how reliable are iq tests?

[amoda]

i'm just wondering about something acordding to some of the iq tests i took i have an av iq of 129. But i dont feel as if its very accurate. My avgrade at school is a 92% but some of my friends who have a 95% av have lower iqs then mine so i dont really understand how that works. Can some1 shed some light? thx oh by the way if this is in the wrong topic feel free to move it.

[amoda]

no1 knows anythign about the iq tests?

[hierarch]

I experience the same thing. I took an IQ test and got a score of 135 several days ago. But my girl friend had a higher score in spite of the fact that I am better than her in many aspects.

[Aegir]

IQ is your learning potential, not how smart you are. You might now more than your girlfriend about many subjects but if you are presented the same material and neither of you has had previous exposure to the material your girlfroend would learn the material faster, that is why she has a higher IQ.

[admiral_ju00]

keeping in mind that IQ tests measure your past academic knowledge and not real-life knowledge or should i say knowledge pertaining to one's survival abilities. that and what Aegir said

[ugochukwu]

Interesting, and look at me thinking that IQ tests are used to test someone's Smartness. My IQ is definately low, below 90 is must guess

[DeoxyriboNucleicAcid]

I have to admit ugochukwu, you have to have alot of courage to say what you just did I really mean it.

 

Anyhow...

 

IQ is the measure of the copacity of your mind. How much it can hold. Picture your mind as an empty cup. The IQ text measures the copacity of this cup, how much water and knowledge it can hold. However, if you have a 140 IQ, it does not mean you will get a 100% on every test. Learning disabilities, weaknesses, and other factors can greatly interfere in how well you may learn, and how well you score on any old test. For example, one of my best friends has an IQ of 141, but he has ADD (Attention deficit hyperactivity dissorder.) alond with his personality, he has bad jufdgment, and in school he does poorly. With his terrible jugment, he doesnt take his medication (which is not a golden solution anyhow) and is not in a single AP/ honors course. His grade average is terrable (3.2 out of 4.0) for his IQ. All because of his ADD & personality. IQ does not determine all. In contrast, I only have a 132 IQ, and I have a perfect 4.0 average, and am in every honors course my school has to offer.

[MishMish]

DNA:

 

"IQ is the measure of the copacity of your mind. How much it can hold."

 

The different subtests measure different things. Not sure just what all (have still not found a good site to explain it all)

 

Nor am I sure how the subtests are weighted, as they must be or I do not see how I could I have ended up with the full scale score I did (was mostly consistent on the subtests, but quite poorly in the object assembly (37th percentile) and less than I would rather think myself in matrix reasoning and picture assembly (both 84th) yet still ended up with a standardized full scale of 138 putting me in the 99th)

 

I took the WAIS, by the way, and also have no idea why they include a general knowledge category. That seems in direct contradiction to the "capacity" idea, as did both word defintions and sayings interpretations (not sure which subtest that latter falls in)

 

I also became uncooperative towards the end (stupid questions, it annoyed me) but not sure which subtest(s) that would have affected, but not those in which I did poorly, am sure of that (even if I did poorly in some they were more entertaining)

 

And no, IQ definitely does not predict actual performance

 

There are also skills people need to have to be able to utilize or apply their mind. I also expect there must be some basic level beyond which an increase in IQ is not much benefit, a diminishing returns sort of situation, though would not know what that might be. But most people seem able to navigate the world and function in it quite well without having any remarkable IQ

[Kedas]

IQ tests really don't say much/anything.

It's a subjective test it's not like we are really able to measure the potential of a person in this world.

To define the potential of a person you have to do it in relation to its surrounding.

(The surrounding is fixed by defining the test)

[NavajoEverclear]

Hold on dudes--- IQ tests were not handed down to us by God, they were made by imperfect people-- and therefore ARE imperfect-- how much so precisely isn't really proovable. I have never taken a professional IQ test, but it sounds to me as they are quite pointless. I am sure that many, if not most people could be taught the gain a higher score, and the test itself does nothing to aid this learning, it does not promote progress, so i think it is quite stupid. Also there are a million different types of intelligence, our mind is not limited to the parameters society has identified and christened as determinitive of 'intelligence'. What kind of intelligence is important to you is what you should decide. The most important thing in my life will be marraige and family (i'm only 17 so thats why i say WILL). I will most definately marry a smart women, but intelligence comes in different forms, and there are many things more important that them living up to the worlds imposed standards. One woman may score incredibly high on an IQ test wilst having very little knowledge about love and mothering, while one with a significantly lower score may be an excellent wife and mother--- i would choose the latter.---- But i would by no means go and be an idiot and set some sort of crucible that every woman should live up, because anyone could learn to become better in that area, but there are also many different personalities therefore different ways to be an excellent wife and mother.---- that is what is important to me, and like anything else there is no way summarize diversity of each human mind to say which exact componets must be mastered.

 

I don't know what else to say but to think for yourself, make your own choices, and dont let an IQ test, or any test by anyone else limit what you can be.

[amoda]

Great thanks for the help every1

[Searching]

IQ tests don't exactly measure intelligence, and they definitely do not measure knowledge.

 

They measure your ability to reason. Common sense, logic, whatever.

 

I recently got into Mensa off such a test, and have learned a lot about the whole IQ thing since attending events with other Young M's. Most of them either dropped out, or didn't do all that great in class anyway. A lot of us are horrible procrastinators, for instance - something that doesn't exactly do wonders for your grades.

 

School grades are more about memory, retention, and work ethic than about actual intelligence.

[java]

Well IQ test actually dont tell you how smart you are. They actually tell you the level of quickness you learning things in. So if you have a 92% avg and your friend who is smarter than you has 95% avg but a lower iq just means that you have the ability to pick up on things quicker thats all. And they are certain things. Not everything.

 

Java

[Radical Edward]

Probably because of spelling and grammar.

[bloodhound]

No, an IQ test measures the ability of a person to do IQ tests. There maybe some correlation between actual "intelligence" and the IQ score, but IQ test should not be use alone to judge how clever a person is. By the way I loved Hellsing and Cowboy Bebop

[qazibasit]

well the it is true that the iq tests are accurate the untrue part of the test is that some ppls do have a greater iq but they are not good at studies this is just because they are not taking their interest in studies they have some other field of interest in which they are utilizing their resources so it doesnt make any difference that who is scoring much at school the main thing is how a person is facing different dilemmas and how he handle bad situations.

[JaKiri]

No, it's because IQ doesn't measure anything other than your ability to do tests in the style of the questions on the IQ test.

 

The assumption that 'intellect' can be measured, and quantified, is one that isn't even close to have been proven, especially not when the tests are so misapplied as they are by the general populace (IQ tests were designed to be one individual part of a multitude of tests, to establish your abilities at certain tasks then gauge your intellect from them, not as a be all and end all)

[qazibasit]

whatever our iq is be confident We Can Do Anything and thats all.

[Europa]

From http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/bell-curve/support-bell-curve.html

 

"The Meaning and Measurement of Intelligence

 

1. Intelligence is a very general mental capability that, among other

things, involves the ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think

abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from

experience. It is not merely book learning, a narrow academic skill, or

test-taking smarts. Rather, it reflects a broader and deeper capability

for comprehending our surroundings--"catching on," "making sense" of

things, or "figuring out" what to do.

 

2. Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests

measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms,

reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments. They do

not measure creativity, character personality, or other important

differences among individuals, nor are they intended to.

 

3. While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all measure

the same intelligence. Some use words or numbers and require specific

cultural knowledge (like vocabulary). Others do not, and instead use

shapes or designs and require knowledge of only simple, universal

concepts (many/few, open/closed, up/down).

 

[ . . . ]

 

5. Intelligence tests are not culturally biased against American blacks or

other native-born, English-speaking peoples in the U.S. Rather, IQ

scores predict equally accurately for all such Americans, regardless of

race and social class. Individuals who do not understand English well

can be given either a nonverbal test or one in their native language.

 

[ . . . ]

 

9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single

measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational,

economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and

performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life

(education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social

competence), and modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness).

Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social

importance.

 

10. A high IQ is an advantage in life because virtually all activities

require some reasoning and decision-making. Conversely, a low IQ is

often a disadvantage, especially in disorganized environments. Of

course, a high IQ no more guarantees success than a low IQ guarantees

failure in life. There are many exceptions, but the odds for success in

our society greatly favor individuals with higher IQs.

 

11. The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life

settings become more complex (novel, ambiguous, changing,

unpredictable, or multifaceted). For example, a high IQ is generally

necessary to perform well in highly complex or fluid jobs (the

professions, management): it is a considerable advantage in moderately

complex jobs (crafts, clerical and police work); but it provides less

advantage in settings that require only routine decision making or

simple problem solving (unskilled work)."

[tinyboy21]

I don't find IQ very important.

[5614]

i find them pathetic, depending on which one you do, you can be a genius --> a baby. depending on the subject of the questions amongst other things.

 

intelligence cannot be defined.

[Thales]

I find most people who go on about IQ tests scored highly once on some dodgy online test and hope that means something. The simple answer is that it is not you IQ it is simply a score you got for that test. Sit another test and it will give you a different IQ, does that mean you've got smater or dumber between tests....no. How could it when the psychological definition of IQ is supposedly unchanging with age. People can be intelligent in many different ways, from their ability to function in the spartially abstract to writing and politics to art and music.

 

You cannot simply assign a number to someone by sitting a test and use it as a means to rank peoples intelligence. Its a flawed concept.

[MolecularMan14]

Agreed, IQ is just potential. Not your intelligence at a certain point. I have an IQ of 187 but I find myself tripping over words, and rambling and having a hard time with some things (especially typing). lol

[5614]

i think we are all in agreement, i would like to add that there's still nothing wrong with boasting your IQ, if you can find a site which gives everyone a high IQ then good for you [its a physcological thing]

 

so long as two IQ tests are taken at the same time, same site and with no pre-knowledge of the questions and the questions are random [not all on topic, as this could be a topic the person is very good or bad at] then the results can be compared.

[MolecularMan14]

I dont think that websites are the best place for judging IQs. But if they are all from the same source, then there could be a reasonable idea of thought processing between people.