How accurate are IQ tests?

I wasn't sure where to post this, so please move if necessary.

I remember doing an IQ test when I was still in school, that was some years ago. I am sure however that if i have to do an IQ test now, the results will be different. I think I gained more wisdom and knowledge as I got older.

I tried searching for an answer to this question, but kept on getting these internet IQ tests which i think are all fake, or totally inaccurate. I did a couple of them and got totally different results??

Is there 1 IQ test that is 100 percent accurate and that will have the same results if you had to do it a couple of years from now?

I was just wondereing, since i saw another poster say that the average IQ is 100. If the tests aren't accurate how sure can we be of that?

Any help would be appreciated

VVV

-Most- of the tests you'll find spread about online, and even the cheap version in classrooms aren't going to be -that- accurate of a test. They may give you a general idea of what your intelligence is but it's definitely not a "standardized test" like the real IQ test. From what I understand if you want a proper IQ test it can be 1) rather expensive and 2) usually given out by a certified psychologist.

If you can peel an apple from the inside out you have a fairly high IQ.

If you can patiently watch some one peel an apple from the inside out you have reached a state of zen and should probably get a job.

The truly wise drink only green alcohol and water.

A wise man he did once say 'double post'.

Thanks i understand and appreciate your comments.

I do feel however you are missing my point.

Let's say a person did an IQ test and the results were, 140 IQ. This then automatically makes this person think he is intelligent or clever, smarter than 3.6 billion people, purely based on the result of the test. But if the test was inaccurate, his whole belief and credibility is destroyed with that information.

So how do we know then how smart someone really is?

VVV

When I took my Mensa test - back in 1982 - I remember sitting in a classroom on a Saturday morning, with a couple dozen others, and being told to get a p*ss break in now or forever hold it (not forever, but for the next 6 hours). Then we were handed the first of 12 1/2 hour tests, which were each focused on different aspects of general aptitude and areas of mental expenditure. The aptitude tests were to measure the person's intellectual curiosity, which is an indicator of the person's capacity, since the fascile mind will seek information (generally) and when tossed in with the traditional IQ tests (which measure a person's capacity to figure out bias-free challenges, such as abstract design associations and pattern recognition) help refine the determination process.

We received 12 test, one after another, with no breaks whatsoever. No calculators and no excuses. When it was done, the whole room erupted in a blizzard of chatter, as if we'd all known each other forever. It was quite an experience. I've read that Mensa doesn't test like that anymore. After that test, I felt that I'd really been tested, and whatever it revealed was probably as close to accurate as anything was going to get.

I don't agree that a person's IQ can't be determined by testing. A person's capacity for success is not a person's IQ, and most people confuse the two. A person's IQ is the relative "maturity" of that person's intellectual development, as compared to others that have been tested who share that person's overall demography. The errors occur when people of differing backgrounds are directly compared with each other to determine the IQ score of either.

Like everything a human being gets its hands on, IQ determination can get screwed up. That said, just because some people screw it up, doesn't mean the entire premise is invalid.

reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep


i think fear and hate have direct and indirect effects on our IQs. As well as how much others can manipulate them.
IQs are directly related to how perceptive one is to new information, and how effectively they adapt to it. if one is afraid of the information, they are more likely to be less receptive to it, people usually run from what they are scared of ..... or they fight it, which is still less receptive than acceptance. fight or flight are not all the options, but fear and hate are not receptive to new information, thus may not be aware of all the options available.

perhaps fear and hate even have side affects, but whether the pros outway the cons seems to be up to the individual.

these are some of the thoughts i entertain,
et

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher


Thankyou very intelligent post. You must have a high IQ. And have a star!

I agree with your interpretation. Fear and Hate does indeed influence our intellegence.

I just can't agree with the thought than we all have a set IQ, like these test would have us believe. I reckon we grow in intellegence as we go along and gain more knowledge from stuff around us.

VVV

Funie youu shud asek!

I decided to take an IQ test at 32. Mensa is at 140. (Far beyond me, as I was C student through High School and failed all of my four majors in my 3.5 years at College) BTW I scored 129. $%!&

I took a different IQ test at 43 and scored 129 again. More $%!&

Not to be negative, but I look at it as a waste of 10 hours.

reply to post by Tribble


This is my point. You say it was a waste of 10 hours. And indeed it was, what did you gain out of this test?
What is the point of these tests in the first place?

Would be interesting to see some more peoples results.

And sorry i might have made a grammar error on the tile of this thread, I think it should be "are" instead of "is" LOL

Kinda ironic.

VVV

In my twenties I went on a course conducted by a govt ministry 2 weeks 3/5 hours a day under strict exam conditions by civil servants, isometric testing iirc. I would imagine the results were as good as you can get for iq testing we weren't told the results but it was fairly easy for me to find mine with a bit of subterfuge.

IQ tests are meaningless junk science. Until someone invents a way to measure how much common sense one has, no one can measure someone's intelligence.

000000000 Sec Line

There is an urban myth, in relation to the IQ test, that it was never designed to accurately measure the level of intelligence within an individual.

Originally posted by ohioriver
IQ tests are meaningless junk science. Until someone invents a way to measure how much common sense one has, no one can measure someone's intelligence.

000000000 Sec Line

This is what i have been thinking too.
You hit the nail on the head with that post. I am just curious if there are any people who does actually believe the resuslts gotton from an IQ test and why?

VVV

What is a test? A test is knowing the answers to a question. Ok well then here is something to try Take the same IQ test five times .
The thing is each time you take it EVEN if the questions were changed you will get a feel for the format .
So each time your score will be higher . It may not change but one point BUT it will change .
IQ is NOT a static thing It changes every day and even every hour as even what you eat can affect how well you can learn .
You want a really good example when I am just not in the mood to bother with it my spelling looks like a fifth grader .
So if i spell bad one post and spell good on another which indicates my intelligence?
Ps I can do a post Without spell check If i really try lol.

The issue is how intelligence is measured.

Primary cognitive responses to math, basic problem solving, logic, patern recognition, and memory.

This however is not a good way to measure true intelligence. True intelligence actually is more to do with abstract reasoning, the ability to draw upon past experience and form new ideas to tackle new objectives.

Learning is important but consigning to memory the entire encyclopaedia won't make you anymore intelligent.

So true intelligence or Common Sense has as much more to do with Instinct, Mental Attitude and Wisdom than just pure raw cognitive ability.

All the best,

Korg.

IQ tests show speed of thought: rates of putting together information etc. etc. A low IQ does not means someone cannot comprehend, it means they take longer to reach the conclusion. Example: The inventor of the Artificial Heart was sub 100.

Though I choked when I read "How accurate IS IQ tests?" It tasted like irony to me, but it isn't..

Originally posted by lordtyp0
IQ tests show speed of thought: rates of putting together information etc. etc. A low IQ does not means someone cannot comprehend, it means they take longer to reach the conclusion. Example: The inventor of the Artificial Heart was sub 100.

Though I choked when I read "How accurate IS IQ tests?" It tasted like irony to me, but it isn't..

Lol, yes sorry about that. As I have stated numerous times, English is my third language and I do tend to make mistakes, especially grammar mistakes. In retrospec, it does make for some good irony though, no?

VVV

Originally posted by lordtyp0

Though I choked when I read "How accurate IS IQ tests?" It tasted like irony to me, but it isn't..

Glad someone else said it first. It was making me itch. Gawd, I'm such a nerd.

For the record, I score really high on an IQ test when it isn't time and substantially lower when it is timed. Both were MENSA tests, for whatever that means. Apparently I'm slowly smart.

I've read before that you can actually improve your IQ score by practising the test. I think an IQ test is far from being a great way of measuring how intelligent somebody is, but with that said is still about the best guideline out there.

This is a chart from a controversial 2002 book by Dr. Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland, and Dr. Tatu Vanhanen, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.

en.wikipedia.org...

The book argues that differences in national income (in the form of per capita gross domestic product) correlate with differences in the average national intelligence quotient (IQ). The authors interpret this correlation as showing that IQ is one important factor contributing to differences in national wealth and rates of economic growth.

Unsurprisingly Asian and European countries come out on top, while Arab, South American and African nations fair poorly. I believe the authors of this book are basicly telling us the the more intelligent a nation the richer it is, not sure if i've got that right or what really to make of the results, just find it quite intresting.