What's your IQ?

[Beowulf]

Wares the optchun for 76 cos I'm ded cleva I is. not as fik as sum the rest of mi famly is got an qi of 63 so I'm de braneist wun.

Actually.. I passed the Mensa Home test and went for the adjudicated test and passed that too (This was circa 91/92) .. however then I didn't want to join Mensa as I had read some things about them being a bunch of elitist snobs.

I have no idea what my IQ is now.. Not had a "proper" test for a while now.

(personally IQ tests are overrated IMHO !!)

[Tessalicious]

See already someone (guess it was you ) has put that they have iq of 140-150 which puts them in the top 0.13 % which would make them one of most clever people on the planet !!!

Er, actually that's wrong. When I did the test (about 3 years ago), an IQ of 142 put you in the top 2% while 158 was needed to put you in the top 1%.

[JiveLad]

Why do the poll categories only go up to 160?

I think that is slightly presumptious.

(IQ tests are really good for measuring................IQ).

[David Franklin]

Oops, soz, I still tend to think in terms of Tripos. Yep, it would have been some kind of variation on Mods and Greats presumably.

His website says he got a first in Natural Sciences, no mention of distinctions etc. but I don't know how much that means.

At the end of the day, what a top first generally says is that you were the best candidate at answering problems that can reasonably be solved in 20-30 minutes or so. This doesn't necessarily correlate with being a decent researcher. There is, of course, a similar problem with IQ tests.

[Lee Bartholomew]

Er, actually that's wrong. When I did the test (about 3 years ago), an IQ of 142 put you in the top 2% while 158 was needed to put you in the top 1%.

Different IQ tests tell you different things. Thats the point I was making in the post.

[Terpsichorea]

His website says he got a first in Natural Sciences, no mention of distinctions etc. but I don't know how much that means.

At the end of the day, what a top first generally says is that you were the best candidate at answering problems that can reasonably be solved in 20-30 minutes or so. This doesn't necessarily correlate with being a decent researcher. There is, of course, a similar problem with IQ tests.

Absolutely, having a First is (generally) a prerequisite for going on to postgraduate study, but the skills you need to get a First (especially at Oxbridge) are different from those you need, say, as a doctoral student. Generally speaking, getting a First is about being a bit pyrotechnic in your approach, you're there to dazzle the examiner. You have to show you have it all down pat, and then show the examiner something different, something they haven't seen before. Doctoral work is less glamorous, more about steady application (IMO) than showy brilliance.

[David Franklin]

Wares the optchun for 76 cos I'm ded cleva I is. not as fik as sum the rest of mi famly is got an qi of 63 so I'm de braneist wun.

Don't know if it was intentional on your part, but I feel impelled to respond:

please if you get a chanse, put some flowers on Algernons grave in the bak yard...".

has put that they have iq of 140-150 which puts them in the top 0.13 % which would make them one of most clever people on the planet !!!

Actually, assuming you're using the website you quoted, it would only be about the top 0.3% (either the website figures don't correspond exactly to a normal distribution or I'm not getting the continuity corrections right, but I can't get an exact calculation to work, so I can't be more precise).

And 0.3% (or even 0.13%) is hardly one of the most clever people on the planet. Given the numbers, you'd expect at least 2 or 3 people like that on the forum.

Why do the poll categories only go up to 160?

I assumed that was what the "really clever" category was for. Maybe I should change my vote...

[Little Monkey]

We've had a few of these threads before, like here.

And this is what I posted last time:

Congratulations!
Your general IQ score is 143.

A person whose IQ score falls in the range of 129-143 is considered to be "highly intelligent".

I'm sure I scored much higher in the last Mensa test I did..... I'm getting old ans stupid!

[Dan]

Actually.. I passed the Mensa Home test and went for the adjudicated test and passed that too (This was circa 91/92) .. however then I didn't want to join Mensa as I had read some things about them being a bunch of elitist snobs.

I have no idea what my IQ is now..

Still 91/92 ??!

[Rocky]

Er, actually that's wrong. When I did the test (about 3 years ago), an IQ of 142 put you in the top 2% while 158 was needed to put you in the top 1%.

That's interesting because when I sat the adjudicated test 20 years ago 145 was top 2% and 152+ was top 1% and technically 'genius' level. I find it difficult to believe that we have become more intelligent as a nation and have therefore had the figures adjusted upwards! It also means I've gone from being a genius to just very bright..

Of course the home test is nothing like the adjudicated test which IMO is in a different league... I'm also surprised that it hasn't been adapted as its content is so male biased.

In the end common sense and nous are far more valuable in the real World than a high IQ and anyone who passes and then actually joins MENSA, wants their head examining anyway...

[David Franklin]

That's interesting because when I sat the adjudicated test 20 years ago 145 was top 2% and 152+ was top 1% and technically 'genius' level. I find it difficult to believe that we have become more intelligent as a nation and have therefore had the figures adjusted upwards!

See Flynn effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

(Yes, I also find it hard to credit, looking at the youth of today...)

[Andy McGregor]

Er, actually that's wrong. When I did the test (about 3 years ago), an IQ of 142 put you in the top 2% while 158 was needed to put you in the top 1%.

I was just about to post this. I was tested as part of an excercise conducted by my company many years ago and had a score of 142 and was told this put me in the top 2.5%. I asked the tester why I wasn't more successful as I was so clever. He said IQ was only part of being successful

My company were trying to profile their employees at the time and were looking at pshychological profiling as well as intelligence, reasoning power and a few other things I forget, probabaly memry and speling

[ducasi]

I was given a formal IQ test when I was at school, around 15 years old.

I got quite a good score, though I wondered at the time when I noticed that the examiner made a mistake and gave me a few points extra whether that meant I deserved to be marked down for not doing quite so well, or marked up for being smarter than the man testing me.

Anyway, I was told I was in the top half percent of the population. Don't think I've done as well in any (non-formal) test since then, which just goes to show you that kids are smarter than adults. (Or something – maybe I'm not smart enough any more to draw the correct conclusions. )

[Gus]

Where is Dance Cat when you need her? ... Aforementioned lass, having some knowledge of learning abilities, has been to great pains to piont out the correlation (or not) between IQ and real intelligence.

I've got a reasonably good IQ but this gets more than compensated by a clinically poor memory and a pathlogical need to open mouth before engaging brain. I've probably got a 20 point advantage over my baby brother .... but he's one of the sharpest people I know and I will seek his counsel first ahead of all the people I know who are members of mensa or have serious MBAs. However, I do take exception to the automatic assumption that 'High IQ = Low Commonsense' though. Thats just too glib.

My slight handle on the subject is that IQ is just one of many factors and intelligence can manifest itself in many ways. Is the ability to undewrtsand why someone is hurting and manage to devise an approach to mitigate that pain less 'intelligent' than the ability to solve a rubicks cube or play a high standard of chess?

[Gus]

Er, actually that's wrong. When I did the test (about 3 years ago), an IQ of 142 put you in the top 2% while 158 was needed to put you in the top 1%.

I think there are two different scales. When I did the entrance exam I think the pass rate for 'standard membership' (sometimes referred to as DENSA ... non-genius members) was 148 on the Cattell III B scale ... but that equates to only 132 on the Wechsler Scales ... go figure

[dance cat]

Where is Dance Cat when you need her? ... Aforementioned lass, having some knowledge of learning abilities, has been to great pains to piont out the correlation (or not) between IQ and real intelligence.

I've got a reasonably good IQ but this gets more than compensated by a clinically poor memory and a pathlogical need to open mouth before engaging brain. I've probably got a 20 point advantage over my baby brother .... but he's one of the sharpest people I know and I will seek his counsel first ahead of all the people I know who are members of mensa or have serious MBAs. However, I do take exception to the automatic assumption that 'High IQ = Low Commonsense' though. Thats just too glib.

My slight handle on the subject is that IQ is just one of many factors and intelligence can manifest itself in many ways. Is the ability to undewrtsand why someone is hurting and manage to devise an approach to mitigate that pain less 'intelligent' than the ability to solve a rubicks cube or play a high standard of chess?

There are eight different types of intelligence and Daniel Goldman has done a great deal of work on emotional intelligence and how this helps people to be more successful in life and I'm not just referring to business or how much you earn. There are three main learning styles though I have worked with people who seem to be equal in two out of the three.
If you are good at learning to learn-understanding what makes a good learner and what outside factors help your learning- then this makes children in school settings perform better and has been shown to produce more rounded individuals.
In terms of IQ there are so many different ways of testing it and so many factors that can influence test performance that it surely has to be taken in relation to overall performance. If Mr X has an IQ of 150 yet no ability to fix my car and Mr Y has an IQ of 100 and is a skilled mechanic I know who I would want to help me when my car breaks down.

[drathzel]

I took an iq test a short while back but it wasnt one of these internet ones. It was a legit one. I was pleasantly surprised with the result.

[Spin dryer]

In most situations, emotional intelligence and social intelligence are far more important than IQ.

[Gadget]

I like the TV quiz... the one with that Stephen Fry bloke... does that count for anything?

[killingtime]

I'm going to post a poll with this, because I'd be interested in what the IQ of forumites is. There's any manner of jokes available from that point...

I think "I'm on the Simpletons' Sofa" should be an option .