedus said:
> ...



Nevermind. I was careless and didn't read above posts. I was lead to believe you were trying to get people (hoping to get quiz answers) to click on your link. Sorry. Still, don't lmgtfy.


----------



## Parity (Dec 26, 2009)

144


----------



## Hadley4000 (Dec 26, 2009)

DavidWoner said:


> 420


----------



## hyunchoi98 (Dec 26, 2009)

114


----------



## Sin-H (Dec 26, 2009)

145.

also, English is not my native tongue. But there was only one question where I had problems understanding.



StefanPochmann said:


> Tried again, giving the same answer (I think), but did it faster and entered a younger age (15 instead of 32). Same result, still 148. So if others get 180+, I guess I must have made quite a few mistakes. Can you guys tell me where I'm wrong? These are my answers:
> 
> TTFTT (1-5)
> TTFTT (6-10)
> ...


I chose the same answers except for 24 and 29. so for 24, we know that now (the opposite of street), and I didn't quite understand question #29.

EDIT: Dammit, now I know what toothpick means xD. I really had a little lack of vocab there ^^


----------



## LarsN (Dec 26, 2009)

146 (with english understanding problems)

Come on ... the opposite of street?

Could some one tell me the opposite of light? (yes, it's a trick question, but a serious one)


----------



## Oliver Wolff (Dec 26, 2009)

This one like almost every IQ test you can buy (in germany) or do online are crap and way too easy.
There are a few test that are scientifically aknowledged all over the world as far as I know but they last for hours not for some minutes.
If you want to do a "real" IQ test try the one from e.g. MENSA.


----------



## Tim Major (Dec 26, 2009)

Isn't a true IQ test. Previous IQ tests I've tried have been more about symbols and shapes, not questions like these. Many of these are just Vocab questions. I have a book by the guy who formed mensa, and the test in that is very good. I'll try and find the book to give you the title.


----------



## Sin-H (Dec 26, 2009)

Oliver Wolff said:


> This one like almost every IQ test you can buy (in germany) or do online are crap and way too easy.
> There are a few test that are scientifically aknowledged all over the world as far as I know but they last for hours not for some minutes.
> If you want to do a "real" IQ test try the one from e.g. MENSA.


My Mensa result was 138 (but I finished in half of the time given which was not taken into consideration ). My result here: 145. Not that much of a difference. And yes, this test doesn't appear that good to me.


----------



## ben1996123 (Dec 26, 2009)

Meh, I got 177, but Ive taken this test before...

The first time I took it, I got 156.


----------



## Carrot (Dec 26, 2009)

LarsN said:


> 146 (with english understanding problems)



Lars you bastard... 144 :fp at some of the questions I got like "It-can't-be-the-same-answer-so-many-time-in-a-row-so-I'm-gonna-take-the-other-option..." :/

but whatever... I didn't understand 5 of the questions  (You don't need to learn more english than you are gonna use in the big world )


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 26, 2009)

Wow, I suck at written IQ tests. 133. I prefer visual/shape/symbol/math ones. I like the one at http://www.highiqsociety.org/ because it's a good mix. I score usually between 158 and 163.


----------



## LewisJ (Dec 26, 2009)

All of you claiming to have scores much over ~150 are lying - the highest Ive managed to get is 152 and I'm quite sure that that's with all correct answers (I think my answer list matches up to stefan's, with F on 24), and I'm entering them as fast as I can. Either that, or age being 13 suddenly adds 30 to your score.


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 26, 2009)

LewisJ said:


> *All of you claiming to have scores much over ~150 are lying* - the highest Ive managed to get is 152 and I'm quite sure that that's with all correct answers (I think my answer list matches up to stefan's, with F on 24), and I'm entering them as fast as I can. Either that, or age being 13 suddenly adds 30 to your score.



That's a rather bold statement...


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

LarsN said:


> Come on ... the opposite of street?


Sidewalk?



LarsN said:


> Could some one tell me the opposite of light?


Dark or heavy?


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 26, 2009)

Just a thought...Do you guys think common sense is related to intelligence?
I'm in the third year in college at Colorado School of Mines, and i have found i am surrounded by extremely _academically_ smart people. I'm sure they all have large I.Q.'s however there are many students who, when faced with social or everyday life situations, struggle. 

So the question is do you think that I.Q. actually measures how smart someone appears, and does, or should, "common sense" play a role in how "smart" someone is?


----------



## Novriil (Dec 26, 2009)

132p


There were like 6 questions I just didn't understand and because I'm sleepy I didn't bother to read them again 

yeah.. hexagons... WTF.. are these 6-sided?  I don't know much about mathematic things in English..


----------



## iSpinz (Dec 26, 2009)

120, is that good?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 26, 2009)

iSpinz said:


> 120, is that good?



Theoretically above average.


----------



## iSpinz (Dec 26, 2009)

Yay me!


----------



## Dene (Dec 26, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > Come on ... the opposite of street?
> ...



Did the test seriously ask this question? That is rather embarrassing if it did, seeing as street does not have an opposite.

As for the OP, I guess his experiment failed?


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 26, 2009)

It probably means "Road".


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

Dene said:


> Did the test seriously ask this question? That is rather embarrassing if it did, seeing as street does not have an opposite.


It asks whether five given words have opposites starting with R, one of them "street". I'd say sidewalk is acceptable as opposite in some sense, but as there don't seem to be any starting with R, there's no problem.


----------



## Dene (Dec 26, 2009)

Oh ok. That makes more sense, although it is a bit of a trick question. IQ test should not contain any trick questions, but we'll overlook that :/


----------



## miniGOINGS (Dec 26, 2009)

Dene said:


> Oh ok. That makes more sense, although it is a bit of a trick question. IQ test should not contain any trick questions, but we'll overlook that :/



Are you acknowledging my answer as correct? I agree, it is not a very clear question, but that's how I perceive they ment it.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 26, 2009)

Dene said:


> IQ test should not contain any trick questions


Why not?


----------



## Worker (Dec 27, 2009)

128


----------



## LewisJ (Dec 27, 2009)

bwatkins said:


> LewisJ said:
> 
> 
> > *All of you claiming to have scores much over ~150 are lying* - the highest Ive managed to get is 152 and I'm quite sure that that's with all correct answers (I think my answer list matches up to stefan's, with F on 24), and I'm entering them as fast as I can. Either that, or age being 13 suddenly adds 30 to your score.
> ...



It would be a bold statement if this test didn't have a rather hard score limit; if you notice, everybody here that you'd expect to do well gets 145-152 while a select few others get....170+? No intermediate ground?


----------



## Cyrus C. (Dec 27, 2009)

LewisJ said:


> bwatkins said:
> 
> 
> > LewisJ said:
> ...



Maybe your just underestimating some people.


----------



## Dene (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > IQ test should not contain any trick questions
> ...



I figured you would ask, and I don't believe that I could give a satisfactory answer in any less than 3000 words, so I will give a less satisfactory answer and try to keep it to one paragraph.

I will give an illustration that will hopefully at least demonstrate one very good reason why trick questions do not measure IQ.

It basically goes like this: a good magician could fool the smartest person in the world. Does this show that the smartest person in the world is stupid? Of course not. He fell for a trick. I don't see any particular reason why a trick question should be any different. A trick question isn't testing the "general intelligence" that IQ tests are meant to be finding.




miniGOINGS said:


> Dene said:
> 
> 
> > Oh ok. That makes more sense, although it is a bit of a trick question. IQ test should not contain any trick questions, but we'll overlook that :/
> ...



I figure that is what they meant. However a 2 year old could tell you that street and road are not opposites.


----------



## qqwref (Dec 27, 2009)

Anyone who thinks that they are smart *because* their score on this test is >100 isn't smart at all. From this topic it should be pretty obvious that the mean of this test is nowhere near 100.


----------



## LewisJ (Dec 27, 2009)

Cyrus C. said:


> LewisJ said:
> 
> 
> > bwatkins said:
> ...


I hope you're kidding...I'm not underestimating people, I'm saying that they are claiming to have results which aren't possible on this test.


----------



## Pedro (Dec 27, 2009)

Got 149 the first time, with my correct age (20)

then did it again, but couldn't remember what I answered to #8 and #33 (put them both as True the second time), and got 144, with age as 15

I'll change those 2 and go faster to see what I get (maybe lower age too?)

EDIT

Didn't change the age (still as 15) and changed those 2 answers (went faster too). Result: 152

EDIT 2

Went faster this time (I think, at least) and put the age as 12...still 152
I don't see how people get 180...


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

Changing my 24 to F and claiming I'm 9 also gave me 152.


----------



## fanwuq (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> Changing my 24 to F and claiming I'm 9 also gave me 152.



First time, I had the same answers as you (with corrected 24) and got 149. Then I went a bit faster and got 152. I claimed that I was 17. So I think 152 is the highest you can get unless there were trick questions like some of you have mentioned.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

fanwuq said:


> unless there were trick questions like some of you have mentioned.


Some of us? I only saw Dene. And I don't think it's a trick question.


----------



## LewisJ (Dec 27, 2009)

Regardless of possible trick questions, I think it's safe to conclude that ZB_FTW, (R), and ben1996123 didn't score what they've claimed.


----------



## yeee707 (Dec 27, 2009)

132


----------



## Tim Major (Dec 27, 2009)

LewisJ said:


> Regardless of possible trick questions, I think it's safe to conclude that ZB_FTW, (R), and ben1996123 didn't score what they've claimed.



I didn't make it obvious enough. Sorry. In that book I was talking about I just got into mensa. I just randomly said that. I wasn't really trying to lie, because I thought no one would believe me. I haven't actually taken this test yet, though after 2 questions, I thought it was a pretty dodgy IQ test, and gave up. I'm sorry for lying about my score, though I didn't actually expect people to believe me. I'll do the test now.

Edit: cbf, my brain is on holidays.


----------



## Caedus (Dec 27, 2009)

I made a Javascript bookmarklet to select the answers as fast as possible so human speed issues are eliminated. I recommend you do the test once and record your answers as true and false (1 and 0) separated by commas, and then redo the test and enter your results into the bookmarklet. The default answers are the ones that Stefan provided earlier.

You can look at the bookmarklet source code here.
This is the source:

```
question = 1;
answers = [1,1,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,1,1,1,0,0,1,0,1,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1,0,1,0,1,0,0,1,1,0,0,0];
if(confirm("Are these answers okay? (1 = true, 0 = false)\n" + answers) == false)
{
answers = prompt("Change the answers:",answers);
}

while(question < 39)
{
element = (question * 2) - answers[question - 1];
document.forms[0].elements[element + 2].click();
question++;
}
```
This is the bookmarklet link:

```
javascript:(function(){var%20s=document.createElement(%22script%22);s.charset=%22UTF-8%22;s.src=%22http://cubingweekly.com/iqtest.js%22;document.body.appendChild(s)})();
```

Bookmark that link and click the bookmark while on the test page.

I got 148 when I said I was 15.


----------



## qqwref (Dec 27, 2009)

Uh, nice job I guess, but fail for not actually reading the test's description. It pretty clearly says that as long as you take under 20 seconds per question your time won't affect your score.


----------



## Caedus (Dec 27, 2009)

qqwref said:


> Uh, nice job I guess, but fail for not actually reading the test's description. It pretty clearly says that as long as you take under 20 seconds per question your time won't affect your score.



Ah. Whoops. Missed that part. Oh well. It was fun to write I guess.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

qqwref said:


> It pretty clearly says that as long as you take under 20 seconds per question your time won't affect your score.



_"If you take longer, you will be penalized, or *if you get through the test in less time than thirteen minutes, your score will be increased*."_

By how much? And only at the 13 minutes mark? That'd feel wrong, 12:59 isn't really much better than 13:00. A one second difference shouldn't make more than a one point difference. But if it's just one point at 13:00 and that's all, then they should just not have it at all, just makes things complicated for almost no value. No, I got the impression that maybe you get an extra point for every 30 seconds you need less. Something like that. It definitely does *not* clearly state what you said.


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > Come on ... the opposite of street?
> ...



Paved or gravel?



StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > Could some one tell me the opposite of light?
> ...



My point exactly. The concept of opposite is more a concept of associated opposites, which will not work in a test.
(And it couldn't be dark, because dark is absence of light, not opposite)


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > LarsN said:
> ...


Nobody cares?



LarsN said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > LarsN said:
> ...


1. This would very well work in a test. Why not?
2. No, the adjective dark is not the absence of light.


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > StefanPochmann said:
> ...


I guess you like stating my points.



StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > StefanPochmann said:
> ...



1. I guess it would work in a test of the kind that determines if your one kind of person or another. The kind of test with no wrong answers. But in an IQtest I can't see how it would work if you could choose the answer that suits your association and still get points for that.
2. From a dictionary: *adj*., dark·er, dark·est.

Lacking or having very little light: a dark corner.
Lacking brightness: a dark day.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> StefanPochmann said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody cares?
> ...


So what's the point of bringing something up that you think nobody cares about? You like wasting our time?



LarsN said:


> in an IQtest I can't see how it would work if you could choose the answer that suits your association and still get points for that.


Where's the problem?



LarsN said:


> Lacking or having very little light: a dark corner.


Yes. Lacking light. Not lack of light.


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > StefanPochmann said:
> ...


I was stating that there is no opposite to street. You took it to extremes, not me.



StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > in an IQtest I can't see how it would work if you could choose the answer that suits your association and still get points for that.
> ...



My association of lacking is absence. You just stated that there is no problem with associations.

I think we should stop hijacking the thread. You can PM me if you still don't understand. Then we won't waste anybodys time.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> I was stating that there is no opposite to street.


And I still disagree.



LarsN said:


> My association of lacking is absence.


There's a difference between nouns and adjectives. I think the adjective "dark" is a valid opposite of the adjective "light".



LarsN said:


> You just stated that there is no problem with associations.


No, I asked what the problem is supposed to be.



LarsN said:


> You can PM me if you still don't understand.


Declare yourself superior and request to not respond publicly? Where did you learn that, Trolling 101?


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > I was stating that there is no opposite to street.
> ...




I apologize for the last one. That was uncalled for.

You still haven't given my an acceptable opposite of street.

I'd prefer discussing the problem with associations as the other discussions are getting silly.

For example a test with the following question:

What word would you associate with the following word: "Table":

- Wood
- Chair
- furniture
- dinner

Which choice would give you the highest score on an IQ test?


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> You still haven't given my an acceptable opposite of street.


Just cause you don't accept sidewalk.

What's the opposite of lion?



LarsN said:


> For example a test with the following question:
> 
> What word would you associate with the following word: "Table":
> 
> ...


That's not at all comparable to the question in the iqtest.com test.


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

Well, then I guess the big question is why the correct answer was false. Was it because there is no opposite to street, or because the opposite of street is not spelled with an R?

I think the point of the question was to trick the person taking the test to think "street - road" and then the intelligent person would think: "Wait, road isn't the opposite of street."
I feel that if street does not have an opposite, then they should have used another word in the question.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> Well, then I guess the big question is why the correct answer was false. Was it because there is no opposite to street, or because the opposite of street is not spelled with an R?


The correct answer is "false" because the statement is false.

The statement is false because not all five words have opposites starting with R.

Not all five words have opposites starting with R because street doesn't (at least that's what I think, as I think I know opposites starting with R for the other words).

Street doesn't have an opposite starting with R because ... well, it just doesn't. Whether that's because it doesn't have any opposite at all or because it doesn't have any starting with R doesn't matter. That's completely irrelevant.


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> I feel that if street does not have an opposite, then they should have used another word in the question.


Why? The statement isn't _"The opposites of the following words start with R"_, the statement is _"The following words are the opposites of words that begin with the letter R"_. There's no misleading implication of existence. Quite the contrary! The existence is the question!


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > I feel that if street does not have an opposite, then they should have used another word in the question.
> ...



Yes, existence is the question. But who defines the existence?

In Denmark we have an organisation that deals with grammar rules and such. I've never heard of an official list of opposites. You think that sidewalk could be the opposite of street. I don't know if your right. Someone else could think that road is opposite of street. But that would result in a poorer result on the IQtest, because they have decided that it is not opposite.
A test with a definite result, should not include non-definite questions.


----------



## Omniscient (Dec 27, 2009)

If English (American) is not your native language, then your reported IQ score will probably be lower than it would be if you took an IQ test in your own language.
lol I'm lucky


----------



## Stefan (Dec 27, 2009)

LarsN said:


> Someone else could think that road is opposite of street.


And then I would like to see the justification for that. There's a reason I wrote _"I'd say sidewalk is *acceptable* as opposite *in some sense*"_, namely that in the rather common context of moving around (by walking, driving), sidewalk seems to me like a reasonable opposite to street. What's the reasonable justification for road?


----------



## andrewunz1 (Dec 27, 2009)

122


----------



## LarsN (Dec 27, 2009)

There's a reason I said someone, because I wouldn't myself. My english vocabulary is limited, but I find it hard to believe that there isn't just one single R-word that can be justified in the same maner you just did.

Railroad, perhaps, where trains go as opposed to cars. Although it's a weak justification I find it just as reasonable as sidewalk.


----------



## fanwuq (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > Someone else could think that road is opposite of street.
> ...



I don't see how "sidewalk" or "road" can be opposites of "street." "Road" is clearly a synonym of "street." Sidewalk is just something that is often at the sides of streets; there isn't anything opposite about it.
http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/street


----------



## Arendil (Dec 27, 2009)

117 lol


----------



## Tomk (Dec 27, 2009)

I got 141 on that website a while back


----------



## Carson (Dec 27, 2009)

144

As far as IQ tests go, this one is pretty lousy. There is a "speed" bonus for competing the entire test in under a given time. Knowing a few shortcuts can really speed up your time. For example: There were at least 3 question that I can recall regarding whether a certain amount of odd numbers add up to an even or odd number. Knowing that an odd amount of odd numbers adds up to an odd number and that an even amount of odd numbers add up to an even number can save you tons of time by not having to actually do the math. This is a simple math "trick" and doesn't really have anything to do with iq.


----------



## bwatkins (Dec 27, 2009)

Carson said:


> 144
> 
> As far as IQ tests go, this one is pretty lousy. There is a "speed" bonus for competing the entire test in under a given time. Knowing a few shortcuts can really speed up your time. For example: There were at least 3 question that I can recall regarding whether a certain amount of odd numbers add up to an even or odd number. Knowing that an odd amount of odd numbers adds up to an odd number and that an even amount of odd numbers add up to an even number can save you tons of time by not having to actually do the math. This is a simple math "trick" and doesn't really have anything to do with iq.



I would agree with your point about speed. It seems as if this should have little to do with intelligence. For instance i read a study back in high school about students and how many struggled with the ACT standardized test because of the time limit. It also showed that fewer students struggled with time constraints on the SAT. 

For instance when applying for college i had a 3.7 unweighted GPA, a 24 ACT and a 2250 SAT. These results seem to have a large deviation from one another, and for me personally the ACT and the time constraints were a problem.

I think the time bonus definitely skews the results.


----------



## Escher (Dec 27, 2009)

IQ tests are ridiculous, particularly the Mensa one, because of their high profile. I would say that you'd think they'd know better, but since I know that IQ tests mean practically nothing I won't -.-

They test such a limited range of human capacity that amounts to intelligence which is dynamic for everybody, and a fluid concept anyway. 

142, for what it's worth (nothing).


----------



## Dene (Dec 27, 2009)

StefanPochmann said:


> LarsN said:
> 
> 
> > I feel that if street does not have an opposite, then they should have used another word in the question.
> ...



You know, I was about to ask for the actual question. I finally got the motivation to check out the question (it took way too many clicks for me to get to the actual test). I can now see that it is by no means a trick question.

I hope you can see how I was mislead, having not seen the actual question, and with the way the conversation was going prior.


----------



## esquimalt1 (Dec 27, 2009)

105!!


----------



## Lt-UnReaL (Dec 27, 2009)

143. I read slowly.


----------



## Kian (Dec 28, 2009)

(R) said:


> 185... No joke
> No surprise.. im a sociopath



Well at least that explains the unnecessary lying.


----------



## PeterNewton (Dec 28, 2009)

Carson said:


> 144
> 
> As far as IQ tests go, this one is pretty lousy. There is a "speed" bonus for competing the entire test in under a given time. Knowing a few shortcuts can really speed up your time. For example: There were at least 3 question that I can recall regarding whether a certain amount of odd numbers add up to an even or odd number. Knowing that an odd amount of odd numbers adds up to an odd number and that an even amount of odd numbers add up to an even number can save you tons of time by not having to actually do the math. This is a simple math "trick" and doesn't really have anything to do with iq.



Heehee I used the arithmetic series shortcut. The sum of the first n odd numbers is n^2.


----------



## jackshnader (Dec 28, 2015)

shelley said:


> IQ tests are not standardized and the results mean absolutely nothing xD.
> 
> Oh wait, is the xD supposed to be part of my post?



That is the main task of the IQ test developer - create smth that not depends of culture, circumstances an even age. So only one opportunity to improve your brain its train it. How you do it - it's your choice but it possible. You can play special games like this https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple-store/id887025430?pt=95788912&ct=usa_link&mt=8


----------



## MoyuFTW (Dec 28, 2015)

jackshnader said:


> That is the main task of the IQ test developer - create smth that not depends of culture, circumstances an even age. So only one opportunity to improve your brain its train it. How you do it - it's your choice but it possible. You can play special games like this https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple-store/id887025430?pt=95788912&ct=usa_link&mt=8



Nice, 6 year bump. That might be a record


----------



## shadowslice e (Dec 28, 2015)

MoyuFTW said:


> Nice, 6 year bump. That might be a record



God damn it internet explorer 



Spoiler



Lol I declare this test formally invalid: I got a test score of 157  cause I definately believe that. Seriously though, the test isn't intelligence, just maths and thinking speed not problem solving abilities so a cuber should do well cause they train themselves to think quickly even if they don't problem solve that much.

I'll give it that it's actually the only online test that I haven't broken though- all the others just put me in the xxx+ category. One said 180+ after only like 10 questions (pls don't judge I did them when I was 12 and bored out of mind during a transit in Dubai going over to Malaysia)


----------



## BananaSlayer64 (Dec 28, 2015)

Lolwut that website makes you pay to see your results.
Edit: Nvm I got 116


----------



## Rocky0701 (Dec 28, 2015)

MoyuFTW said:


> Nice, 6 year bump. That might be a record


Nah, I've seen someone do a 7 year, but I don't remember who it was. There have probably been 8 or 9 year ones though. 

I got 131, but that test is super inflated.


----------



## Oliver7073 (Jan 25, 2016)

I was so surprised. I'm a 12 year old and I had 153 on it. Not lying!


----------



## Ordway Persyn (Jan 26, 2016)

Mine was only 123  It doesn't look real to me. I think on an episode of good Mythical Morning When they had an episode on smartest people in the world, they said Steven Hawking has an IQ of about 160. I doubt most people (if any) on this forum are as smart as him.


----------



## WACWCA (Jan 26, 2016)

Ordway Persyn said:


> Mine was only 123  It doesn't look real to me. I think on an episode of good Mythical Morning When they had an episode on smartest people in the world, they said Steven Hawking has an IQ of about 160. I doubt most people (if any) on this forum are as smart as him.



GMM = life


----------



## Morrowindchamp (Oct 7, 2019)

I scored 151. Maxed it out, except for computational speed. Any alleged scores above 152 are false and either entirely nonexistent or from a different test. That computational speed subtest score was 145, while the others were all 152. 145 computational speed equates to around 4 minutes of total test duration. My RIQ score from IQexams.net is 154 sd 15, and I scored 46/50 on the Wonderlic.

Edit: After performing careful statistical analyses I've found that the average score for iqtest.com converges upon approximately 114.44 with standard deviations of 16.9324. Based on this, if you want to convert your score from iqtest.com to WAIS based on the z-score from the bell-curve alone, use the equation IQ >= ((IQTestScore - 114.44)/16.9324 * 15) + 100. And no, these 11,000 results aren't the full 14,000,000 results... but it clearly does not matter at this normative order of magnitude. Only 1 person of this 11,000 scored 151 and 1 person scored 152.


----------



## White KB (Oct 9, 2019)

132
Guys, I'm officially a genius
Whoa


----------



## Hazel (Oct 10, 2019)

I got 140, but I don't think this is a very good test xD


----------



## Morrowindchamp (Oct 11, 2019)

Don't take your scores seriously until you butcher them as per my advice ^ I don't even own a Rubik's Cube I'm just here for the statistics.

If you're interested in taking a legitimate test of intelligence, I have a gift for you from Cambridge University. The International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR). I scored 58/60 (99.93 %ile).

I dug up my old calculations for the ICAR. "My math has been confirmed and the average for Condon and Revelle's massive study was around 25.75 correct with SD of 11.89 raw. "

So WAIS IQ >= ((IcarRawScore - 25.75)/11.89*15) + 100

https://planning.e-psychometrics.com/test/icar60?ssid=8165461


----------



## PetrusQuber (Oct 16, 2019)

I got 115 in a fake test, but I don't believe it. Also,


Morrowindchamp said:


> Don't take your scores seriously until you butcher them as per my advice ^ I don't even own a Rubik's Cube I'm just here for the statistics.
> 
> If you're interested in taking a legitimate test of intelligence, I have a gift for you from Cambridge University. The International Cognitive Ability Resource (ICAR). I scored 58/60 (99.93 %ile).
> 
> ...


Do you play morrowind? As in the Elder Scrolls III game?


----------



## Morrowindchamp (Oct 31, 2019)

PetrusQuber said:


> I got 115 in a fake test, but I don't believe it. Also,
> 
> Do you play morrowind? As in the Elder Scrolls III game?



Hi, PQ. Yeah, Morrowind is a classic and a great game. I have it on my PC and original Xbox, actually... I picked that username when I was new to the internet in 2006 and it stuck with me.


----------

