what's your IQ score?

[conflictofinterests]

Mine was 115 the last time I checked, and I think that's within a standard deviation of the mean. (100 right?) So I'm just the high side of average. Haven't procured a job yet, but other factors seem to have lent themselves towards making me a nigh ridiculously fast learner.

 

[Lawnmooer]

I've done a few IQ tests and they all said that my IQ was around 180ish (183 was the last one I believe)

Not that I really pay attention to it. Since it doesn't matter what my IQ is (Because those tests are most likely wrong) all that matters is what grades you get in School, how well you do in college and if you get through university...

Also paying attention in lessons and watching some educational television helps...

There is no real way to compare how intelligent people are due to many different factors (Some people are good at tests, others arn't. Some people know alot of general knowledge and some people only just know alot about specific subjects ect.) Especially since alot of people with some mental disabilities are infact very good at some subjects (Maths being fairly common)

You also have to decide what intelligence is. Is it knowing alot of information? Remembering alot of information? Putting things they know into practice? Writing down and solving long mathematical/scientifical equations?

 

[Flames66]

I Got something around 120. It varied by at least 10 depending on where I took it so I don't take it very seriously.

 

[conflictofinterests]

I had an IQ of 135 when I was 11, which was based on an estimate of how well I did on the UK's national IQ test.

Now, according to an online test, it's only 110.

As others have said, though, motivation can make up for IQ. I think intelligence =

Savvy+Smarts

IQ is a measure of Savvy, or the ability to learn, which is why it's all about pattern recognition and logic puzzles, analyzing the way you think. Smarts come from bombing through books, but bombing through books can also increase your Savvy, if you're reading the right kind of books.

From the rhetoric I've heard spouted, your IQ shouldn't change over time. So yeah, pattern recognition and whatnot, but books shouldn't really affect that.

 

[CactiComplex]

The average of my online tests is 132, taking into account I struggle with the numerical ones, and a few others, because of my dyscalculia. So, really, it doesn't say much at all. I'd love to get officially tested if there's one out there that caters for dyscalculic people. Should be if there's one that caters for dyslexics, I think. I'd quite like to know my 'official' IQ, but I don't believe for a moment it tells you exactly how intelligent you are. Too many factors for a single test to calculate, really.

 

[ultimateownage]

IQ's are retarded and an extremely superficial measure of intellect. There are different types of intellect.
CATs on the other hand, are at least slightly more reliable and sensible.

 

[ninjapenguin981]

I just did the same one and got 121.

 

[OldRat]

Free internet tests really aren't the way to go with measuring IQ, people.
And on that note, IQ really isn't really all that important for most people anyway.

But anyhow, I can't even recall it right now without the little paper, but my Mensa-approved test ranks me in the category of "Enough to get in, but not really enough to actually be of note in there."
I think it was around 140.

I've never even considered joining that club, from the fear of becoming an elitist asshole and flaunting my masterful number to people with a smaller number.

 

[conflictofinterests]

I've done a few IQ tests and they all said that my IQ was around 180ish (183 was the last one I believe)

Not that I really pay attention to it. Since it doesn't matter what my IQ is (Because those tests are most likely wrong) all that matters is what grades you get in School, how well you do in college and if you get through university...

Also paying attention in lessons and watching some educational television helps...

There is no real way to compare how intelligent people are due to many different factors (Some people are good at tests, others arn't. Some people know alot of general knowledge and some people only just know alot about specific subjects ect.) Especially since alot of people with some mental disabilities are infact very good at some subjects (Maths being fairly common)

You also have to decide what intelligence is. Is it knowing alot of information? Remembering alot of information? Putting things they know into practice? Writing down and solving long mathematical/scientifical equations?

From what I hear, getting a job isn't just about how well you do in school, though that does help. It's more about how connected you are with the people in the company in which you're seeking employment. I highly doubt anyone with a marginally higher IQ but low social skills or interest in social interactions is going to be hired over someone with an average IQ that has done their research on the company, and is able to form some sort of working relationship with the person who's hiring.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I just took an on-line IQ test on the BBC website and scored 87, Go Me! (sarcasm).
Along with your own score, feel free to say how much relevance IQ score has on ones occupational prospects and there life in general.

Well, I was tested and had an overall score in the range of 136-142 (with a 95% probability of this being accurate).

Somewhere in one of the sub-scores to do with visual-spatial processing I got as high as 155.

(Officially, 100 is defined as the statistical norm of the population. Eg: 66% of the population should be close to an IQ of 100)

But, IQ scores aren't a good predictor of success in life, or even studies.

I'm good at a lot of things, and pick up new knowledge and abilities quite easily, which I guess is sort of consistent with my IQ results.

But, considering how useless I am compared to 'dumber' people sometimes, there's obviously something very crucial to success in life that isn't measured at all by IQ tests.


One final thing; Officially, IQ scores can't be compared between different tests.

So saying you have an IQ of 70. Or 100 or 150 or whatever is meaningless out of context, and you can't blindly compare two numbers.

IQ scores can only be validly compared if they are scores for the same IQ test.

If they're different tests, comparisons are meaningless.

 

[Wolfram23]

The only IQ test I've taken that I recall is a free one on Facebook. Obviously unrealiable. Still, I scored a 135.

 

[hmwm]

IQ score is your "mental age" (which is figured out by taking your raw IQ test score and then referencing the IQ test table), divided by your actual age, multiplied by 100. So it shouldn't change over time, because as you're getting older to score more correct, the total number is also being divided by a higher number anyway. Because of this, an IQ score can only really be compared to others of the same age.

68% of the population is within 30 points of 100, 85-115, which is one standard deviation. 95% of the population is within 30 points (two standard deviations) of 100, 70-130.
Anyone who claims to have scored over 130 is likely lying, especially if they're posting on escapistmagazine's forums.
Only 4% of the world's population has a score that's three standard deviations out, that's 130-145, or on the other end, 55-70, and then four standard deviations from the norm (0-55, 145+) is the territory of only 1% of the population. A quick google search tells me that the highest IQ on record is 210, and it belongs to physicist Kim Ung-Yong.

tl;dr because of the way IQ tests and standard deviation statistics work, it's a fair to doubt people who claim to be above 115, and that almost everyone who claims to be above 130 is lying. Also you can only compare IQ tests to people your age.

I guess at this point I have to claim that I took an IQ test and my score is 153, but then make a modesty claim that they probably don't mean anything anyway, yeah?

edit: typos, oops. Even people with "IQ's" of 153 slip up occasionally

 

[fgdfgdgd]

It seems we have the brain-trust of the internet right here in one thread, considering the average is somewhere between 80-115.

OT: High enough to know it doesn't matter.

 

[tigermilk]

Wow the national average (In the UK) is about 100, clearly nearly everyone who has replied is borderline genius. What do IQ tests matter/how will they effect your prospects?

There appear to be a lot of very very intelligent people who are wasting away the hours on the Escapist instead of living the highlife that speaks volumes.

I do acknowledge most people used the prefix of "they are meaningless and I don't care" before revealing there prodigous talents.

Yup it has been a shit day at a shit job that doesn't utilise my undergraduate or masters degrees and I needed an outlet, sorry if I offended anyone.

 

[Raesvelg]

The things to remember when you post this topic, like so many people on so many forums have done before you ever thought about it, are as follows.

Thing the first: There is more than one IQ scale. Holy shit, I know right? You could score an 87 and be considered slightly above Forrest Gump, or you could score an 87 and be considered on the high side of normal. Yes, the typical score places the mean at 100, and measures from there, but even that is debatable most of the time.

Thing the second: Not all IQ tests are created equal. A proper test takes quite a while to administer, requires a controlled environment, etc etc etc. And even those will have a deviation of 10-20% depending on the precise nature of the test in relation to the individual taking it.

Thing the third: People lie their asses off, particularly in online settings where they can't possibly be called out for, y'know, lying their asses off, as to what their IQ scores are. During the course of my tenure here on teh intarwebz, I have seen enough people claiming an IQ in excess of 160 that Mensa must be second only to bloody FACEBOOK in total membership.

 

[CrystalShadow]

I'd say no one in this thread has done a valid IQ test... It costs hundreds of dollars (talking from an Australian perspective here, make of it what you will) to get a valid IQ test such as the WAIS administered professionally.

Very presumtious of you.

I had one 3 years ago or so as part of a work capability assessment done by the government.

I've been tested in school at the age of 7, and again at the age of 10 in relation to getting into a specialist gifted education class (in Darwin).

I don't know the results of any of the tests I did as a child, because the stock answer was it wasn't worth telling a child and it'll just make them arrogant.

Anecdotal evidence suggests those childhood test results were giving very high scores indeed, but I'll never know.

The test 3 years ago (done by a psychiatrist, though I don't know which test it is anymore - it's the most common test used in the UK though.), were as I've already mentioned before.

Hahahaha. So 145 is to pretend IQ ratings as saying 8 and a 1/2 inches is to pretend penis sizes... good to know.

I've performed a real IQ test, administered by Australian Psychological Society & i fell into the 120-130 range (with a margin of error of 5). That puts me into the bright to gifted section of the scale. The 140 marker which people keep on trying to put themselves into is highly gifted & only approx 1 in 1,000 people fall into this category. Also just for the record, genius does not appear on the IQ test, so anyone telling you they're a genius because they got 140+ is as full of shit as the score they made up.

IQ scoring is a better guage of of self-importance & the ability to act pompous then it is of intelligence, or potential.

-M

Yeah, I with that last statement. XD.

Altough my childhood and recent test results (within the last 3 years) suggest I'm very close to that border of 140 on official tests. (Test result was 136-142 with 95% confidence) (And in some more limited subject areas quite a bit above it. (A result of 155 or higher)

But it's still pointless shit considering anything actually meaningful to do with my life. >_<

(incedentally, the test I took, is, based on the evidence, probably the "1986 Stanford-Binet Test" - This test defines 130+ as "Genius" level intelligence.)

- This site makes some interesting points about IQ tests:
http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/intelligence.htm

Apparently, the correlation between IQ scores and success is demonstrable, but goes down significantly with each age group.

 

[lepinkainen]

According to Mensas official test, 163. Am I smart... wouldn't say so.

 

[puff ball]

IQ test's have a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 that means that 95% of the population should be between 70 and 130 with most being between 85 and 115. only 2.5% of the population has an IQ above 130.

straight from my statistics textbook

 

[Lawnmooer]

From what I hear, getting a job isn't just about how well you do in school, though that does help. It's more about how connected you are with the people in the company in which you're seeking employment. I highly doubt anyone with a marginally higher IQ but low social skills or interest in social interactions is going to be hired over someone with an average IQ that has done their research on the company, and is able to form some sort of working relationship with the person who's hiring.

From what all of my college tutors tell me what employers look for is predominantly past experience, if you have had a job(s) before you have a better chance at getting employed, even more so if 1 or more of the jobs you previously have done are in the same field (For example I want to go into the police service but as they are not employing for 2 years due to cutbacks to have a chance (Or even to find out whether they are employing) I will have to volenteer as a special constable (Similar powers to a regular but no pay))

If you do not have any past experience they look at what degrees/A-levels/A-level equivilents you have to the point where all my tutors agree that if you have the lowest grade of A-level you won't get a second look regardless of what kind of person you are.

Social people do not get prioritised over people with better grades (Since they look at qualifications before meeting you) but it will help with any interviews you might have.

 

[hypovolemia]

From the rhetoric I've heard spouted, your IQ shouldn't change over time. So yeah, pattern recognition and whatnot, but books shouldn't really affect that.

It changes quite a bit actually. Your "fluid" abilities like spatial performance or mental calculations peak in your mid-to-late twenties and get worse afterwards, while abilities like vocabulary tend to improve with age. And that's not even counting that taking the same test twice (or two different tests) will give you two different results.


The only practical use (I can think of) IQ tests have is to detect certain cognitive deficits in childhood or after neurological damage. And that's actually pretty useful.