Do you know your IQ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These tests have got to be BS. if 100 is average, where are all the people who get below 100?

There's some confirmation bias. Those of us who scored well don't mind answering the question. But also, let's not forget the demographics of the DC are and DCUM. We are more highly educated than the average, and the IQ test definitely shows privilege bias.

Is IQ something you were born with? Or is it increased with education?

Advocates for test say it is genetic. Common sense says it is a human construct and fundamentally bias toward the culture of the dominate class. If it is something that can be studied for (it is) then you are not born with it. One is trained into it, either explicitly by studying or implicitly by the way one’s parents raise them. Many, many, many studies show the tests used in the US are bias toward the white affluent. If one is from a different background their word choices will be different, their descriptions will be different, the puzzles they are trained to solve will be different, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How high does it go? Whatever it is that’s mine

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine is 138. I was tested because I didn't speak at all before 4 years old. Then I fell out of the moving car in the parking lot on the way to get the test. But, it turns out that was unrelated. I have since made of for my early lack of speech in spades.

My older brother who spoke for me has an IQ of 118. I know because I found all his files in a box at my house. I had great fun making fun of all of the comments in his report cards. What a fun day!

How do they test a child who doesn’t speak?

They don’t. The PP is lying. The test for 4 year olds is the WPPSI and it is totally unreliable at its best. More than half of it is “What is this?” or questions that require a verbal response. The other half is puzzles or “point to ___”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine was 138. Low for my family: my sister was 148, our mom was 156, and my father's was close to 180. I have never met anyone smarter than my father. But if you think being a super genius makes you super competent, etc., guess again. My father was brilliant, but EQ stunted. It is hard to hold a regular conversation with someone who intellectualizes everything.

My brilliant father (200) is in his third marriage. He’s cut off his mother, his sister, and his daughter among others. Emotional T Rex

One of my sons to my surprise has an IQ of 104. All of his life, people marveled at his intelligence, vocabulary etc. He made excellent grades and is very successful in his career.

🤷‍♀️

Here is another liar.
The test only goes up to 180.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These tests have got to be BS. if 100 is average, where are all the people who get below 100?

It's a bell curve -- most people are clustered around 100, very few at either end. 70% of people are between 85 and 120. Below 70 (two standard deviations below the mean) is considered cognitively impaired (less than 2% of people), while 130 and up are considered cognitively gifted (also less than 2% of people).

And the ones who claimed they were in the top 2% didn’t know this very basic information when they were writing things like “busboy” or whatever.

+1
Those people also don’t understand statistics or basic math, which is totally strange for gifted people. It is not strange for liars though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know, roughly. Psychologist family member tested me and my two siblings. Like a PP, my parents didn't want us to compare so I know the three of us all fall in the 130 to 140 range but not my exact IQ.

A family member tested you and you are in the 0.1 percentile. C’mon. You were stupid kids then but what’s your excuse now?

If they had said 160 I'd be skeptical, but this is a pretty "average" range in the smart bucket. All of us were top students with little effort, went to Ivy League schools, and are accomplished in our fields. I guess my neurosurgeon brother could have a sub-130 IQ but this range sounds right given other factors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine is 138. I was tested because I didn't speak at all before 4 years old. Then I fell out of the moving car in the parking lot on the way to get the test. But, it turns out that was unrelated. I have since made of for my early lack of speech in spades.

My older brother who spoke for me has an IQ of 118. I know because I found all his files in a box at my house. I had great fun making fun of all of the comments in his report cards. What a fun day!

How do they test a child who doesn’t speak?

They don’t. The PP is lying. The test for 4 year olds is the WPPSI and it is totally unreliable at its best. More than half of it is “What is this?” or questions that require a verbal response. The other half is puzzles or “point to ___”

I was not lying. But I have no idea how they did the testing. I do remember the parking lot incident but not the rest of the testing experience. (This was around 1980) I don’t believe I was fully mute, but mostly. I started reading extremely early. Maybe I could do one word answers. I do not know of taking another IQ test after that, but I was always in G&T classes. Then in 7th grade, I got a perfect score on the SAT, which qualified me for CTY. Then I spent all of college teaching standardized tests. Patterns and games are my favorite; SAT math, LSAT and whatever they call the dental school exam (I forgot; it has been over 20 years) were my specialities. I wasn’t particularly good on the ACT nor would I be for anything medical; recall isn’t a strength.

[Anonymous]

PP here again. There are a lot of downsides of high IQ. I think the sweet spot is around 125. Once you get higher than that, you start having different types of problems. My husband and several family members are 150-165, and I’m not the slightest bit jealous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mine is 138. I was tested because I didn't speak at all before 4 years old. Then I fell out of the moving car in the parking lot on the way to get the test. But, it turns out that was unrelated. I have since made of for my early lack of speech in spades.

My older brother who spoke for me has an IQ of 118. I know because I found all his files in a box at my house. I had great fun making fun of all of the comments in his report cards. What a fun day!

How do they test a child who doesn’t speak?

They don’t. The PP is lying. The test for 4 year olds is the WPPSI and it is totally unreliable at its best. More than half of it is “What is this?” or questions that require a verbal response. The other half is puzzles or “point to ___”

I was not lying. But I have no idea how they did the testing. I do remember the parking lot incident but not the rest of the testing experience. (This was around 1980) I don’t believe I was fully mute, but mostly. I started reading extremely early. Maybe I could do one word answers. I do not know of taking another IQ test after that, but I was always in G&T classes. Then in 7th grade, I got a perfect score on the SAT, which qualified me for CTY. Then I spent all of college teaching standardized tests. Patterns and games are my favorite; SAT math, LSAT and whatever they call the dental school exam (I forgot; it has been over 20 years) were my specialities. I wasn’t particularly good on the ACT nor would I be for anything medical; recall isn’t a strength.

Sure, Jan.

You probably went for a test but it wasn’t a real IQ test. There are very few tests designed for 4 year olds and most are not reliable. Many school districts do G&T classes by teacher recommendation, so you don’t actually need to be gifted - except gifted with the behavior necessary to get noticed as a good student.

[Anonymous]

Yeah my parents told me. I guess I was tested as a child but I have no recollection of that. I wish they hadn’t told me honestly. Always felt I had to do something great and I didn’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had a 139 when I was 14. I haven't taken it since. I had only slightly above average SAT scores though!

Then you don’t have an IQ higher than 98% of the population. SAT is not a difficult test for smart people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone going to fess up to having an iq ~100?

My two kids had IQ tests for learning disabilities. I don’t remember exact numbers but my daughter was in the average intelligence range and my son was in the superior intelligence range. I could have told them that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These tests have got to be BS. if 100 is average, where are all the people who get below 100?

There's some confirmation bias. Those of us who scored well don't mind answering the question. But also, let's not forget the demographics of the DC are and DCUM. We are more highly educated than the average, and the IQ test definitely shows privilege bias.

Maybe. But the scores people are posting are exaggerated. It doesn’t take a genius with a high IQ to see that. It’s embarrassing.

People with very high scores - and I know some of them - would have no qualms posting their scores on an anonymous board, especially since it’s the kind of thing no one brags about publicly. So I don’t think that the scores people are posting are exaggerated. You don’t have to believe them, but your “it’s embarrassing” comes across as a little…I dunno…defensive. I’ll just remind you that IQ is ultimately meaningless and has no bearing on success in life.

It seems like some are trying to outdo previous posters and maybe it’s more like people confusing their testing for “gifted” programs as IQ tests. But there’s definitely exaggeration and I find that embarrassing for grown people.

IQ can have meaning if you’re an outlier. Especially on the lower end. It makes life more difficult. But the majority of people go through life not knowing or caring what their IQ is. The most common need for IQ tests is suspecting a learning disability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here again. There are a lot of downsides of high IQ. I think the sweet spot is around 125. Once you get higher than that, you start having different types of problems. My husband and several family members are 150-165, and I’m not the slightest bit jealous.

I agree. My siblings and I are 120s to 130s and it has been fine. However my nephew tested very high - it was 150s, 160s range and life was / is very very difficult for him. He is now a young adult and is doing better but childhood and adolescent were socially and emotionally extremely hard. He couldn't relate at all to other kids. It has not been easy at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know, roughly. Psychologist family member tested me and my two siblings. Like a PP, my parents didn't want us to compare so I know the three of us all fall in the 130 to 140 range but not my exact IQ.

A family member tested you and you are in the 0.1 percentile. C’mon. You were stupid kids then but what’s your excuse now?

If they had said 160 I'd be skeptical, but this is a pretty "average" range in the smart bucket. All of us were top students with little effort, went to Ivy League schools, and are accomplished in our fields. I guess my neurosurgeon brother could have a sub-130 IQ but this range sounds right given other factors.

140 is not in the average range, it’s way above. I’m sure your brother is very talented and is in a very small group of people who have everything needed to become a neurosurgeon. But being a top student is not contingent on one test taken decades ago. Give yourself more credit than that.