Moving on from the previous post in terms of character type, I decided to do an IQ test which I ran into online. The IQ test website is based in Denmark, which supposedly tests a person's general IQ (are there other kinds of IQ's? I'll have to look into this). Anyways, I decided to take it for fun and I scored a 122 with a ranking in the 92.8%th percentile. I also took a second test with a score of 126, ranking in the 95.8%th percentile. The results of these tests seem fairly consistent.
I also should note that IQ tests are also supposed to be correlated by age (which these tests ignore), and some people have argued that with out this information, the test is meaningless. I would argue this is true for young children scoring very well, however for people above the age of 20, the age factor effecting the results of these tests should be less prominent.
Of course, I should note that these tests only measure the relative intelligence between myself and my peers based on the distribution of results. These tests posted online, use only 30-40 questions to calculate your IQ score and I am somewhat skeptical on how well (and with what resolution) these tests are able to calculate one's IQ. Of course, I am not certain about the significance of these tests without further data, in particular the average score and the final score distribution.
For example, if the average score was 20/40 and 99% of people scored +/- 3 of the average, then the variance would not be very large and just answering 1 question over the average would significantly bump your IQ score up, but the overall intelligence of the surveyed population could possibly have a small variance.
Given the results of the 2 tests taken, for the time being, I might be confident to say that my IQ is approximately in the 122-126 range. Note, if you score above 130, only about 2.3% of the population might be more intelligent than you (that is, 2.3 people out of 100).
I should also note that having a high IQ is not the "end-all be-all of everything," but it does help for situations for logical reasoning and there are also other kinds of "intelligences" which may include aesthetic and kinesthetic components, which are not easily measured (it would analogous to assigning a score to something abstract like "creativity").
In light of these ideas, the pressing questions which I would like to think about are:
1. What are the kinds of possible "intelligences"?
2. How can they be measured?
3. How can they be improved?
5 comments:
I did about 20 questions before saying "this is crap" and just guessed "H" for the rest of them. Score was 107.
Most of these internet based tests are completely useless.
I suspect most of the internet tests have inflated scores. But it might just be me being very smart...
Most internet tests aren't validated, which makes them useless. The .dk test looks pretty solid however and has a large sampling. Since it seems associated with Mensa, which does validate their tests, it should be fairly good at the upper end, which most webs are not. It might not be an even population distribution however. I took it quickly and it seems to suggest only pattern searching, which is not a comprehensive test.
General intelligence refers to an attempt to register across all forms of intelligence - the more g loaded your tests are, the more "universal" they are suppose to be. The tests are specifically suppose to test fluid (if you want, "raw" power) and crystalized (learned, if you will) - gF and gC. Normally to find out how well it works, a standardized test is used that is known to be strongly g loaded (ie: WAIS, KAIT). Course, taking those tests costs 300-500 CDN last time I checked.
Who cares...intelligence tests measure whatever intelligence tests measures which is a usefully tautology to keep in mind...
I wrote the real thing twice in my life: 1. to get into an exclusive elementary school (in HK, not Canada) and once when I was twelve and the educational system thought I was dumb =P. The results were about the same. Regardless, I feel stupid more often than not...
The real test is LIFE and you define how you want to suceed.
Ida, seriously? The education system thought you were dumb at one point? I had a similar experience when I was in kindergarten.
I do think intelligence is important, teaching/encouraging people to be intelligent is also something important. If that were not the case, we would have no use for schools (then again, I think that the current state of schools leaves much more to be desired out of them).
Your point about life, though vague, is valid. Though I don't think many people have a good idea of defining an objective and trying to succeed at it.
Post a Comment