posted
Every once in a while I take a Tickle.com IQ test, and my scores are gradually falling. I started around 170, then dropped to 150, then 138, now 135.
I can't figure out why I get successively lower scores on the same IQ test.
Posts: 550 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I'm not mistaken, IQ Test results are related to age. A 170 for a 7-year-old is different from a 170 for a 27-year-old. I think that, as you get older, your IQ number will drop without your IQ actually dropping.
posted
An IQ is intended to be a measure of mental age divided by physical age, times 100. So if your mental age is twice your physical age, you'd have an IQ of 200.
Now, this creates an obvious problem as people get older and the curve of "mental age" growth flattens -- that is, as the correlation between age and "mental age" smears -- a tiny difference in mental ability that previously created a tiny difference in mental age will now cause a much larger difference in mental age, so in older people the high IQs are "closer" to each other than among young people.
There are numerous other problems with the tests as well, though when administered by a trained professional (yes, good real IQ tests must allow for the subjective judgements of a tester in order to evaluate things such as partial answers, evaluation of strategies used to arrive at answers, and choosing which test questions to ask in order to reveal appropriate abilities) they can help one discover many things about one's learning abilities, as well as providing a rough yardstick by which to measure one's self with (someone with an IQ of 150 is likely smarter than someone with an IQ of 100. w00t.).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Don't feel bad. I just took the test and scored 102. Maybe in ten years I'll be all the way to 80! I can't wait.
Posts: 218 | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged |
Maybe I should do this with my real age, sex, etc, instead of saying I'm a 87-year-old hermaphrodite living in Alaska . . .
Posts: 550 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heheh, I just took the test, and I can help you with why your score is lowering. The key is with the last statement -- they give your score by correlating it with other people who've taken the test. Quite simply, too many smart young people have taken it.
I am reasonably confident I missed no more than two answers, and I can only think of one that I possibly missed. And as you've said, its the exact same test, so your number right variance is likely low. Hence the variance in score is likely due to other people.
Who knows how accurate the algorithm is, so it may be that its been correcting towards more accurate results. However, I doubt this, and suggest that for anyone getting nearly all of them right its results are probably the equivalent of "you scored really well", and just what it considers a "high score" has changed as more people take the test.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In theory your IQ should never change. You might be able work on skills that would be tested but you shouldn't be able to get any more or less intelligent over time. I'm sure the biggest problem is that the test is bad.
Someone once gave me a Mensa book with questions in them and I managed to prove that one of the answers to a question was wrong.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Anthro -- look up something called the Flynn effect. (I think -- now watch me be wrong) A study done with gifted individuals that showed the more they were tested, the scores would usually change toward the lower...
(I should really go check my notes on this before I post)
This number is based on a scientific formula that compares how many questions you answered correctly on the Classic IQ Test relative to others.
Your Intellectual Type is Visionary Philosopher. This means you are highly intelligent and have a powerful mix of skills and insight that can be applied in a variety of different ways. Like Plato, your exceptional math and verbal skills make you very adept at explaining things to others — and at anticipating and predicting patterns. And that's just some of what we know about you from your IQ results.
posted
I scored 145, but I know I'm not as intelligent as Mack, so there has to be a problem with the test.
Tests taken in grade school and high school all pegged me at 125, which was enough to land me in the geek class for the remainder of my schooling. No shop classes
I had my buddies at work take the test the next day, and the questions were the same. Afterward we compared notes. One scored 138 and the other scored 140, and they missed two that I was able to explain to them. They retook the test and kicked my bum. There were at least two subjective questions for which there was no right answer, and my buddies had different answers for those.
The big and little shapes with arrows(?) question was the one I probably got wrong.
quote: Congratulations, Billy Joe! Your IQ score is 142
This number is based on a scientific formula that compares how many questions you answered correctly on the Classic IQ Test relative to others.
Your Intellectual Type is Visionary Philosopher. This means you are highly intelligent and have a powerful mix of skills and insight that can be applied in a variety of different ways. Like Plato, your exceptional math and verbal skills make you very adept at explaining things to others — and at anticipating and predicting patterns. And that's just some of what we know about you from your IQ results.
Now, here's the weird thing. You can use the back button and get to your test and change answers then rescore it. There were only two questions that I thought could possibly have a different answer and I went back and indivually changed those answers. Each time, it LOWERED my score. Then I thought maybe it was deducting points for having messed with the test, or for the added time.
Not so. I changed the answer back to what I originally had put in there and my score went back to 142.
So, in essence, I got every question on the test correct and scored a 142.
Oddly, I went back and changed an answer on one to an alternative I KNOW is wrong and it dropped only to 138.
So, it didn't react much to a CLEARLy wrong answer.
Although that one change did totally affect my "intellectual type" To whit:
quote:Your Intellectual Type is Facts Curator. This means you are highly intelligent and have picked up an impressive and unique collection of facts and figures over the years. You've got a remarkable vocabulary and exceptional math skills — which puts you in the same class as brainiacs like Bill Gates. And that's just some of what we know about you from your test results.
So, instead of being like Plato, I'm kind of like Bill Gates.
Talk about Good news: Bad news!!!
This thing is not being scored in any way that I can fathom.
Maybe someone with a 160+ IQ can figure it out for me???
Edited after re-running test with an obviously wrong answer
posted
At one point the company I presently work for had all of its full time people take personality tests.
They were intriguing to say the least.
Then, after a rather spirited young woman took a test, we recieved a call from the testing company, suggesting we send the young woman into counselling before she hurt herself or others.
She did that bizarrely on the test.
Since she hand never shown any signs of truly dangerous behavior, the management sat down and talked to her.
It seems she got bored quickly with the test, and just forgot about the questions. She made designs usings the collumns of dots to be filled in. Little smiley faces and such.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I usually score around 160 on IQ tests, but I got a 135 on this one.
Anyway...
quote: In theory your IQ should never change. You might be able work on skills that would be tested but you shouldn't be able to get any more or less intelligent over time. I'm sure the biggest problem is that the test is bad.
Someone once gave me a Mensa book with questions in them and I managed to prove that one of the answers to a question was wrong.
I think it should be possible for someone to raise their IQ, simply by practicing problem solving and getting a better method of solving problems.
Also I once got a Mensa book as a gift and I found a suprising number of incorrect answers given in the book.
Posts: 2489 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You can improve your score, but you can't actually get more intelligent, which is what your IQ attempts to measure.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
nfl -- yes and no. One of the primary originators of the scale involved, Binet, decried any application of it as more than a general indicator, firmly taking the stance that it was but a rough measure of ability in a few of the many varied measurements of intelligence.
It became considered more a test of intelligence itself over time as things such as eugenics and nationalism (read: anti-immigration, see: Goddard) became popular. If anything, the "results" obtained in those pursuits should quickly convince one its use as "pure measure of intelligence" is hopelessly flawed.
The name does not claim to be a measure of intelligence itself (though it would seem the quickest route to reach that suggested by the name, the intelligence quotient, would involve a measure of intelligence; this is in fact not how it is done professionally in many cases, the intelligence quotient is instead measured directly without first determining the absolute intelligence).
All in all, as for what it "says" it measures, I fear I must disagree with you. The man who can best be determined the originator of the sort of test certainly disagrees with you, and among the more reputable sites I found talking about the nature of the test, none went so far to assert that it was a direct measure of intelligence, many in fact explicitly denying that.
That is has been used (or mis-used, as the case may be) as a measure of intelligence qua intelligence does not mean it is such, is intended to be such, or anything of the sort.
posted
Considering how the intelligence test has evolved Binet is no longer as relevant. Under Binet's system people's scores would plummet over time due to the fact that people's age would continuously increase and their scores would probably not after a short time. What a full intelligence covers has also changed as it now measures more than "book smarts" and includes things like social intelligence.
What exactly are you disagreeing with? That your intelligence cannot increase or that you can improve your score?
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
First, its the intelligence quotient test we're discussing.
Second, I'm disagreeing with your assertions that 1) its "supposed to be" or "intended as" or anything of the sort a measure of an absolute, unchanging intelligence, and that thus one "should" be unable to change one's score.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Binet's original "mental age/chronological age" formula was dropped a long time ago. Current intelligence tests collect results from a cross section of the population and norm the results such that an average intelligence score is 100, with a standard deviation of 15. A person with an IQ of two standard deviations above the norm (130) is considered gifted.
One of the features of an IQ test is that must be administered by a psychometrist in a controlled environment. The subject is supposed to be unfamiliar with the test, and the score is based on the time it takes to complete a task, and/or correctness of answers. Repeating the test invalidates the results, however, there are several different tests that can be taken.
I think Stanford-Binet still uses a single test, but Weschler uses several tests, Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale, with separate tests for children and adults.
Very few people actually know their IQ. Although the tests are administered with some frequency, the results are rarely shared with the subject, unless the subject is "classified" as learning disabled or mentally retarded, at which point the IQ is listed in the I.E.P for that student.
Most people who "know" their IQ have had a number extrapolated from standardized tests, which are also normed. So (for example) if a child's standardized test scores place her in the "97th percentile" you can back calculate the Z-score to find that they are 1.88 standard deviations above the norm, which is equivalent to an IQ of 128. Unfortunately, these extrapolated scores don't give a true picture of IQ. My extrapolated score from my 4th grade standardized tests apparently gave me an IQ of 162 (I don't know the raw figures, that's the score my teacher told me). My actual IQ score (yes, administered by a psychometrist) was 127.
IQ should not change with age, with the exception of brain damage or senility.
As far as the Tickle.com test is concerned, it appears to be a scam to get you to divulge personal information for marketing research purposes. I refuse to take it.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
