The Classic IQ Test

[zbig44]

I just took Tickle's IQ Test and got my free IQ score. Try it, it's fun!
Especially as English Test, as well!
web.tickle.com/tests/uiq/

<<Congratulations, zbig!

Your IQ score is 131

This number is based on a scientific formula that compares how many questions
you answered correctly on the Classic IQ Test relative to others.

Your Intellectual Type is Visual Mathematician. This means you are gifted at
spotting patterns — both in pictures and in numbers. These talents combined
with your overall high intelligence make you good at understanding the big
picture, which is why people trust your instincts and turn to you for
direction — especially in the workplace. And that's just some of what we know
about you from your test results. >>

[amused.to.death]

Funny, I'm a VISIONARY PHILOSOPHER - the last word I'd use to describe myself:)

(This means you are highly intelligent and have a powerful mix of skills and insight that can be applied in a variety of different ways. Like Plato, your exceptional math and verbal skills make you very adept at explaining things to others — and at anticipating and predicting patterns.)

And I hate maths:))

[Gość: cc]

don't get overexcited, whoever does this test gets the same results - three
people did them last week and all got 131, then zbig's another one ;-)))
but the labels differ - insightful artist, visionary philosopher etc.

(or maybe all of those friends are geniuses ??)

[amused.to.death]

1) I didn't get 131
2) I'd have to have IQ of 10 to take it seriously:))

[Gość: cc]

ad 2) so would I, but - frankly - if I had IQ 10 I wouldn't do this test - it
would take me years to operate the PC and connect to the net properly ;-)))

[amused.to.death]

BTW - I tried to do the test the other way: I chose first answer in each question... and still the result was 80, so I guess it's not possible to get the result that you're an idiot..

[republican]

amused.to.death napisała:

> BTW - I tried to do the test the other way: I chose first answer in each
questi
> on... and still the result was 80, so I guess it's not possible to get the
resu
> lt that you're an idiot..
>
one wonders what would GWB do on this test

[usenetposts]

I got 136, which is pretty close to what I got on the professional ones I did
at work once, so maybe the test itself is kosher. The marketing ploy behind it
is pretty transparent, though.

many-level traps

[zbig44]

usenetposts napisał:

> The marketing ploy behind it
> is pretty transparent, though.

There seems to be no marketing ploy behind it, in my opinion at least.
But... it is evident commercial one. You may have your full dossieur for same
payment as well as the complete answer list. But the score and introductory
prophile you obtain for free (as it was in my case, also).

This was my first IQ test at all, so I have this little remark as a conclusion:

If you are newbe as me, you should assume that there are more then one layer of
difficulty in many questions. I've made the test in ca. 20 minutes (it was
rather for fun than true interest), so I had underestimated at least one problem
(I'd found the first-level trap, but failed to avoid the second one - and the
ability to avoid the maximal number of them is the obvious measure of
inteligence, so I am not dissapointed on an account of final result; oh, maybe
a bit :)

[usenetposts]

zbig44 napisał:

> usenetposts napisał:
>
> > The marketing ploy behind it
> > is pretty transparent, though.
>
> There seems to be no marketing ploy behind it, in my opinion at least.
> But... it is evident commercial one. You may have your full dossieur for same
> payment as well as the complete answer list. But the score and introductory
> prophile you obtain for free (as it was in my case, also).

You don't get anything unless you fill out their questionnaire but a wasted
half hour. Hence I think I am right about a marketing ploy. They have harvested
your contact details, age, sex and some other points about you and will now
send you targeted mailshots, and maybe sell on your address to others. I hope
the e-mail address you gave was not a spam free one, because if so those happy
days are over ....

>
> This was my first IQ test at all, so I have this little remark as a
conclusion:
>
>
> If you are newbe as me, you should assume that there are more then one layer
of
>
> difficulty in many questions. I've made the test in ca. 20 minutes (it was
> rather for fun than true interest), so I had underestimated at least one
proble
> m
> (I'd found the first-level trap, but failed to avoid the second one - and the
> ability to avoid the maximal number of them is the obvious measure of
> inteligence, so I am not dissapointed on an account of final result; oh,
maybe
> a bit :)
>
>


You can certainly learn how to approach these tests, and the sort of techniques
they look for. Then you don't get confused by what they are looking for.

Nevertheless, some items were as much general knowledge as intelligence. Take,
for example, "which one of these is least like the others" and this was
followed by "plum, apricot, grape, cherry, peach". To a botanist, the answer is
obvious, as grapes are in the genus Vitis and all those other plants are in the
genus Prunus. But what that has to do with intelligence I know not. Either a
person has familiarity with botany, or they haven't.

[Gość: dv]

> Nevertheless, some items were as much general knowledge as intelligence.
Take,
> for example, "which one of these is least like the others" and this was
> followed by "plum, apricot, grape, cherry, peach". To a botanist, the answer
is
>
> obvious, as grapes are in the genus Vitis and all those other plants are in
the
>
> genus Prunus. But what that has to do with intelligence I know not. Either a
> person has familiarity with botany, or they haven't.
>
>
I have no idea of genus Vitis or genus Prunus yet even such a thick-head like
me could come up with a good answer. Anyway, I've been officially named "word
warrior"...funny

[Gość: ines]

> Nevertheless, some items were as much general knowledge as intelligence.
> Take, for example, "which one of these is least like the others" and this was
> followed by "plum, apricot, grape, cherry, peach". To a botanist, the answer
> is obvious, as grapes are in the genus Vitis and all those other plants are
> in the genus Prunus. But what that has to do with intelligence I know not.
> Either a person has familiarity with botany, or they haven't.

And what if I have familiarity with ... eating? If you crack them open, what
will you find? Either a stone (plum, apricot, cherry, peach) or pips (grape).