Jump to content

Intelligence test


Chriss
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't trust any online test. But if wanted to get as close to a legitimate test, I guess you could use the online mensa test.

I suppose you're using this to collect data about your speculation. Well, at least you're doing something right. Make sure to report back here once the data doesn't match your predictions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Chriss said:

Do you know the name of the test that I gave the link for ? I like that one.

The link you gave calls it The Classic IQ Test. It's right there in the last few letters, 121-the-classic-iq-test. But I doubt it really is. 

Here's a tip. If a commercial website gives you a free test, then all they really want is for you to lose interest in the test and click on an ad. They're very good at that, and very poor at giving intelligence tests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, I think you should design your own I.Q. test. I don’t mean start from scratch, but make a hybrid test that tests the skills you are looking for. Searching for an I.Q. test on the web will lead to a bunch of garbage or some high-priced package. I don’t know what your goal is. However, usually psychologist use many characteristics to determine I.Q. Testing is just one. For instance, they can look at grades in class, or how a person interacts with others, or how they spend their time. That is why I don’t think you are going to find a credible test that allows you to test people over the web. Of course, I’m just an armchair psychologist.

 

But I believe I am giving you good advice to make your own test. After all, you are the only one how knows what factors you are looking for.

 

Here is some credible tests, which may or may not relate to I.Q. However, those who created them knew what they were looking for in the results of the test.

 

·         SAT

·         ASVAB

·         AHSME - http://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php?title=AHSME_Problems_and_Solutions

 

I hope this helps. It may not be what you are looking for. But without records of I.Q. of a sample group, you must be resourceful.

 

Note that the AHSME test is very strategic. The rules are listed on the website with previous test. It is a timed test. And you can learn a lot about the student from the problems they choose to complete, because the student losses point for wrong answers and must break 100 points. There is both knowledge and strategy involved. Also, the problems are not grouped by subject and the word problems are not just rearranging values. There is problem solving. That mean no memorizing answers or not working through the problem.

 

In fact, I propose a challenge to the members of SFN and the Moderators. If you are the scientists you think you are:
               

                I Challenge the members of SFN to design their own I.Q. test.

                                If you think that Chriss is not knowledgeable enough to test the I.Q. with analytics then post a question to this post that you would consider a measure of I.Q. until the community has designed a credible solution.                               

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Trurl said:

or how a person interacts with others, or how they spend their time.                

Really? This is an incredibly unreliable way to test for IQ. How does an intelligent person spend their time? They read books and study all day? How does an intelligent person interact with others? This implies that every person of a given IQ responds exactly the same way a different person of the same IQ acts. That is a ridiculous claim.

9 hours ago, Trurl said:

IMHO, I think you should design your own I.Q. test.                         

That is even worse advice. He is no professional (neither are you) and even if you were, it would still be bad advice. IQ tests are done by several people who have studied this and know what they are doing. Even they may not output a reliable test.

And don't encourage him to do even more unscientific hypothesizing. I'm sure if he came up with an IQ test, it would completely confirm his hypothesis in this thread.

9 hours ago, Trurl said:

In fact, I propose a challenge to the members of SFN and the Moderators. If you are the scientists you think you are:

               

 

                I Challenge the members of SFN to design their own I.Q. test.

Firstly, ''scientist'' is a broad term. You can't challenge a mathematician or a chemist to design an IQ test based on the fact that he is a scientist.

Secondly, ''why don't you do it?!'' isn't a valid response in proving or disproving a theory. It's like when you criticize a movie and call it bad and someone says ''why don't you make a better movie??!?''. That's not how this works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you make up a set of questions of the sort that get used in IQ tests (or, indeed, pretty much any questions), and get enough people to answer them then you can see if there's a correlation of test score with date of birth.

It doesn't need to be an "official" inteilligence test.

You can, if you want, look at the data and see if you can normalise the scores to some sort of "IQ" like distribution- a mean of 100 and a SD of 15, but that's not the point.

 

But, all you need are a bunch of "scores" and dates of birth. Members here might be prepared to help you out with that.

Then you can do the analysis and, in all sensible probability, lay your idea peacefully to rest.

 

A useful first question might be "have you had your IQ resumed professionally and, if so, what was the result?".

Then you can check if your new test correlates with "real" IQ.

 

If you want to test the hypothesis that "clever people are born at the full moon" then any sort of measure of "cleverness" would do.

Even salary might work as a proxy- as long as you took age into account somehow.

If the effect is as big as Chris first claimed, the effect should show up even with a fairly lousy measure of "cleverness".

Edited by John Cuthber
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote
20 hours ago, Trurl said:

or how a person interacts with others, or how they spend their time.                

Really? This is an incredibly unreliable way to test for IQ. How does an intelligent person spend their time? They read books and study all day? How does an intelligent person interact with others? This implies that every person of a given IQ responds exactly the same way a different person of the same IQ acts. That is a ridiculous claim.

 

If you think it is good science to only to test one aspect. That is why if a psychologist gets a test that someone excelled or did not excel, they evaluate further. One test might show a high I.Q. but isn’t more of an intelligence test if you actually know something about the person?

 

If someone said a pilot should have an I.Q. of 120 or above, would that mean everyone above 120 should fly a plane?

 

I have read studies on creativity. Specifically, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. He did not go around passing out I.Q. test. Instead he rigorously interviewed creative people and looked to see what they had in common and how they differed from others.

 

Quote
20 hours ago, Trurl said:

IMHO, I think you should design your own I.Q. test.                         

That is even worse advice. He is no professional (neither are you) and even if you were, it would still be bad advice. IQ tests are done by several people who have studied this and know what they are doing. Even they may not output a reliable test.

And don't encourage him to do even more unscientific hypothesizing. I'm sure if he came up with an IQ test, it would completely confirm his hypothesis in this thread.

Why is designing your own experiment bad advice? The APA format is designed to introduce an experiment and show the results and findings. If you cannot find a I.Q. test (which is hard for the armchair psychologist), what is wrong with designing your own based on research, to fit the needs of the study? I think it would be a lot more fun and be more meaningful then passing out some test you don’t understand let alone did not designed and not have it meet your needs.

 

Quote
20 hours ago, Trurl said:

    I Challenge the members of SFN to design their own I.Q. test.

Firstly, ''scientist'' is a broad term. You can't challenge a mathematician or a chemist to design an IQ test based on the fact that he is a scientist.

Secondly, ''why don't you do it?!'' isn't a valid response in proving or disproving a theory. It's like when you criticize a movie and call it bad and someone says ''why don't you make a better movie??!?''. That's not how this works

That is not intended as an insult. I truly would like to see this community work on such a project. With the knowledge of this community surely some here is a practicing psychologist or has been through I.Q. testing. I am not saying make a better movie, but have write one of those YouTube alternative endings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

If you want to test the hypothesis that "clever people are born at the full moon" then any sort of measure of "cleverness" would do.

 

I did not said the clever people are born under the full moon. There are separate cycles and how they intersect when someone is born, that way he is marked by them. I don't know what makes someone creative. People born under full moon have a powerful memory and physical energy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Chriss said:

I did not said the clever people are born under the full moon.

 

2 minutes ago, Chriss said:

People born under full moon have a powerful memory and physical energy.

Spot the difference.

OK, set up a test of memory and see if the results are linked to date of birth.

Or even look at the dates of birth of famous athletes- presumably their physical energy is above the norm.

I think you will find a small effect of season of the year, but not one for phase of the moon.

Come back with data I might even help out with the analysis.

 

Here's a start.

Find the dates of birth of this lot; most of them will be on line somewhere

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multiple_Olympic_gold_medalists

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Trurl said:

If you think it is good science to only to test one aspect. That is why if a psychologist gets a test that someone excelled or did not excel, they evaluate further. One test might show a high I.Q. but isn’t more of an intelligence test if you actually know something about the person?

If someone said a pilot should have an I.Q. of 120 or above, would that mean everyone above 120 should fly a plane?

But what does that have to do with anything? You NEED to evaluate a pilot's motor skills and performance under pressure because that's a job requirement but it has nothing to do with general IQ: He's claiming people born on specific dates have specific IQs which has nothing to do with their personality. He should only be focusing on IQ.

12 hours ago, Trurl said:

I have read studies on creativity. Specifically, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. He did not go around passing out I.Q. test. Instead he rigorously interviewed creative people and looked to see what they had in common and how they differed from others.

Again, nothing to do with the topic we're discussing here.

12 hours ago, Trurl said:

Why is designing your own experiment bad advice? The APA format is designed to introduce an experiment and show the results and findings. If you cannot find a I.Q. test (which is hard for the armchair psychologist), what is wrong with designing your own based on research, to fit the needs of the study? I think it would be a lot more fun and be more meaningful then passing out some test you don’t understand let alone did not designed and not have it meet your needs.

Simply because you (and we) aren't eligible to do that. How does he evaluate the number of the person's IQ based on his custom test? How does he know what means what and how to hand out values? What number would you put if a person solved all your question correctly? What about all questions correct but slower?

13 hours ago, Trurl said:

I truly would like to see this community work on such a project. With the knowledge of this community surely some here is a practicing psychologist or has been through I.Q. testing. I am not saying make a better movie, but have write one of those YouTube alternative endings.

And why not simply use the IQ tests readily available to him? He has already dismissed to results of a scientific IQ study becaus they don't fit his hypothesis.

58 minutes ago, Chriss said:

I did not said the clever people are born under the full moon. There are separate cycles and how they intersect when someone is born, that way he is marked by them. I don't know what makes someone creative. People born under full moon have a powerful memory and physical energy.

You still haven't done what I told you. It would be a very easy way to systematically disprove (or if correct, continue proving) your hypothesis. Since you refuse to do it in a scientific manner, you shouldn't expect anyone to take you seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 15.10.2017 at 11:45 AM, John Cuthber said:

 

Spot the difference.

OK, set up a test of memory and see if the results are linked to date of birth.

Or even look at the dates of birth of famous athletes- presumably their physical energy is above the norm.

I think you will find a small effect of season of the year, but not one for phase of the moon.

Come back with data I might even help out with the analysis.

 

Here's a start.

Find the dates of birth of this lot; most of them will be on line somewhere

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multiple_Olympic_gold_medalists

 

I can't do memory tests as I am not a psychologist.

In sport you have also to be talented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Strange said:

And yet you claim to be able to deduce the intelligence of people just by looking at them.

Yes I can know their intelligence by observing them. Only I can ?! You can't know if you know a person if he is more or less intelligent than you ? What's so hard ?

In regard to memory I also observed memory of persons that I know, and it corresponds to where they are placed on the cycle of memory !

Edited by Chriss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop making up excuses.

There are lists of, for example, Nobel prize winners or students who graduate top of their class who can reasonably be assumed to be bright.

Look to see if there is really a pattern in their dates of birth, or if it is just something you have imagined.

 

Don't come back until you actually have some objective data.

Once you have that there's a good chance someone here will help you analyse it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can guess (with some degree of certainty) generally how smart one can be. It's not hard to see when someone is smart or dumb but what is hard is guessing an exact number based on your amateurish and limited experience with people. Guessing in such a way and calling it research is downright laughable.

Seeing how you ignored my request of the calculation which would immediately disprove your "hypothesis" and some other people's suggestions, it is safe to say there is no reason to continue this thread.

Edited by Lord Antares
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
On 25.10.2017 at 8:53 PM, Lord Antares said:

You can guess (with some degree of certainty) generally how smart one can be. It's not hard to see when someone is smart or dumb but what is hard is guessing an exact number based on your amateurish and limited experience with people. Guessing in such a way and calling it research is downright laughable.

Seeing how you ignored my request of the calculation which would immediately disprove your "hypothesis" and some other people's suggestions, it is safe to say there is no reason to continue this thread.

I don't guess any number. I evaluate about where is someone's place on the cycle. It is useless to calculate because there are different intelligence tests which gives you different results. I did 3 types of tests and gave me different scores. In intelligence measurement they have no standard test. Or you tell me what is the standard test ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2017 at 11:53 AM, Lord Antares said:

It's not hard to see when someone is smart or dumb but what is hard is guessing an exact number based on your amateurish and limited experience with people.

In my experience it is not quite that straightforward, except maybe at the extremes. Rather, it is very easy to gauge ones understanding in dealing with a specific topic or problem.  But they may fail rather badly in other aspects (and of course there is a huge middle ground in between). 

There are students who grapple very long with abstract concepts. But put them in the lab where these things go together and are applied, they suddenly outperform those that did very well in tests. The easiest to spot are typically the lazy underperformers, who basically do not make any effort whatsoever (either because they think they are smart enough to get by without work or those who just don't give a damn).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Strange said:

If that is true, then your correlation of intelligence with date of birth is meaningless. 

It is not meaningless because I observed theirs intelligence without knowing any IQ and arrange them in the order of their birthdays. Do you can recognize intelligence ? If yes you can start recall people you know and do what I did and see...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.