I.Q. Test - Certified and 15 minutes

[zoobyshoe]

This one is 40 minutes long; and it's all pattern, Raven's Progressive Matrices:

http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf

I found that to be wicked difficult starting about halfway through.

That's a "real" I.Q. test?

 

[Evo]

Evo's misrepresenting things a bit. Back when Evo and I were 14 parents pulled their kids out of school at 14 as a matter of course to help with the chores around the homestead and fight off Injuns.

LOL, true...

 

[Dadface]

Ah no I only got a 110. I guess I'm only slightly above average.

I'm catching up with you Topher,I scored 9.372 on my last attempt.One more brain cell and I'll be a carrot.

 

[Raizy]

I found that to be wicked difficult starting about halfway through.

That's a "real" I.Q. test?

Obviously not, but it's culture free; non of that "When was Einstein born?" crap. This type of testing is apparently linked to working memory.

 

[Canticle]

126 trying and a worrying 107 not trying! but I did find myself glancing at the questions as I moved the mouse and intuitively hitting what I thought was the right button on the simpler ones instead of being completely random.

But I've been shocked to learn that half the kids in the world are below average IQ, so I'm rushing off to see if I can help bring that up to 75%.

 

[Chi Meson]

Hey, all you multiple choice test takers, where are you when it comes to the PF trivia contest? Come on, come on come on!
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=263889

 

[AUMathTutor]

LOL. Nice test. I should start writing IQ tests. This is great.

"Do you like apples?"

"Are apples delicious?"

"What is the next word in the series: oranges, bananas, grapefruit, _____"

"Which is better, trigonometry or apples?"

 

[zoobyshoe]

Evo, what are the correct answers to these two, and why:

These completely baffle me.

 

[Chi Meson]

Yo, Mentor, what's the color that completely hides the spoiler? Fix dis! (pretty please)
1st one is C, but I think there is a mistake in the given set, or I have the wrong idea; second choice is D. Second one is H, positive about that one. EDIT: no I'm not.

 

[waht]

Yo, Mentor, what's the color that completely hides the spoiler? Fix dis!
1st one is C, second one is H

1st one is E, second one is B

 

[Chi Meson]

1st one is E, second one is B

You're right about B on the second one

 

[jobyts]

The first one is D. It's the superimpose of the other two in the same row or column, with common lines removed. (XOR, in digital logic terms)

 

[waht]

pattern in first one: there is 3 independent sets of shapes composed of 3 like sets (two with 3 verticies and one with 4 verticies) what is missing is a set with 3 verticies of a like shape. Also disregard the square.

 

[Negatron]

Explanation:

The first one takes the first two in a row and performs a logical exclusive OR. So where blacks overlap, black is subtracted, where black exists in only one of the two elements, it is kept.

So D

The second one is set completion. Note that all squares have one empty dot on the outside, empty dot on the inside, and solid dot on the inside. The same for the circles. Naturally the same would be required for the triangles. A triangle with dot inside is the only one missing.

So B


There is an untimed IQ test here.

"www.etienne.nu/cfnse/"[/URL]

This one is only for high performers. I believe scoring only starts around 130 IQ, so anyone below this will get a 0 relative score.

[PLAIN]http://www.iqtest.dk"

This one is a derivative of raven's progressive matrices and suitable for anyone. It is timed. If I recall correctly, it has a sizeable random sample from the population of Denmark, so it should be respectably accurate.

 

[Kurdt]

1st one is E, second one is B

We have spoiler tags now. The new tests from the high IQ society are absolutely appaling compared to the old ones. General knowledge should not be on an IQ test. They used to have the Haselbauer-Dickheiser test up there which was fun if you enjoyed a mind bending puzzle or two. Like Evo has stated they are not properly administered IQ tests and should be taken lightly.

 

[rootX]

What's the point of a "real" IQ test? Does it consider factors like determination, strong will power, goals?

Person with high IQ can spend his whole life doing something that neither benefits him or the society (even counter productive to his/her own welfare) but shouldn't one with high IQ be able to see what's the best course of action to choose and be able to easily understand that social/personal welfare is one of the important criteria in comparing different decisions? Thus one with high IQ should have better goals than one with lower if better thinking capabilities means the person would think fast/better..

I just don't understand how a person with better thinking abilities can outperform one with lower (or is different when we consider the products/services created by them) and what's the criteria to decide (money, social contribution etc) what's better.

...

 

[Kurdt]

The IQ test was originally developed to detect mental retardation and learning disabilities.

 

[waht]

Explanation:

The first one takes the first two in a row and performs a logical exclusive OR. So where blacks overlap, black is subtracted, where black exists in only one of the two elements, it is kept.

So D

you are right
XORing makes a lot of sense, and it's more compelling then the other approach.

 

[waht]

We have spoiler tags now. The new tests from the high IQ society are absolutely appaling compared to the old ones. General knowledge should not be on an IQ test. They used to have the Haselbauer-Dickheiser test up there which was fun if you enjoyed a mind bending puzzle or two. Like Evo has stated they are not properly administered IQ tests and should be taken lightly.

yea I know, some of the tests are a good exercise though, just for fun.

Person with high IQ can spend his whole life doing something that neither benefits him or the society (even counter productive to his/her own welfare) but shouldn't one with high IQ be able to see what's the best course of action to choose and be able to easily understand that social/personal welfare is one of the important criteria in comparing different decisions? Thus one with high IQ should have better goals than one with lower if better thinking capabilities means the person would think fast/better.

Not everyone has motivation and diligence. Successful people are good with other people. However, human relations are often contradictory, and that poses a problem for those who extend rationality to maximum. I guess the view of the world becomes hopeless, and it would be absurd to do anything.

 

[Chi Meson]

Explanation:

The first one takes the first two in a row and performs a logical exclusive OR. So where blacks overlap, black is subtracted, where black exists in only one of the two elements, it is kept.

That's simpler than my reasoning; I figured the rule was "remove one line from each of the first two, then superimpose for the third." But the second didn't quite fit this rule, so I thought it might be "superimpose the first two, then remove one line from the result." This works, interestingly enough, but for some reason I thought my first choice was more likely. The XOR explanation is wonderfully elegant. I should have taken a circuits class.

 

[nicolas.1970]

124 the first time (at office so not concentrated)
and 151 the second, which seems to be a little bit high :)

 

[zoobyshoe]

Explanation:

The first one takes the first two in a row and performs a logical exclusive OR. So where blacks overlap, black is subtracted, where black exists in only one of the two elements, it is kept.

So D

The second one is set completion. Note that all squares have one empty dot on the outside, empty dot on the inside, and solid dot on the inside. The same for the circles. Naturally the same would be required for the triangles. A triangle with dot inside is the only one missing.

So B

Armed with these insights (and two more right answers, of course) I retook the test and my score rose from 106 to 118. I was paying attention to things that didn't matter, like the positions of the little circles in the second one I posted. It seemed their placement had to be part of the pattern they were asking you to perceive but now I see some things can be ignored.

Still, there were many that were out of my grasp. How about this one:

 

[Kurdt]

Probably E. The bottom left and then top right always rotate counter clockwise 90 degrees.

 

[Chi Meson]

Probably E. The bottom left and then top right always rotate counter clockwise 90 degrees.

I agree, except for the "probably" part.

 

[Kurdt]

I agree, except for the "probably" part.

I always like to cover the bases. Especially this late at night

 

[zoobyshoe]

The bottom left and then top right always rotate counter clockwise 90 degrees.

What?

 

[zoobyshoe]

Nevermind: I get it. The bottom left line rotates 90 about its mid point, then the top right line does the same.

 

[drizzle]

the harder way is to erase the bottom-right line of column 1 elements, and the top-left lines of column 3 elements [as pointed in the figure below], then combine [halfway] both columns 1&3 to get the elements of column 2, so the third element of column 3 would be E

[which is more sense for the sake of column 2 existence]

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/125/93230911.jpg

the easy way is as previously described, but for more details, consider column 2 as a mirror, so flip the left side elements then rotate clockwise by 90 degrees, you then get column 3 elements

 

[zoobyshoe]

Your way is good, drizzle.

Kurdt was reading from top to bottom. The same works going across in each row if you first rotate the lower right line segment 90 degrees about its midpoint (clockwise or counter; it doesn't matter), to arrive at the middle figure, then rotate the top left line segment about its midpoint to arrive at the third figure. That's Kurdt's method, except going right to left instead of top to bottom.

 

[drizzle]

that’s more sense and simple, I think that I tend to complex the answer more than clarifying it, I wonder what use I can get of that way of thinking?