| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
moreitsythanyou 
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: April 23 2006
Location: NYC
Status: Offline
Points: 11682
|
 Posted: July 31 2008 at 00:17 |
|
Genius level is 140. I know this because I passed it only by a few points on the actual test I took.
|
 <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR]
|
 |
Chris S
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 00:54 |
Well I got 117 and I'm OK with that 
But half the questions I could not give a toss about and multiple choice was my outcome.
A bit like having sh1t politicians in your country at election time so you vote for neither cos you are guaranteed a corrupted outcome!!
|
|
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
|
|
Jim Garten
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin & Razor Guru
Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 03:55 |
 The Doctor wrote:
On the other hand, I would imagine that the IQ of the average prog fan is more likely to be higher than that of the average person. If we weren't so smart, we'd be listening to crap. I would figure the low end of the prog IQ is 110, maybe higher, so is it really so strange that a third have an IQ above 150, especially when you factor in the bragging quotient...that is, that people are going to pump up their numbers...if they scored 145, well hell that's close enough to 150? And that the 110ers aren't as likely to post their scores? Remember, prog fans are not a random sample. |
Excellent point & well made sir - allows us to be snobbish about prog-rock, adopt a superiority complex & best of all provides spurious proof as well 
|
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 09:40 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Asked to the expert in the personnel department about the test in the front page.
He explained me in technical words that i hardly understood, but to summarize that test has a deviation of + 5 to + 10% in the final result.
It appears that he was speaking about "confidence intervals" rather than "deviation." In any case, that's not exactly how one would use confidence intervals anyway. The confidence interval is a set of values centered around the mean. The radius of that interval is called the margin of error and it is dependent on the confidence level, standard deviation, and the sample size. Suppose that this particular test has a 95% confidence interval for a sample size of 1000 with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 (the last two values are characteristic of IQ tests). Using a straightforward formula, we find that the margin of error is approximately 0.923. This would mean that we should expect the actual mean to be between 99.077 and 100.923 (roughly 99 and 101). I can't think of any situation in which a margin of error of five to ten percent of the mean would be considered acceptable.
So if you have 150, your real IQ is probably between 135 - 142.
See above.
She knew about this short tests, are a good tool for fast exams, because a company doesn't care too much if you are a genius, they care only if your IQ is in a normal range and that can be answered by this short tests, but according to her, this one has been manipulated to boost the results, specially for people who is over 130.
Most modern psychologists don't take IQ tests seriously, or if they do it is cum grano salis. In particular, the concept of "genius" is generally ill-defined, or in the most charitable analysis it is nebulously conceived. Moreover, I'd be quite surprised to learn of any company that expresses any concern over the IQ of a prospective hire.
Bellow 130 the deviation doesn't exist, because the target people that companies search for is between 110 - 130 (except for crucial positions, but those positions are normally covered by people recruited directly from the Universities or experts in a determined field, so they don't take the test), .
Again, this strikes me as simply bizarre. Perhaps employment procedures differ in the southern hemisphere: this simply doesn't happen up here.
Mensa only asks 140 if I'm not wrong (Well really to be in the 2% superior of the standarized tests).
No, the 98th percentile for an IQ test with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15 is approximately 132.
Ultimately, any debate about the results of this test is fruitless when the actual validity of the exam remains unestablished.
|
Edited by WinterLight - July 31 2008 at 12:05
|
|
Pnoom!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 02 2006
Location: OH
Status: Offline
Points: 4981
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 11:40 |
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 12:19 |
WinterLight wrote:
[
It appears that he was speaking about "confidence intervals" rather than "deviation." In any case, that's not exactly how one would use confidence intervals anyway. The confidence interval is a set of values centered around the mean. The radius of that interval is called the margin of error and it is dependent on the confidence level, standard deviation, and the sample size. Suppose that this particular test has a 95% confidence interval for a sample size of 1000 with a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15 (the last two values are characteristic of IQ tests). Using a straightforward formula, we find that the margin of error is approximately 0.923. This would mean that we should expect the actual mean to be between 99.077 and 100.923 (roughly 99 and 101). I can't think of any situation in which a margin of error of five to ten percent of the mean would be considered acceptable.
I said it in my first post, "She explained me in technical words that i hardly understood", I only exptressed what I understood after an explanation in simpler terms..
Most modern psychologists don't take IQ tests seriously, or if they do it is cum grano salis. In particular, the concept of "genius" is generally ill-defined, or in the most charitable analysis it is nebulously conceived. Moreover, I'd be quite surprised to learn of any company that expresses any concern over the IQ of a prospective hire.
They do also, but she was talking about a determined test that is in the first page, not about all tests.
Again, this strikes me as simply bizarre. Perhaps employment procedures differ in the southern hemisphere: this simply doesn't happen up here.
It's different, this is a poor country, I passed two years without work because they said I was over qualifyed, and I only have a Legal degree and a master,. nothing incredible.
BTW: Employement procedures are different here, that's truth: They prefer an average worker than a person who may have a post grade because it's cheaper, some companies search for people with one or rtwo years of graduate rather than one with experience because costs are lower.
In this country the companies hire the cheapest candidate, not the best (except for 2 or 3 big transnationals), people hire a lawyer that charges 200 dollars for a divorce, even if hey know they are going to have problems, when the average cost of one of this cases (By mutual agreement) is over te US$ 2,000.00) but there are lawyers offering their services for US$ 150.00
The companies even post requirements in the newspapers forcing you to add in your resume how much you want to receive as salary instead of posting what's te salary they offer,with the hope of hiring somenoe cheaper than what they believed, that's our sad reality in a country with 40% of unemployent or sub. employment.
That's the difference in some countries the southern hemisphere.
BTW, this person gave me her opínion as a friend, not as a repersentative of a company, but checking the differences with the standarized test she took to every worker of the company and the results of three persons who took this test (She was surprised by the differences between my resultsand the ones I had on thisspecific test) , she made some calculations and as a friend she gave the opinion.
Ultimately, any debate about the results of this test is fruitless when the actual validity of the exam remains unestablished.
That was the main point, but I ask you something....Is it normal that 33% of the people who take a test have an IQ superior to 150?
Iván |
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 31 2008 at 12:38
|
|
|
|
jimmy_row
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 11 2007
Location: Hibernation
Status: Offline
Points: 2601
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 14:19 |
WinterLight wrote:
Most modern psychologists don't take IQ tests seriously, or if they do it is cum grano salis. In particular, the concept of "genius" is generally ill-defined, or in the most charitable analysis it is nebulously conceived. Moreover, I'd be quite surprised to learn of any company that expresses any concern over the IQ of a prospective hire.
Ultimately, any debate about the results of this test is fruitless when the actual validity of the exam remains unestablished. |
 People are always so hung-up with inadequate operational definitions, one's that are basically the most simplified possible explanation for a particular attribute or phenomenon. Never mind what the actual experts say (although in this case there are SOME...few "old-schoolers" that use/study intelligence tests). What folks that don't have any statistical background may not always understand is that when a measure is not VALID, it is rejected...has no predictive ability whatsoever that we can use or cite. So a genius score on an invalid (if that is the case here...we haven't determined that...) test is worth nothing; it cannot be scaled or manipulated to fit the curve. Like I've said before... just for fun!
|
|
Signature Writers Guild on strike
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 20:31 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
It's different, this is a poor country, I passed two years without work because they said I was over qualifyed, and I only have a Legal degree and a master,. nothing incredible.
That's astonishing. By "legal degree" do you mean a JD? Earning a JD in the US requires 3 years beyond undergraduate work, and a Master's in anything requires at least another 1 or 2 years. I'd say that's "incredible."
BTW: Employement procedures are different here, that's truth: They prefer an average worker than a person who may have a post grade because it's cheaper, some companies search for people with one or rtwo years of graduate rather than one with experience because costs are lower.
Same here, at least in certain fields. An engineer, for example, is less likely to find work with a PhD than with a Master's or even Bachelor's despite (or perhaps, at least partially, because) his deeper and more extensive training for the same you reason you observe: the PhD demands greater compensation, but employers would rather not pay it. However, in other fields the doctorate is mandatory: the academic professions, medicine, and law, to name a few.
In this country the companies hire the cheapest candidate, not the best (except for 2 or 3 big transnationals), people hire a lawyer that charges 200 dollars for a divorce, even if hey know they are going to have problems, when the average cost of one of this cases (By mutual agreement) is over te US$ 2,000.00) but there are lawyers offering their services for US$ 150.00
You could bill at least $150 per hour in a small US city for a divorce.
The companies even post requirements in the newspapers forcing you to add in your resume how much you want to receive as salary instead of posting what's te salary they offer,with the hope of hiring somenoe cheaper than what they believed, that's our sad reality in a country with 40% of unemployent or sub. employment.
That's terrible--it makes me feel somewhat ashamed. What is your government doing about it? More importantly, what are its citizens doing to change this state?
That was the main point, but I ask you something....Is it normal that 33% of the people who take a test have an IQ superior to 150?
Not normal at all. Less than 1 out of 1000 should have a score above 150.
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 31 2008 at 21:40 |
WinterLight wrote:
That's astonishing. By "legal degree" do you mean a JD? Earning a JD in the US requires 3 years beyond undergraduate work, and a Master's in anything requires at least another 1 or 2 years. I'd say that's "incredible."
No, in Perú the only legal degree is Lawyer (There's no para-legal or anything similar), it's 6.5 years, but there are 46,000 of us only in Lima (Plus a couple thousand that never studied but act as lawyers with false documents, so if you loose your credential, you have to notify the police to avoid problems, because somebody can be using it), being that there are free state universities that give you a title without checking if here's enough work for all of them. Of course having studied in the Catholic University (The best in Laws) helps a bit.
You could bill at least $150 per hour in a small US city for a divorce.
Maybe for a conflictive divorce, but a mutual agreement (used to last 1 or 2 years), US$ 1,000 is the average. Now that the Government has created the fast divorce in notaries and Councils, probably the prices will go way down. Thanks God I only take divorce cases from friends and if I have an agreement signed by both parts giving me full representation, so there are no fights in the court.
That's terrible--it makes me feel somewhat ashamed. What is your government doing about it? More importantly, what are its citizens doing to change this state?
Nothing, there are worst problems, or at least more urgent......But a soccer player can easily reach 15 or 20 thousand bucks a month. 
Not normal at all. Less than 1 out of 1000 should have a score above 150.
That's why this person got interested in the test, she told me that it was impossible to reach those numbers in a random group.
Iván
|
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 31 2008 at 21:42
|
|
|
|
Jimbo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 28 2005
Location: Helsinki
Status: Offline
Points: 2818
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 02:57 |
Well, having scored 146 on the test (the one on the front page), it pretty much ruins any credibility it might've had. If I'm a full-blown genius (yay!  ) , I wonder how much some of my acquaintances would score, seeing as how they're so much smarter, quicker and wittier than me it's not even funny. As others have pointed out, I don't think these tests measure anything except your ability to take IQ tests.
|
|
|
|
Jim Garten
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin & Razor Guru
Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 03:10 |
And as a previous correspondent ably stated, obtaining a high score then actually paying for the full report proves the high score was inaccurate
|
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 03:22 |
|
As per the "the only thing IQ tests measure is the ability to take an IQ test" argument, there have been correlations proven between IQ and life expectancy. The test is far from perfect, but it seems to do a decent job.
|
|
|
|
WinterLight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 09 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 424
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 05:30 |
rileydog22 wrote:
As per the "the only thing IQ tests measure is the ability to take an IQ test" argument, there have been correlations proven between IQ and life expectancy.
Not surprising. You find high IQs in modernized, affluent societies, where, by definition, the life expectancy is high. In any case, to recall a rudimentary observation in statistics, correlation is not sufficient to explain causation.
The test is far from perfect, but it seems to do a decent job.
But what "decent job" does it perform? I suppose that the reflexive reply is IQ tests measure intelligence. But this is premised on the belief that intelligence is measurable. On this view, I remain skeptical, especially in view of the historical origins of intelligence testing: Binet designed his test to identify not "gifted" students, but those who could benefit from remedial education. He maintained (and there's much research to support this view) that, notwithstanding those suffering from neurological disease or damage, most children can perform well in academics, if provided with sufficient resources.
|
Edited by WinterLight - August 01 2008 at 05:30
|
|
The T
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 13:36 |
And, for some strange reason, many of those genius with great IQ's are usually paid by much-more-powerful idiots with incredibly big bank accounts.... to develop whatever sh*t these last ones want to come up with....
... in the meantime, many high-IQ young people have problems to adapt socially and thus their chances to shine get lessened....
As someone said, the value of IQ tests is: provide an employer with a tool to discard people with less than average intelligence... they are to be the receivers of all the magic the puppet-genius devices for the guy on top....
Kind of conspiracionist, I know.... You see what your IQ tests create? A lot if neurotic people who fight over which stupid album is better than the other and what the word "prog" means"!
|
|
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: August 01 2008 at 13:47 |
The T wrote:
... in the meantime, many high-IQ young people have problems to adapt socially and thus their chances to get their willy shined get lessened....
|
Yeah. 
I couldn't agree more with your whole sentiment. A high IQ does not always lead to success in life, and far too often, the ones with the high IQ's are working for some dolt who can barely tie his shoelaces. Personally, I'd rather be stupid and have wealth and power, rather than have this burden of intelligence. I guess what I'm tryin to say is I wanna be George Bush. 
|
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
dude
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 30 2004
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 1338
|
Posted: August 05 2008 at 11:51 |
|
I IZ REELY BrITE I SORE A SINE IN SHOP "25c eech or 3 for 60 cents" i wus owtraged i said YU CANT FULL ME ITS 75 SENSE!!! so i payd that................i sure fuled that shopkeeper!!! SEE MY MATHS IS REEL GUD!!!
|
|
Jim Garten
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin & Razor Guru
Joined: February 02 2004
Location: South England
Status: Offline
Points: 14693
|
Posted: August 06 2008 at 03:13 |
|
That was a party political broadcast from the Australian minister for education.
|
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
|
Neil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 04 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1497
|
Posted: August 06 2008 at 03:24 |
|
Isn't IQ a tv show for dyslexics, hosted by Stephen Fry?
|
|
When people get lost in thought it's often because it's unfamiliar territory.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
What is your IQ?
