This IQ test takes no prisoners. There are 40 questions and you have 40 minutes to finish it. It gives you your score at the end.
http://iqtest.dk/main.swfI got 118. Guess I'm not Mensa material....
ya, towards the end I was getting a headache...I had no idea what the heck those patterns meant at all...110 for me, however, my musical ability outweighs my IQ
The last two were really hard.
I have to admit mine was a 116... but I stand behind the fact I'd do better if I didn't have an 18 year old emo girl IMing me at the same time.
Bren R.
Too much blood flowing to the other brain?
I'm with Hutzal at 110. I blame the fact that I didn't guess well.
Speaking of Mensa, though, I was appalled when I heard that you have to pay to take their IQ test. That seems like the real IQ test right there, whether or not you're willing to pay for an IQ test.
AN IQ test is a lot more than just pattern recognition. So I would not say this is a real IQ test. My 10 year old son scored 137 because he is particularly gifted at visual-spatial cognition. However, that does not mean that he would score 137 on the WAIS.
Yeah, I've done a lot better on other so-called IQ tests with a broader range of problems, but on the other hand, it should probably be depressing if I ever score high on a test, since I'm just sitting on whatever potential it's indicating, anyway.
Quote:
Too much blood flowing to the other brain?
Shall I even up that 2 point discrepancy with this cross-peen hammer? 
Not one of my favorite tests, though... I think reasoning and spatial perception should be a bigger part than pattern matching, which this one catered to... the CSI types would do well on this one I think.
Bren R.
Quote:
I think reasoning and spatial perception should be a bigger part than pattern matching, which this one catered to...
I've noticed that the Mensa tests also are big on the patterns. When I was growing up in the '70s, I would go through my parents' old Reader's Digests and do the "Are You a Genius?" quizzes that Mensa would provide.
My wife is a psychometrist (cool word!) and can tell you all you need to know about the WAIS and WISC. But the real reason I married her is her in-depth knowledge of the Woodcock-Johnson. 
I managed to get a 135 on this test. I too have gotten "higher" scores with other tests, but this one seems more "real" than others...
Of course the results of an IQ test don't mean that one person is smarter than another. For me, I just find what seems to be an increased desire to learn. It drives my wife nuts how I can research the snot out of something and still not get bored. Maybe some day I will take on audio to be "audio smart" like everyone else is here.
Quote:
... I'd do better if I didn't have an 18 year old emo girl IMing me at the same time.
Speakergrrl, is that you?!
a mild tangent, but I wonder how many people have seen the word in Mojo's avatar?
Keep wondering, because YOU'LL NEVER KNOW.
Noticed from the start...very creative, Mojo.
Now I see it that you pointed it out, but I just thought it was a dog before that.
Quote:
...I just thought it was a dog...
Well, back to the drawing board with that avatar I suppose.
Quote:
a mild tangent, but I wonder how many people have seen the word in Mojo's avatar?
The word is Mojo right? I have seen that since the first time I have seen his avatar...I have never seen anything else...maybe I am missing something?
Quote:
...maybe I am missing something?
I don't think so; I think you are up to speed.
I tried for a while to fashion a cool copy-cat avatar using the letters in my screen name, to no avail. Good thing I don't work as a graphic artist.
You mean you don't also see the dog?
Quote:
You mean you don't also see the dog?
I did not see the dog until all you guys started pointing it out to me...hence the 110.
I propose an experiment where Axiom gives away equipment to those who are willing to post IQs lower than 100. If yours is 90-99, you get an Algonquin pair. If you're an 80-89, you get an EP400. If you're less than 80, you get an amp. You deserve it.
If only there were a way to prevent fakery. "Look, I'm a 37, do I get two amps?!"
Just sayin'. Yes, I'm evil. Today. Tomorrow, I go back to using my superpowers for good.
I don't know what you guys are talking about there being a name or a dog in Mo's avatar. I will say, however, that it's even sexier than some of those inkblots they also showed me when I was sent for an IQ test when I was 12.
I think it's kind of mean for people to be calling Mojo's likeness a dog.
There we go. I can never be mistaken for a dog again.
Hey, does that mean people can't call you a big dog or top dog anymore?
I've been starin' at the avatar too long.... it's like the eyes are following me.
Also, my IQ is 14 (amp in black, please) and I just saw Natalie Portman sniffin' around dog poop.
Did I just hear this thread screech to a halt?
Heh... I was just wondering if this one and the bad actress one would be still going when I came back from my vacation...
LOL!
Tres bien, MSJ.
Quote:
Heh... I was just wondering if this one and the bad actress one would be still going when I came back from my vacation...
If that is what you are wondering about while on vacation, you're spending too much time on the Axiom message board. Just enjoy your vacay!
Go anywhere good?
Quote:
My 10 year old son scored 137 ...
I just realized that you have now given us an Axiom version of "Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?".
And that so far, with our 5 contestants, the answer is "No", although nickbuol could claim a tie since he is within the margin of error.
Mojo is totally right, though, in that this is not a valid test of IQ due to its limited scope. On the WAIS there are 7 subtests on the Verbal Scale and 7 subtests on the Performance Scale. This online test probably only hits a couple of areas on the Performance Scale.
Still, nice to have a little evidence (however little it is) that Axiom purchasers are smarter than the average bear, as Yogi would say. Of course, we all already knew that.
Your evidence is still lacking...
Quote:
Quote:
My 10 year old son scored 137 ...
I just realized that you have now given us an Axiom version of "Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader?".
And that so far, with our 5 contestants, the answer is "No", although nickbuol could claim a tie since he is within the margin of error.
Mojo is totally right, though, in that this is not a valid test of IQ due to its limited scope. On the WAIS there are 7 subtests on the Verbal Scale and 7 subtests on the Performance Scale. This online test probably only hits a couple of areas on the Performance Scale.
IQ Test are so subjective. A person's score can vary from day to day, test to test.
I edged you by 8 points, if that's what you're getting at.
Quote:
IQ Test [sic] are so subjective. A person's score can vary from day to day, test to test.
Maybe you are just trying to be modest. Hey, don't worry about it! You scored really high, in the top 2%. Be proud!
But I am going to challenge you on the "subjective" part of your claim.
If you mean these fun fluffy little web tests, then, sure, I'll agree with you. Who knows where half of these things come from, but I enjoy doing them from time to time. The fact that my scores have ranged from 126-160 would seem to indicate that you are correct. That's too big a range to be very meaningful.
But when you get into the serious Mac Daddy psychological instruments such as the WAIS or the WISC, with massive amounts of research and development, then you are getting a good objective test of a person's IQ. Remember, an IQ is fairly stable over time, unless there's a disease process going on, like dementia.
Sure, a person can have a bad testing day, but these professional assessments are so thorough that, with an honest effort by the participant, they will accurately determine IQ within a margin of error of a few points. Usually, a psychological testing report will include a phrase like, "Peter's full scale IQ was 118. The chances of repeat testing yielding an IQ within the range of 113-123 are 90% ... " Speaking from personal experience, the assessment I had in elementary school was within 4 points of the one I had in my residency.
Full-scale IQ tests administered by skilled professionals are accurate and reproducible, and thus are scientifically valid. They are helpful tools providing valuable information for mental health workers, educators, and others.
Quote:
Remember, an IQ is fairly stable over time, unless there's a disease process going on, like dementia.
Sometimes a Phenomenon will help, too?
Quote:
But I am going to challenge you on the "subjective" part of your claim.
If you mean these fun fluffy little web tests, then, sure, I'll agree with you. Who knows where half of these things come from, but I enjoy doing them from time to time. The fact that my scores have ranged from 126-160 would seem to indicate that you are correct. That's too big a range to be very meaningful.
But when you get into the serious Mac Daddy psychological instruments such as the WAIS or the WISC, with massive amounts of research and development, then you are getting a good objective test of a person's IQ. Remember, an IQ is fairly stable over time, unless there's a disease process going on, like dementia.
Sure, a person can have a bad testing day, but these professional assessments are so thorough that, with an honest effort by the participant, they will accurately determine IQ within a margin of error of a few points. Usually, a psychological testing report will include a phrase like, "Peter's full scale IQ was 118. The chances of repeat testing yielding an IQ within the range of 113-123 are 90% ... " Speaking from personal experience, the assessment I had in elementary school was within 4 points of the one I had in my residency.
Full-scale IQ tests administered by skilled professionals are accurate and reproducible, and thus are scientifically valid. They are helpful tools providing valuable information for mental health workers, educators, and others.
Absolutely, but my claim still is valid if you think about it. Let's look at my statement again.
Quote:
IQ Tests are so subjective. A person's score can vary from day to day, test to test.
You are looking at it form the test and the scorer's point of view. I am looking at it from the person taking the test point of view. A person can, potentially, score differently if they take the same test on different days, it happens all of the time. And the other variant is the tests... I said "test to test" meaning that there are multiple sources for IQ tests, from the "fluffy" ones to the serious ones, you can, and will get different scores. Some are like talking to your neighbor about a sore throat that you have, and others are like going to an E.N.T. doctor. You may get similar diagnosis, but the doctor should be more accurate in it.
So yes, by taking the WAIS or WISC you SHOULD get the more accurate result, but even you mention the margin of error to some degree.
So the challenge was accepted and I think that in actuality, it wasn't a challenge, just a clarification. So in reality, we are on the same page. You just chose to discus your point more than I did. 
Quote:
So in reality, we are on the same page.
Sure, I guess. All in all, IQ tests do a good job of objectifying some subjective concepts.
I'm glad that you clarified your original statement. It had sounded like you were dismissive of the concept of IQ and how to measure it.
Quote:
Sometimes a Phenomenon will help, too?
I liked the part in that movie where he was asked to name as many mammals as he could in 60 seconds. It's a fun exercise.
Whenever I hear the word phenomenon, I think of this clip of Dr. Sandra Bullock, animal psychiatrist.
Thanks for the laugh this morning....
I hope I don't owe you $150...
