IQ Test Whatnot

[Utisz]

Well, look at Mr. IQ champion.

Take 7 and multiply it by 31. Then subtract that from the number of this post.


Then print off that number and stick it on your fridge biatch.

[Polemarch]

Take 7 and multiply it by 31. Then subtract that from the number of this post.


Then print off that number and stick it on your fridge biatch.

I stayed out of the fray, I didn't want to hurt anyone's feelings. (including my own)

[Utisz]

It's a good test. You should take it even if you don't post the results. Otherwise you know that the not knowing will eat your insides until all that's left is a hollow Ph.

[Polemarch]

It's a good test. You should take it even if you don't post the results. Otherwise you know that the not knowing will eat your insides until all that's left is a hollow Ph.

I did Hustler's on the old site. I did decently well, but I was frustrated at the format. The visual/spatial emphasis of the test seemed to measure a very specific mental aptitude - one which I wouldn't really classify as "IQ". On the other hand, other forms of intelligence and aptitude testing are often criticized for their overreliance on verbal/math skills (i.e. skewed based on educational achievement/access/experience), so I can see why they've tried to get away from that.

I'll PM prometheus for the link (assuming it was closed?), unless it's just a general internet test you can send me to.

EDIT: Also, the olemarc is something I can probably do without. That's what the keto's for.

[C.J.Woolf]

I did Hustler's on the old site. I did decently well, but I was frustrated at the format. The visual/spatial emphasis of the test seemed to measure a very specific mental aptitude - one which I wouldn't really classify as "IQ". On the other hand, other forms of intelligence and aptitude testing are often criticized for their overreliance on verbal/math skills (i.e. skewed based on educational achievement/access/experience), so I can see why they've tried to get away from that.

Hustler also wanted to make the test language-independent. One of the top scorers was a native Croatian speaker, IIRC.

[kali]

I did Hustler's on the old site. I did decently well, but I was frustrated at the format. The visual/spatial emphasis of the test seemed to measure a very specific mental aptitude - one which I wouldn't really classify as "IQ". On the other hand, other forms of intelligence and aptitude testing are often criticized for their overreliance on verbal/math skills (i.e. skewed based on educational achievement/access/experience), so I can see why they've tried to get away from that.

The general idea is that spatial tests are culture-fair, but I really doubt that is true, after this video, which blew my mind to bits:



still a million times better than tests of crystallised intelligence.

(you can find tests of verbal/math skills on the website)

[Hephaestus]

I think Muller-Lyer only works because people don't see the lines as lines. They don't even realize they aren't seeing the lines as lines. If you see the lines as lines though, you more readily discard the extraneous information and the illusion vanishes.

This doesn't mean that there aren't biases at work. It's just that at least with that one illusion, the bias can be defused.

[ferrus]

http://www.kent.ac.uk/careers/tests/spatialtest.htm

This is interesting as it actually has many of them worked out (they are a lot easier than the examples we saw before, but still).

Number 20 was the most interesting, whether or not you can pick that out from the mass of information (noise vs. signal) is perhaps what distinguishes spatial reasoners and pattern finders from more verbally orientated people.

[msg_v2]

http://www.kent.ac.uk/careers/tests/spatialtest.htm

This is interesting as it actually has many of them worked out (they are a lot easier than the examples we saw before, but still).

Number 20 was the most interesting, whether or not you can pick that out from the mass of information (noise vs. signal) is perhaps what distinguishes spatial reasoners and pattern finders from more verbally orientated people.

Haven't taken the test, but I suspect very few Americans would do well on Number 20, given the answer.

[ferrus]

Haven't taken the test, but I suspect very few Americans would do well on Number 20, given the answer.

It's an idiom... the pattern is the important bit.