4 ms·

From my own experience, you're able to prepare for IQ-tests. I scored slightly below average (below 90 actually) on the IQ-test I did with 7. Average (104) on

by lainon 10y ago

From my own experience, you're able to prepare for IQ-tests. I scored slightly below average (below 90 actually) on the IQ-test I did with 7. Average (104) on the one I did with 16. And actually made it in to Mensa with a result of 144 on the IQ-test I did aged 18. I was in a good mood the day I did that IQ-test, and learned math, memory techniques etc. a few weeks before. So, IQ-tests really aren't that reliable.

tdb7893 10y ago
Ya, turns out people can learn just about anything with practice
reitanqild 10y ago
Around here those tests seems to be careful to avoid maths, memory etc and only try to test your ability to recognize patterns or find missing solutions.
- lainon 10y ago
  >Around here those tests seems to be careful to avoid maths I was required to do mental calculation during the WAIS-IV I did.
- gohrt 10y ago
  So you practice patterns to raise your score.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    No, not really. Never felt I had time. I also think they try to introduce elements that makes it hard to prepare for the test. That said if someone has never taken one of these then getting used to how the test works and doing a sample test could help them get a better score right away.
vacri 10y ago
Were your IQ tests run on a 1:1 basis with a trained practitioner over the course of several hours? If not, they're not one of the actual formal IQ tests, but either some form of proxy or some random unrelated test that someone has slapped the label on. This is why there's so much confusion about "how can the IQ test be considered studied and reliable, bah!" - because the ones that are properly performed are labour-intensive and require a lot of training - and this is why results are all over the place. It's just not the case that $RANDOM_YAHOO[1] on the internet knows more about the caveats around IQ tests that the professionals who apply and study them. Disclaimer: have formally studied 'intelligence' (and cognition, perception etc) and been given a partial IQ test myself by a properly trained professional, which came with the caveat "the results can't be properly used, because you're familiar with the process, which confounds the results". [1] I don't mean you, I just mean that this is a common complaint
- alasdair_ 10y ago
  The Mensa tests are generally done in a room with an experienced practitioner. The "take home" tests are just used as a marketing tactic and/or as a way to decide if you should even bother with a formal test.
jgord 10y ago
Maybe your actual IQ was varying, and the tests were accurate enough to show that ? We should consider the real possibility that both a) IQ tests are a reasonably good proxy for general intelligence AND b) preparation by training on problem solving improves IQ Id really like to know how much IQ is improvable. If the brain is plastic and physically adapts to training, what are the most effective methods? It seems an important issue, not least for schooling.
- mcv 10y ago
  Depends on what you mean by IQ. If IQ is simply the result from the test, then it's clearly varying. If you define IQ as some sort of intrinsic and mostly unchanging ability for intelligence, then IQ tests are clearly very imperfect. Part of the problem is that there are too many slightly different definitions of IQ and intelligence, and what's worse: we're not even sure what exactly we mean by "intelligence".

by lainon 10y ago

tdb7893 10y ago

Ya, turns out people can learn just about anything with practice

reitanqild 10y ago

Around here those tests seems to be careful to avoid maths, memory etc and only try to test your ability to recognize patterns or find missing solutions.

lainon 10y ago
>Around here those tests seems to be careful to avoid maths I was required to do mental calculation during the WAIS-IV I did.
gohrt 10y ago
So you practice patterns to raise your score.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  No, not really. Never felt I had time. I also think they try to introduce elements that makes it hard to prepare for the test. That said if someone has never taken one of these then getting used to how the test works and doing a sample test could help them get a better score right away.

vacri 10y ago

Were your IQ tests run on a 1:1 basis with a trained practitioner over the course of several hours? If not, they're not one of the actual formal IQ tests, but either some form of proxy or some random unrelated test that someone has slapped the label on. This is why there's so much confusion about "how can the IQ test be considered studied and reliable, bah!" - because the ones that are properly performed are labour-intensive and require a lot of training - and this is why results are all over the place. It's just not the case that $RANDOM_YAHOO[1] on the internet knows more about the caveats around IQ tests that the professionals who apply and study them. Disclaimer: have formally studied 'intelligence' (and cognition, perception etc) and been given a partial IQ test myself by a properly trained professional, which came with the caveat "the results can't be properly used, because you're familiar with the process, which confounds the results". [1] I don't mean you, I just mean that this is a common complaint

alasdair_ 10y ago
The Mensa tests are generally done in a room with an experienced practitioner. The "take home" tests are just used as a marketing tactic and/or as a way to decide if you should even bother with a formal test.

jgord 10y ago

Maybe your actual IQ was varying, and the tests were accurate enough to show that ? We should consider the real possibility that both a) IQ tests are a reasonably good proxy for general intelligence AND b) preparation by training on problem solving improves IQ Id really like to know how much IQ is improvable. If the brain is plastic and physically adapts to training, what are the most effective methods? It seems an important issue, not least for schooling.

mcv 10y ago
Depends on what you mean by IQ. If IQ is simply the result from the test, then it's clearly varying. If you define IQ as some sort of intrinsic and mostly unchanging ability for intelligence, then IQ tests are clearly very imperfect. Part of the problem is that there are too many slightly different definitions of IQ and intelligence, and what's worse: we're not even sure what exactly we mean by "intelligence".