essay iq test

Please paste a sample text containing at least 50 words, then click the button below to let the algorithm analyze it.

Estimated IQ: ...

If the button doesn't work, refresh the page or shorten the text and try again.

Want to train an LLM on your own data? Get cheap GPUs at

VastAI! Save 5-6X on GPU compute.

How does this work?

The algorithm cleans up the inputted text and then attempts to analyze the quality of the vocabulary used. It then maps that information to an IQ value, using a custom made function that was designed to fit data of texts and the IQs of the authors behind them.

How accurate is the algorithm?

As accurate as one would expect such an algorithm to be. As "proof" I have run the algorithm on a few examples, and you can see that the results aren't surprising (nor should they be).

• Stephen Hawking, using his last paper as the sample, achieves an IQ of 151.
• Alexander Hamilton, using Federalist paper number 6 as the written sample, achieves an IQ of 166.
• Testing different CNN reporters using their articles, I got IQs ranging from 102 to 127.
• Testing different 5G-coronavirus conspiracy theorists using posts from one of their Facebook groups, I got IQs ranging from 75 to 89.

How can I measure myself?

The algorithm assumes that when writing the text, the author put thought behind every sentence he wrote. Furthermore, it assumes that the author didn't purposefully attempt to dumb himself down and is sufficiently fluent in English as to not be restricted in his choice of words. Ideally, you should paste in a paper, article or another document that you have written and are proud of. Note that the algorithm is meant to be equivalent to an IQ test for adults, so if you are under 18 the result will likely be significantly lower than your true IQ score.

If you don't possess a text fitting the requirements, you can attempt to answer the following prompt to create one: describe one way in which the world will be different 30 years in the future and explain your reasoning to the best of your ability.

Note that you can use a spell checker.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is an IQ Test?

It can tell you your intellectual potential, but take it with a grain of salt

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Sean Gladwell / Getty Images

• Interpretation
• How to Find

An IQ test, short for "intelligence quotient", is an assessment that measures a range of cognitive abilities and provides a score that is intended to serve as a measure of an individual's intellectual abilities and potential. IQ tests are among the most administered psychological tests.

That being said, while IQ scores can determine intellectual potential or someone's expected capabilities, it doesn't necessarily mean they're smart. Intelligence comes from so many different emotional and experiential places there is no one test to determine how smart someone is. IQ tests are helpful for some things—like determining disability—and less so for others.

To understand what these scores truly mean, it is essential to look at exactly how these test scores are calculated. Today, many IQ tests are standardized, and scores are derived by comparing individual performance against the norm for people in that age group.

While many tests utilize similar methods to derive their scores, it is also important to note that each IQ test is different. Additionally, scoring methods may not be the same from one test to another.

IQ is a type of standard score that indicates how far above, or how far below, his/her peer group an individual stands in mental ability" according to Mensa International, an organization for people scoring in the top 2% for IQ.

Types of IQ Tests

There are several different intelligence tests in existence and their content can vary considerably. Some are used for adults, but many are specifically designed to be administered to children.

Some commonly used intelligence tests include:

• Cognitive Assessment System
• Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children
• Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale
• Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test
• Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale
• Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
• Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Cognitive Abilities

Which IQ test is best or more accurate? Unfortunately, there is no consensus on this. Instead, some suggest that each test measures a different notion of intelligence , thus IQ test scores can vary depending on what is being measured and the test being taken.

What are they used for?

IQ tests can be used for a wide range of purposes, including:

• Educational assessment and placement
• Assessment and diagnosis of intellectual disability
• Cognitive research
• Job candidate evaluation
• Assessing cognitive abilities including memory , speed, and attention

Modern intelligence tests often focus on abilities such as mathematical skills, memory, spatial perception, and language abilities. The capacity to see relationships, solve problems , and remember information are important components of intelligence, so these are often the skills on which IQ tests focus.

Impact of IQ Testing

IQ can have an impact on different areas of life, including school and work. High scores are often associated with higher achievement in school, while lower scores may be linked to some form of intellectual disability.

The following is a rough breakdown of various IQ score ranges. Some tests present scores differently and with differing interpretations of what those scores might mean.

Intelligence test scores typically follow what is known as a normal distribution, or a bell-shaped curve in which most scores lie near or around the average IQ test score . For example, the majority of scores (about 68%) on the Wechsler IQ tests tend to lie between plus 15 or minus 15 points from the average score of 100.

This means that approximately 68% of people who take this IQ test will score somewhere between 85 and 115. As you look further toward the extreme ends of the distribution, scores tend to become less common.

In many cases, an IQ test score that falls below 70 is considered low IQ, while a score of above 140 indicates high IQ. In the past, scores below 70 were used as a marker to identify intellectual disabilities. Today, test scores alone are not enough to diagnose an intellectual disability as diagnosticians also consider factors such as the age of onset and adaptive skills .

How common are very high IQ test scores?

Very few individuals (approximately 0.2%) receive a score of more than 145 (indicating a very high IQ ) or less than 55 (indicating a very low IQ) on an IQ test.

How to Interpret Your Score

To understand what your IQ test score really means, it can be helpful to know how these tests are designed and how your score compares to others. Your score on an IQ test can tell you how you compare to others in your peer group regarding:

• Language skills
• Mathematical abilities
• Processing speed
• Reasoning abilities
• Visual-spatial processing

To adequately assess and interpret IQ test scores, scientists who develop these tests use a process known as standardization . This involves administering the test to a representative sample of the population that will eventually take the test.

This initial sample represents the total population as accurately as possible and reflects many of the things that are present in the general population. This allows IQ test developers to establish norms or standards by which individual scores can be compared.

Potential Pitfalls of IQ Tests

IQ testing has been controversial throughout history for a few reasons, including:

• Discrimination : IQ tests have been used to justify eugenicist movements and discrimination against minority groups and disabled individuals.
• Validity : Not all experts agree on a standard definition of intelligence , so not all IQ tests measure the same things.
• Reliability : There is also the question of how reliable these tests are. Reliable IQ tests should provide consistent results. Put another way, people should score roughly the same each time they take the test.

While higher IQ test scores are linked to increased health, academic performance, and overall well-being, these scores do not necessarily predict an individual's success in life . It is important to remember that IQ tests are only one measure of intelligence.

What factors can affect my score?

Many factors can influence IQ and scores can change over time. Some of the factors that can impact a person's IQ test score include:

• Educational access and background
• Environment
• Overall health and medical conditions

Many experts believe that other important elements contribute to intelligence, including social and emotional factors. Some experts even suggest that these social and emotional skills actually matter more than IQ when it comes to determining success in life.  

History of IQ Tests

French psychologist Alfred Binet was the first to develop a formal test of intelligence and a form of his original IQ test is still in use today as the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test. Later, psychologist Charles Spearman developed a concept of general intelligence , or general mental ability to perform a wide variety of cognitive tasks.

Psychologist Robert Yerkes developed IQ tests for the U.S. Army during World War I to test army recruits. During the 1950s, David Wechsler developed IQ tests for use with children and adults. These tests remain popular today.

Where to get tested

If you want to take a formal IQ test, a licensed psychologist can provide this service for you. This mental health professional is trained to administer and supervise IQ tests, also ensuring that the test used is valid and reliable.

Several online sites also offer free IQ tests if you're more interested in knowing how you score but don't need a formal test. When selecting a free IQ test provider, it can be helpful to choose an organization that is reputable in the field of intelligence. For example, Mensa International offers a free online IQ test .

Keep in Mind

While IQ test scores can reveal information about an individual's abilities in certain domains, it is important to remember that other factors—including such things as adaptive skills, emotional intelligence , and task performance—are also important indicators of an individual's capabilities.

Kaufman A.  IQ Testing 101 .

Mensa International. What is IQ?

Stangor C. 10.1 Defining and Measuring Intelligence . Introduction to Psychology. Version 2.1.

De Boeck P, Fore LR, González T, San Martín E. An alternative view on the measurement of intelligence and its history . The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence . 2020:47-74. doi:10.1017/9781108770422.005

Deary IJ, Strand S, Smith P, Fernandez C. Intelligence and educational achievement .  Intelligence . 2007;35:13–21. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2006.02.001

Brinch CN, Galloway TA. Schooling in adolescence raises IQ scores .  PNAS . 2012;109(2):425‐430. doi:10.1073/pnas.1106077109

Bartholomew D.  Measuring Intelligence .

Breedlove SM. Principles of Psychology .

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

We Are Oakland County's Premier Counseling and Testing Service Providers

Clarkston | West Bloomfield | Troy

The A to Z of IQ Testing: Everything You Need to Know

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests have long been a subject of interest among psychologists, educators, and the general public alike. These tests, originally designed to assess intelligence for educational purposes, have now found various applications in different fields. This guide aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of IQ testing.

Table of Contents

Frequently asked questions (faq) about iq testing, how to test for iq: understanding intelligence quotient (iq) testing.

The term “Intelligence Quotient,” or IQ, refers to a score derived from one of several different standardized tests designed to assess human intelligence. The concept of IQ was first developed in the early 20th century by psychologists Alfred Binet and Theodore Simon attempting to measure human intelligence.

Free Online IQ Tests VS IQ Tests Administered by a Professional

IQ, or Intelligence Quotient, tests aim to measure an individual’s cognitive abilities in relation to their age group. They’re commonly used in educational settings and psychological research, and by some employers during recruitment. There are numerous online IQ tests available, which may seem convenient and straightforward, but it’s important to understand the differences and limitations when comparing these to formal IQ tests administered by a professional.

1. Validity and Reliability: Online IQ tests vary significantly in their validity (accuracy in measuring what they claim to measure) and reliability (consistency over time). Many online IQ tests are not based on accepted theories of intelligence or on thorough psychometric testing, which compromises their validity. In contrast, professionally administered IQ tests like the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) or the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales have undergone rigorous scientific testing for validity and reliability.

2. Test Content: Online tests often lack the comprehensive coverage found in professional IQ tests. Most professionally administered tests assess multiple domains of intelligence such as verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed. Online IQ tests, on the other hand, may not assess all of these areas, leading to an incomplete or skewed evaluation of an individual’s cognitive abilities.

3. Interpretation of Results: Professional IQ tests are administered and interpreted by trained psychologists or psychometricians who can provide a nuanced understanding of the results. They consider factors like cultural and language differences, education level, and any disabilities that may impact test performance. Online tests, however, provide automated scores without such context, which can lead to misinterpretation of results.

4. Test Environment: Professionally administered IQ tests are conducted in controlled environments, reducing the likelihood of distractions that could impact the accuracy of the results. Conversely, online IQ tests are often taken at home or other locations where interruptions and distractions can skew results.

5. Use of Results: Results from professionally administered IQ tests are recognized by educational institutions, employers, and other organizations. They can inform educational placements, job recruitment, or diagnostic assessments. On the other hand, results from online tests are usually not accepted by these organizations due to the lack of standardization and professional oversight.

6. Fee: Most online IQ tests are free or require a small fee, while professionally administered IQ tests can be costly. However, the quality of results and their applicability are often reflected in the price.

7. Privacy and Data Security: While professional psychologists adhere to strict ethical guidelines regarding test-taker privacy and data security, the same may not be true for online tests. Some online platforms may collect and sell user data or use results for research without explicit consent.

In conclusion, while online IQ tests can be entertaining and offer a basic idea of your cognitive abilities, they should not be considered a substitute for a professionally administered IQ test. If you require an accurate measure of intelligence for educational or professional purposes, or for a diagnosis, you should consult with a trained professional.

Different Types of IQ Tests

Stanford-binet intelligence scale.

The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale is one of the most popular and respected measures of intelligence. It was first developed in France in the early 1900s and later adapted by Stanford University psychologist Lewis Terman.

Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)

The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, or WAIS, is another widely used IQ test developed by psychologist David Wechsler. The test measures various aspects of intelligence, including verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, working memory, and processing speed.

Raven’s Progressive Matrices

Raven’s Progressive Matrices are non-verbal multiple-choice measures of the abstract reasoning component of intelligence. They measure the ability to form perceptual relations and reason by analogy, independent of language and formal schooling.

Components of IQ Testing

IQ tests typically measure two types of intelligence: fluid and crystallized. Fluid intelligence involves the ability to solve new problems and use logic in new situations without relying on previously acquired knowledge. Crystallized intelligence, on the other hand, involves the ability to use learned knowledge and experience.

How Are IQ Tests Scored

IQ scores are usually calculated using a formula that takes into account the person’s mental age (as assessed by the test) and their chronological age. The scores are then standardized so that the average score is 100. Scores above 100 are considered above average, while scores below 100 are considered below average.

The Validity and Reliability of IQ Testing

Validity and reliability are two important factors to consider when evaluating the quality of a test. Validity refers to whether a test measures what it’s supposed to measure. Reliability refers to the consistency of the test results over time. While IQ tests are generally considered valid and reliable measures of cognitive ability, they have faced criticism, particularly regarding potential cultural bias.

The Impact of Genetics and Environment on IQ

Both genetics and environment play a significant role in determining a person’s IQ. While genetics may set the potential for intelligence, environmental factors such as nutrition, stimulation, and education can significantly influence whether that potential is realized.

The Flynn Effect and IQ

The Flynn Effect refers to the observed rise in IQ scores over time, suggesting that people are getting smarter with each generation. While the reasons for this are not fully understood, hypotheses include improved nutrition, more stimulating environments, and changes in education.

Practical Applications of IQ Testing

IQ tests can serve various practical purposes. In education, they can be used to identify students who may benefit from additional support or advanced programs. In the workplace, some companies use IQ tests to assess potential employees’ problem-solving abilities and other cognitive skills. Additionally, psychologists may use IQ tests as part of the process for diagnosing learning disabilities or identifying giftedness.

The Future of IQ Testing

As technology advances, we’re seeing more computerized versions of IQ tests, which can provide more precise measurements and personalized feedback. Moreover, psychologists are continuously working on improving IQ tests to address criticisms and ensure they are valid, reliable, and free from cultural bias.

In conclusion, IQ testing is a complex and fascinating field that plays a significant role in understanding human intelligence. While not without controversy, IQ tests provide a useful tool for assessing cognitive abilities and have numerous applications in education, psychology, and beyond.

At Bright Pine Behavioral Health , we offer comprehensive IQ testing services conducted by experienced psychologists in Clarkston and West Bloomfield , MI. Our IQ psychological testing services are designed to assess cognitive abilities and provide valuable insights into an individual’s intellectual strengths and weaknesses. Through standardized assessments and personalized evaluations, our team delivers accurate and reliable results to help individuals gain a better understanding of their cognitive potential. Whether it’s for educational purposes, diagnostic assessments , or personal growth, our IQ testing services provide valuable information to support individuals on their unique journeys.

WEST BLOOMFIELD, MI

5777 W. MAPLE RD, SUITE 145 WEST BLOOMFIELD, MI 48322

(We are located in the Yorktowne Building. Entrance on the South Side of Maple Road)

Counseling and Therapy in West Bloomfield, MI

Psychological Testing in West Bloomfield, MI

CLARKSTON, MI

6060 DIXIE HIGHWAY, SUITE H CLARKSTON, MI 48346

(We are located slightly south of Hilltop Restaurant on the East Side of Dixie Hwy)

Counseling and Therapy in Clarkston, MI

Psychological Testing in Clarkston, MI

1739 W BIG BEAVER, TROY, MI 48084

(We are located on the South side, one building over Benihana’s restaurant)

Counseling and Therapy in Troy, MI

Psychological Testing in Troy, MI

GET IN TOUCH

Fax: 888-789-6449

Bright Pine Behavioral Health : Psychological Testing and Counseling & Therapy Services. All rights reserved. HIPPA compliant client portal is managed by Simple Practice. Privacy Policy

Have A Question? Ask Elizabeth!

Get The Professional answers and advice you need, When You Need It.

Front desk staff may not always have the appropriate clinical expertise to answer questions about your unique situation. That’s why we provide quick and efficient consultations with experienced clinicians. 

Submit A Request For Psychological Testing or Therapy Services

Advertisement

The truth about intelligence: Do IQ tests really work?

By Linda Geddes

18 July 2018

C.J. Burton/Getty

Russell Warne has spent many hours scrutinising undergraduate psychology textbooks. As a professor of psychology at Utah Valley University, he wasn’t looking for insight, but for mistakes – and he found plenty. Some of the worst concerned IQ tests. “The most common inaccuracy I found, by far, was the claim that intelligence tests are biased against certain groups,” he says. Yet intelligence researchers are at pains to ensure that IQ tests are fair and not culturally biased . “Another, very common one was the idea that intelligence is difficult to measure.”

The truth about intelligence: A guide for the confused

Our thinking on human intellect is clouded with misinformation. but the latest science of intelligence is surprisingly enlightening.

No wonder IQ tests are often considered controversial and flaky. But that simply isn’t the case. “Despite the critiques, the intelligence test is one of the most reliable and solid behavioural tests ever invented,” says Rex Jung at the University of New Mexico.

That said, you shouldn’t trust the kind of 10-minute test that might pop up in your Facebook feed. A comprehensive IQ test takes well over an hour and is ideally administered by a professional examiner. It is designed to assess precisely those cognitive skills that constitute intelligence, so consists of a series of subtests that cover reasoning, vocabulary, mental processing speed, spatial ability and more. Shorter IQ tests, assessing fewer of these skills, can still provide a general indication of someone’s mental abilities, however, because the nature of intelligence means that someone who scores highly on one type of cognitive test will also do comparatively well on others.…

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

To continue reading, subscribe today with our introductory offers

No commitment, cancel anytime*

Offer ends 2nd of July 2024.

*Cancel anytime within 14 days of payment to receive a refund on unserved issues.

Inclusive of applicable taxes (VAT)

Existing subscribers

More from New Scientist

Explore the latest news, articles and features

Mutation behind Huntington's linked to higher childhood intelligence

Subscriber-only

Could your gut bacteria influence how intelligent you are?

How smart is chatgpt really – and how do we judge intelligence in ais, presence review: a lively look at why we experience ghostly presences, popular articles.

Trending New Scientist articles

• Brain Development
• Childhood & Adolescence
• Diet & Lifestyle
• Emotions, Stress & Anxiety
• Learning & Memory
• Thinking & Awareness
• Alzheimer's & Dementia
• Childhood Disorders
• Immune System Disorders
• Mental Health
• Neurodegenerative Disorders
• Infectious Disease
• Neurological Disorders A-Z
• Body Systems
• Cells & Circuits
• Genes & Molecules
• The Arts & the Brain
• Law, Economics & Ethics
• Neuroscience in the News
• Supporting Research
• Tech & the Brain
• Animals in Research
• BRAIN Initiative
• Meet the Researcher
• Neuro-technologies
• Tools & Techniques
• Core Concepts
• For Educators
• Ask an Expert
• The Brain Facts Book

The Past and Future of the IQ Test

• Published 7 Jun 2021
• Author Levi Gadye
• Source BrainFacts/SfN

A century old test to identify children struggling in school evolved into assessments to determine intelligence. But should it have?

One of the most pressing issues any teacher faces is how to bring struggling students up to speed if they have fallen behind the rest of their class. A hundred years ago, the French government commissioned the creation of a test that could uncover the intellectual weaknesses of young children before they fell too far behind, giving schools the chance to provide them with extra help.

That test, known as the Binet-Simon Scale, made its way to the U.S. and morphed into what is called the intelligence quotient (IQ) test.

The intention of the IQ test was to identify kids who most need remediation. And indeed, experts today recognize that it is a useful tool for measuring a child’s educational progress.

But soon after its introduction, the IQ test became used to simplify a person’s overall intelligence into a single number. Not only was this interpretation a far cry from the more nuanced scientific understanding of human intelligence, but it enabled fields well outside education to apply IQ scores in inappropriate and often discriminatory ways.

Over the years, IQ scores would be used to justify the exclusion of certain immigrants from the U.S., the sterilization of racial minorities, and the hiring practices of police departments. Popular culture still refers to the IQ test as the gold standard for measuring intelligence, to the dismay of experts who recognize that our cognitive abilities vary along many axes and can’t be easily measured.

So, what is the IQ test, what is it useful for, and why is human intelligence so much more than a number?

To Teach, One Must First Test

In response to the French government’s 1904 request for a diagnostic test of children’s intellectual abilities, psychiatrist Alfred Binet and his student, Théodore Simon, came up with a series of questions and puzzles for several different age groups, revealing areas in need of targeted instruction for particular students.

If a child scored low on a particular category of problems, it would highlight that child’s need for extra instruction in that category, like spatial reasoning or verbal ability.

Binet hoped the test would prevent children from being labeled with a cognitive disability and sent to psychiatric asylums. He recognized the test’s limitations — it couldn’t measure emotional or creative intelligence, for example — but to direct failing students to remedial help, it would suffice.

American psychologists soon adapted the Binet-Simon Scale into the intelligence quotient (IQ). An IQ score is a ratio, multiplied by 100, of a child’s performance on a series of cognitive tests relative to the average performance of similarly-aged children. An IQ score of less than 100 would suggest that a child was falling behind their peers, while an IQ greater than 100 would suggest that a child was ahead of the curve.

"The only way you can get any decent score at all is to have education"

A variety of IQ tests are available today, each consisting of up to a dozen assessments of skills like spatial reasoning, vocabulary, and arithmetic. All the major IQ tests correlate closely with one another and are used for diagnostic purposes in education and psychiatry, according to Richard Nisbett, a psychologist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.

Importantly, though, studies have shown that these IQ scores are more useful for reflecting the quality of education a child has received rather than their innate intellectual potential.

“The only way you can get any decent score at all is to have education,” Nisbett says. “And education is one of the most reliable ways to raise a child’s IQ score.”

Indeed, in the century since its introduction, the IQ test has reliably demonstrated the value of education for children. Kids who have had access to high-quality education from a young age score higher on IQ tests than kids who have lacked that access.

“There are findings looking at young children who've never been formally schooled,” Nisbett says. “You can give them the Raven’s Progressive Matrices [a type of IQ test that can be given regardless of a person’s language], and they do perfectly terribly on it, but after a couple of months in school, their IQ goes up 10 points.”

A Predictor of Success, a Barrier to Opportunity

In a similar vein, IQ tests are still used, as originally intended, to uncover aspects of a person’s cognitive skillset that may need special attention, for instance, among children with Down’s syndrome or adults with schizophrenia . Yet, the allure of boiling down a person’s intellect into a single number has also turned IQ scores into a tool of discrimination.

The IQ test’s ability to measure a person’s attainment of education makes it an accurate predictor of educational and career success over time. After all, a good education sets children up with both the skills and the social network required for success as adults. However, fields well beyond schooling have come to see it as a concrete measure of a person’s potential when it’s anything but.

"Within mere years of its introduction, IQ was being used to discriminate against individuals who were perceived to be less “intelligent” or “smart” than average"

“The smarter you are, in some sense, the better grades you're going to get in school,” Nisbett says. “So, IQ correlates with grades in school, and it correlates with success in nearly every occupation. But the way to get there is by having a solid education in the first place.”

Unfortunately, within mere years of its introduction, IQ was being used to discriminate against individuals who were perceived to be less “intelligent” or “smart” than average. It was easy to co-opt IQ into existing, often racist ideologies about the intellectual inferiority of certain groups , even though a low IQ score often just reflects a relative dearth of educational opportunity .

In the most extreme cases, low IQ scores have been used to justify the government’s forced sterilization of individuals with behavioral problems, rather than to direct those individuals into more effective therapy or educational programs.

For example, from 1933 to 1977, North Carolina implemented a eugenics program to reduce welfare and social work expenditures based on sterilizing people with low IQ. Eighty-five percent of those sterilized were women; 40% were people of color including Black and Native Americans. The state, which ultimately sterilized an estimated 7,600 people, apologized to the victims of the program in 2002. In 2010, the state-financed N.C. Justice for Sterilization Victims Foundation was established to distribute a $10 million fund to qualifying survivors and their descendants. The first restitutions would not begin until four years later. Of the 786 claims filed, 220 survivors were eligible, receiving $20,000 each.

More Than a Number

As IQ scores are repeatedly shown to best reflect a person’s prior educational opportunities above all else, a true measure of intelligence may seem more elusive. But if anything, psychologists today see intelligence in the same way they see personality — it varies in many dimensions and can’t be measured with just one test.

David Condon is one of those psychologists. Condon, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Oregon, is an expert in the psychological differences between people. For him, intelligence, or cognitive ability, is best understood as an aspect of personality and not a one-dimensional characteristic of brain strength.

“Cognitive abilities are just part of what makes people different from one another, and those differences are incredibly diverse,” Condon says.

The IQ test, then, can only measure whether a person is skilled at taking the IQ test, but can’t reveal how a person will grapple with problems that may have a variety of solutions.

“Intelligence is a tool that people draw upon as a strategy for navigating life,” Condon says. “Given one of life's problems, one person might lean heavily on cognitive abilities, another might lean heavily on agreeableness, or finding someone to help you, give you advice, or point you in another direction.”

Unsurprisingly, this complexity in how people approach problem-solving can complicate interpretations of IQ scores. If a person doesn’t feel like answering the questions on a test, it can look like they got the questions wrong, even if their actual cognitive abilities are strong. Or in the case of children with certain types of brain cancer, IQ scores can mistakenly suggest the presence of cognitive problems when these patients are actually struggling with processing speed and motor coordination.

It’s this complexity that has led Condon away from parsimonious, or simplistic, measures of human differences, like IQ, and toward a more nuanced view of people’s cognitive strengths.

“Professional athletes are to some extent geniuses, but not in the way that term is normally used,” Condon says. “But they're just so far out from the mean on whatever their particular ability is that it works pretty well to think of them that way.”

Nisbett and Condon are both interested in using tests to help all humans become better and more capable learners and problem solvers. Nisbett would like to see tests of intelligence that measure different types of scientific reasoning taught in school to capture a wider range of children’s cognitive abilities. And Condon is curious about the neural hardware that enables the brain to complete cognitive tasks.

“It would be nice to have some sort of neural assessment of efficiency, of processing speed,” Condon says. “We all have marveled at friends who can do things so effortlessly, and it would be invaluable to be able to teach such effortless ways of problem solving.”

About the Author

Levi Gadye is a public information representative at UCSF. He earned his PhD in neuroscience from UC Berkeley, studying how the nose regrows its sensory neurons. 

CONTENT PROVIDED BY

BrainFacts/SfN

Discussion Questions

• Why was the IQ test created and how was it later used in a harmful way?
• How are IQ and education related?
• How are researchers attempting to refocus the IQ test today? 

Fowler, H. (2020, July 22). ‘Act of genocide.’ Eugenics program tried to ‘breed out’ Black people in Nc, report says. The News & Observer. https://www.newsobserver.com/news/state/north-carolina/article244411987.html .

Kaufman, A. B., Kaufman, J. C., Benisz, M., Willis, J. O., & Dumont, R. (2019). Abuses and Misuses of Intelligence Tests: Facts and Misconceptions . In Pseudoscience: the conspiracy against science. essay, MIT Press. https://mitpress.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.7551/mitpress/9780262037426.001.0001/upso-9780262037426-chapter-016 .

Morrill, J. (2014, December 5). N.C. eugenics victims shut out of settlements by law’s wording. The Charlotte Observer. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article9241226.html .

What to Read Next

Also In Thinking & Awareness

Popular articles on BrainFacts.org

BrainFacts Book

Download a copy of the newest edition of the book, Brain Facts: A Primer on the Brain and Nervous System.

Educator Resources

Explain the brain to your students with a variety of teaching tools and resources.

Ask An Expert

Ask a neuroscientist your questions about the brain.

Submit a Question

SUPPORTING PARTNERS

• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Manage Cookies

Some pages on this website provide links that require Adobe Reader to view.

Take a Free IQ Test!

Is your iq score high enough to be considered a genius take this free intelligence test and see your score instantly.

Full Quiz 50 questions in 12:00 minutes

Quick Quiz 25 questions in 06:00 minutes

How to Qualify for High IQ Societies

Most high IQ societies limit their membership to those who have scored above the 98th percentile on applicable IQ tests. Applicants who have already done so can apply for high IQ society membership by furnishing proof of their high scores. People who have lost their scores or simply want to take a new test can take any of the more widely recognized IQ tests, such as Stanford-Binet Intelligence Test , the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS) , or the Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test . The score that they receive on the intelligence test will determine if they qualify for membership. However, applicants are encouraged to take practice tests first to help them prepare for the challenge of entering a high IQ society.

Practicing for IQ tests

One of the best resources for preparing yourself to take an IQ test are practice tests . They offer the same types of questions, and present concepts in a manner similar to what you would encounter on a real IQ test. Going over practice tests multiple times in order to break the questions down to their fundamental parts is key when it comes to doing well on an IQ test.

Taking an IQ Test

IQ tests work by assessing a person’s ability to overcome a specific set of obstacles, either in the form of written questions or as visual puzzles. Depending on the test being taken, the questions can range from assessing quantitative reasoning ability, verbal reasoning ability, visuospatial abilities, etc. By allowing for a variety of unique intelligence variables to be measured about someone, IQ tests assist in quantifying a person’s strengths and weaknesses.

Sharpen Your Skills

Our IQ practice tests PDF reviews the most common forms of questions on popular IQ tests, and gives you the best strategies for answering them quickly and correctly!

February 3, 2014

What Do IQ Tests Test?: Interview with Psychologist W. Joel Schneider

W.Joel Schneider is a psychologist atIllinois State University,dividing his time equally between the Clinical-Counseling program and the Quantitative Psychology program.

By Scott Barry Kaufman

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American

W. Joel Schneider is a psychologist at Illinois State University, dividing his time equally between the Clinical-Counseling program and the Quantitative Psychology program. He also runs the College Learning Assessment Service in which students and adults from the community can learn about their cognitive and academic strengths and weaknesses. His primary research interests lie in evaluating psychological evaluations. He is also interested in helping clinicians use statistical tools to improve case conceptualization and diagnostic decisions. Schneider writes Assessing Psyche , one of my favorite blogs on IQ testing and assessment. I was delighted when he agreed to do an interview with me.

1. What is your definition of intelligence?

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

At the individual level, most people define intelligence in their own image. Engineers define it in ways that describe a good engineer. Artists define it in ways that describe a great artist. Scientists, entrepreneurs, and athletes all do likewise. My definition would probably describe a good academic psychologist. There is considerable diversity in these definitions but also considerable overlap. It is the redundancy in the definitions that justifies the use of the folk term intelligence . However, the inconsistencies in the various definitions are real and thus require that the term intelligence remain ambiguous so that it meets the needs of the folk who use it.

In describing intelligence as a folk concept , I do not mean that it is a primitive idea in need of an upgrade. Many folk concepts are incredibly nuanced and sophisticated. They do not need to be translated into formal scientific concepts any more than folk songs need to be rewritten as operas. Of course, just as folk melodies have been used in operas, folk concepts and formal scientific concepts can inform one another—but they do not always need to. For this reason I want to dispense with the trope that there is something fishy about the subdiscipline of intelligence research because groups of psychologists persistently disagree on the definition of intelligence. They do not need to agree, and we should not expect them to. If they did happen to agree, the particular definition they agreed upon would be an arbitrary choice and would be non-binding on any other psychologist (or anyone else). That is the nature of folk concepts; their meanings are determined flexibly, conveniently, and collectively by the folk who use them—and folk can change their minds.

Further, to say that something is a folk concept does not mean that it is not real or that it is not important; many of the words we use to describe people— polite , cool , greedy , dignified , athletic , and so forth—refer to folk concepts that most of us consider to be very real and quite important. Intelligence, too, is very real, and quite important! In fact, it is important by definition—we use the word to describe people who are able to acquire useful knowledge, and who can solve consequential problems using some combination of logic, intuition, creativity, experience, and wisdom.

See what I just did there? I tried to define intelligence with a bunch of terms that are just as vague as the thing I am trying to define. Of course, terms like useful knowledge and consequential problems are abstractions that take on specific meanings only in specific cultural contexts. If you and I have a shared understanding of all those vague terms, though, we understand each other. If we are of the same folk, our folk concepts convey useful information.

To say that a phenomenon is culturally bound does not imply that the phenomenon can mean anything at all or that it floats free of biology and physics. The meaning of athletic , for example, might vary greatly depending on a person’s age, sex, and past record of achievement, among many other factors. Even though the meaning of athletic varies depending on context, its meaning is still constrained to refer to skills in physical activities such as sports. Just because athleticism is a folk concept, it does not mean that it has no biological determinants. It just means that there will never be a single list of biological determinants of athleticism that apply to everyone to the same degree in all situations. However, some biological determinants will be on almost every list. Useful scientific research on what determines athletic skill is quite possible. So it is with intelligence. It is a concept that has meaning only at the intersection of person, situation, and culture; yet its meaning is stable enough that it can be measured in individuals and that useful theories about it can be constructed.

Here is a particularly lucid passage from the introduction to Stern’s (1914) The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence :

"The objection is often made that the problem of intellectual diagnosis can in no way be successfully dealt with until we have exact knowledge of the general nature of intelligence itself. But this objection does not seem to me pertinent….We measure electro-motive force without knowing what electricity is, and we diagnose with very delicate test methods many diseases the real nature of which we know as yet very little (p. 2)."

There is no need to shoehorn scientific concepts into folk concepts like intelligence . As the science of cognitive abilities progresses, the folk concept of intelligence will change, as it is in the nature of folk concepts to do. Witness how effective Howard Gardner (1983) has been in adjusting and expanding the meaning of intelligence. Far more important than soliciting agreement among scholars on definitions is to encourage creative researchers to do their work well, approaching the topic from diverse viewpoints. Someday much later we can sort out what a consensus definition of intelligence might be if that ever seems like a good idea. For over a century, though, there has been no looming crisis over the lack of consensus on the meaning of intelligence. There may never be one.

2. What do IQ tests test?

The value of IQ tests is determined more by what they correlate with than what they measure. IQ tests did not begin as operational definitions of theories that happened to correlate with important outcomes. The reason that IQ tests correlate with so many important outcomes is that they have undergone a long process akin to natural selection. The fastest way to disabuse oneself of the belief that Binet invented the first intelligence test is to read the works of Binet himself—he even shows you the test items he copied from scholars who came before him! With each new test and each test revision, good test items are retained and bad test items are dropped. Good test items have high correlations with important outcomes in every population for which the test is intended to be used. Bad items correlate with nothing but other test items. Some test items must be discarded because they have substantially different correlations with outcomes across demographic subgroups, causing the tests to be biased in favor of some groups at the expense of other groups.

So, as the old joke goes about a certain kind of French academic, “It works in practice—but will it work in theory?” I am not claiming that theory has played no role in test development, nor that theory has not hastened the process of test improvement. However, we typically do not see the tests that fail, many of which are very much theory-based. So we have successful tests and we have the ideas of successful test developers. Those ideas are likely to be approximately correct, but we do not yet have a strong theory of the cognitive processes that occur while taking IQ tests. There are, of course, many excellent studies that attempt to describe and explain what processes are involved in IQ test performance. Although this literature is large and sophisticated, I believe that we are still at the beginning stages of theory validation work.

A crude description of what a good IQ test should measure might be as follows. People need to be able learn new information. One way to estimate learning ability is to teach a person new information and measure knowledge retention. This works well for simple information (e.g., recalling word lists and retelling simple stories) but it is hard to design a test in which retention of complex information is measured (e.g., memory of a lecture on Lebanese politics) without the test being contaminated by differences in prior knowledge.

Learning ability can be estimated indirectly by measuring how much a person has learned in the past. If our purpose is to measure raw learning ability, this method is poor because learning ability is confounded by learning opportunities, cultural differences, familial differences, and personality differences in conscientiousness and openness to learning. However, if the purpose of the IQ score is to forecast future learning, it is hard to do better than measures of past learning. Knowledge tests are among the most robust predictors of performance that we have.

Our society at this time in history values the ability to make generalizations from incomplete data and to deduce new information from abstract rules. IQ tests need to measure this ability to engage in abstract reasoning in ways that minimize the advantage of having prior knowledge of the content domain.

Good IQ tests should measure aspects of visual-spatial processing and auditory processing, as well as short-term memory, and processing speed.

3. What does a person’s global IQ score mean? If a person’s IQ score is low, do you think that means they are necessarily dumb?

IQ is an imperfect predictor of many outcomes. A person who scores very low on a competently administered IQ test is likely to struggle in many domains. However, an IQ score will miss the mark in many individuals, in both directions.

Should we be angry at the IQ test when it misses the mark? No. All psychological measures are rubber rulers. It is in their nature to miss the mark from time to time. If the score was wrong because of incompetence, we should be angry at incompetent test administrators. We should be angry at institutions that use IQ tests to justify oppression. However, if the grossly incorrect test score was obtained by a competent, caring, and conscientious clinician, we have to accept that there are limits to what can be known. Competent, caring, and conscientious clinicians understand these limits and factor their uncertainty into their interpretations and into any decisions based on these interpretations. If an institution uses test scores to make high-stakes decisions, the institution should have mechanisms in place to identify its mistakes (e.g., occasional re-evaluations).

4. Can a person be highly intelligent and still score poorly on IQ tests? If so, in what ways is that situation possible?

There are countless ways in which this can happen. Language and other cultural barriers cause intelligence tests to produce underestimates of intelligence. It is quite common to fail to get sustained optimal effort from young children and from people with a number of mental disorders. In these cases, all but the most obtuse clinicians will recognize that something is amiss and will take appropriate action (e.g., find a more appropriate test or discontinue testing until optimal effort is again possible). Unfortunately, a single obtuse clinician can do a lot of damage.

5. What is the practical utility of IQ testing?

It is almost impossible not to be angry when we hear about incorrect decisions that result from misleading IQ scores. It is fairly common to hear members of the public and various kinds of experts to indulge in the fantasy that we can do away with standardized testing. It is easy to sympathize with their humanist yearnings and their distaste for mechanical decisions that are blind to each person’s individual circumstances. The reason that it is important to read the works of Binet is that in them we have a first-hand account of the nasty sorts of things that would likely happen if such wishes were granted.

It seems obvious that when we are faced with a decision between doing The Wrong Thing based on false information from an IQ test and doing The Right Thing by ignoring the IQ test when it is wrong, we should do the right thing. Unfortunately, we do not live in that universe, the one in which we always know what The Right Thing is. In this universe, there is universal uncertainty, including uncertainty about what we should be uncertain about. IQ tests, error-ridden as they are, peel back a layer or two of uncertainty about what people are capable of. In the right hands, they work reasonably well. They are approximately right more often than they are grossly in error. If we did not have them, we would fall back on far more fallible means of decision making.

Much of the unease about standardized tests can be eliminated by assuring the public that few tests are used to make decisions in a truly mechanical manner. As professionals who use standardized tests, we need to communicate what it is that we actually do. For many decades, the use of holistic judgment and statistical decision rules have co-existed in a state of constant tension. This is a healthy state of affairs. Standardized tests provide a sort of anchor point for human judgment. Unaided human reason is typically very bad at calculating relevant probabilities. Without standardized tests, hard decisions about diagnosis and qualification for services will still be made, but they will be made in a more haphazard manner.

On the other hand, without reasonable safeguards that allow for human judgment, standardized tests become arbitrary tyrants. Usually when we interpret cognitive ability test data, we go with what the numbers say. Sometimes, the numbers are good first approximations of the truth but need a small adjustment. Sometimes, however, they are not the truth, not even approximately. It is our prerogative to override what the numbers say when failing to do so would be illogical, impractical, or morally outrageous. The exercise of this prerogative can, of course, become a problem of its own if it is invoked too frequently. To reinvigorate one’s capacity for mature humility, I recommend re-reading every few years the thoughts of Paul Meehl on this topic (e.g., Grove & Meehl, 1996; Meehl, 1957).

6. Why do IQ tests measure “General Knowledge” and obscure vocabulary words? Is knowledge of useless knowledge really “intelligence", or is it just useless knowledge?

If we think of IQ as an estimate of pure potential, including acquired knowledge tests in IQ is a very bad idea. We have pretty good tests that estimate various kinds of raw cognitive power (e.g., working memory tests and processing speed tests). We have reasonably good tests of reasoning ability that do not require specific content knowledge. However, if we think of IQ as prediction devices, there is no better predictor of future learning than past learning. Furthermore, past learning does not just predict future learning—it often enables it.

Well-designed knowledge tests do not just measure memory for stupid facts. Rather, they measure understanding of certain cognitive tools that facilitate reasoning and problem solving. To take an obvious example, knowledge of basic math facts (e.g., 6×7=42) enables a person to perform feats of reasoning that are otherwise impossible. In a less obvious way, knowledge of certain words, phrases, and stories facilitate reasoning. IQ test measure knowledge of well-chosen words, phrases, and stories because people with this knowledge are likely to be able to exercise better judgment in difficult situations.

Certain vocabulary words allow us to communicate complex ideas succinctly and make us aware of distinctions that might otherwise escape our notice. In some cultures, personal bravery is a primary virtue and cowardice is to be avoided at all costs. In such a context, there are great advantages in having words that distinguish between admirable fearlessness (heroic, courageous, valiant) and foolish fearlessness (reckless, brash, cocksure). Perhaps even more important is the distinction between shameful fear (faint-hearted, spineless, milquetoast) and wise fear (wary, prudent, shrewd). Knowledge of such words allows a person to communicate with peers about the need for caution without being accused of cowardice. Otherwise, if there is no honorable way to talk about caution, the honorable are left with no choices but folly and self-destruction. I may be overstating my case a bit here for effect but it is no exaggeration to say that words are powerful tools. People without those tools are at a severe disadvantage.

The collective wisdom of a culture is collected in quotes (“The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools.”), clichés (“Live to fight another day.”), and catchphrases (“Speak softly and carry a big stick.”). Those who do not know the meanings of proverbs (“Discretion is the better part of valor.”) must figure things out for themselves, by trial and error (i.e., mostly error).

Proverbs, too, are tools, little cognitive enhancers. Sure, you can pound a nail with your bare hands but even the strongest hands can’t compete with a hammer. Choosing which proverb fits the situation, of course, still requires judgment. Hammers are great—but not for tightening screws.

Most events in history are immediately forgotten, even by historians. Those that are recorded tend to be important. Those that are repeated and remembered over centuries tend to contain something of central importance to the culture. For example, the phrase “Pyrrhic victory” may not be widely known or used but it has survived among educated readers because it uses an episode of history to express wisdom in an evocative and pithy way. Certain key episodes from history serve as templates for our decision-makers (e.g., Napolean’s invasion of Russia, Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of Hitler, the Vietnam War as a “quagmire.”). In a democracy, it is of vital importance that make of us have many good templates from which to draw. Without deep knowledge of the history of the early Roman Republic, George Washington might not have seen the wisdom of relinquishing power after two terms. Without deep appreciation for history, his contemporaries would not have called Washington “The American Cincinnatus,” renaming a new city in Ohio in his honor. It is one thing for voters to understand in the abstract that term limits are there for a good reason. For a republic to be dictator-proof, it must have a long tradition of honoring powerful and popular leaders for stepping down voluntarily.

Crystallized Intelligence Visualized

7. Do so-called measures of “fluid intelligence”— on-the-spot novel problem solving and reasoning— measure fluid intelligence to the same degree in all children?

No psychological or academic test measures anything to the same degree in all children. It is true that well-designed tests of abstract reasoning reduce the need to have specific content knowledge. However, the process of engaging in abstract reasoning is itself learned and very much influenced by culture. James Flynn has been most articulate on this point. It is right to measure abstract reasoning capacity but it is a mistake to think of the ability and willingness to engage in abstract reasoning as divorced from a number of important concrete cultural realities. Some cultures must emphasize the practical here-and-now of day-to-day survival over the what-ifs and maybes of the never-gonna-happens.

Ancient Greek culture was very strange in its appreciation for abstraction (though not unique—India is the cradle of many an abstraction and Arabic scholars, with their placeholding Arabic numerals, gave us the ultimate tool for managing abstractions: algebra.). Truth is, most ancient Greeks probably did not care much for abstraction either. When Greek philosophers began systematically exploring the realms of abstraction, it was dangerous territory. Socrates, with his crazy questions, was seen as a real threat.

Our capacity for abstract reasoning is a recent innovation on the evolutionary time scale. As capacities go, it is a half-baked and buggy bit of software—it is fragile, inconsistent, error prone, and easily overridden by all sorts of weird biases. It is disrupted by being a little bit tired, or distracted, or drunk, or worried, or sick, or injured,…the list goes on and on. The weak link in the system is probably the extremely vulnerable working memory/attentional control mechanisms. Almost every psychological disorder, from depression to schizophrenia, is associated with deficits and inefficiencies in these systems.

Compared to the engineering marvel that is our brain’s robust visual information processing system, it was relatively easy for computer scientists to design better logic processors than the ones our brains have. Yet, in this era, those members of our society who master the tools of abstraction can leverage their advantage to acquire unprecedented levels of wealth. They also come in pretty handy for those of us who derive deep satisfaction from scientific exploration and artistic expression.

8. Which do you think is more important, high IQ or high intellectual curiosity?

The relationship between IQ, curiosity, discipline, and achievement is like that of length, width, depth, and volume.

9. What is the relationship between IQ and creative productivity?

"[W]hat I write is smarter than I am. Because I can rewrite it."

I was intrigued by this Susan Sontag quote that someone I follow retweeted. Then I found and fell in love with the whole essay . High IQ is nice to have and there is abundant evidence that it is substantially correlated with creative productivity. On the other hand, many people with high IQ fail to create much of anything and many people with moderate intellect achieve lasting greatness. Sontag’s insight suggests how we can transcend our limitations.

10. Do you think ADHD is overdiagnosed?

Many members of the public worry that ADHD is not a real disorder: it is just an excuse for lazy parents and bad teachers to medicate kids…kids who are essentially normal but maybe a little exuberant and little hard to handle. The public is right to worry! We don’t want to mislabel normal children and give them drugs they don’t need… However, ADHD IS a real disorder. If you have ever worked with a child with a severe case of it, you know that it is not merely rambunctious that is keeping the child from making friends, performing well in school, and preparing for life as an adult.

Just as we worry about mislabeling and overmedicating children who do not have ADHD, we should also worry about failing to identify children who ­do have ADHD. Those kids are equally mislabeled. They are called lazy . They are called unmotivated . They are called irresponsible . If they play by the rules, they are called spacey . If they don’t, they are called no-darn-good (and much much worse). In time (in many cases), these terms— lazy , unmotivated , irresponsible , and no-darn-good —these are the labels they come to accept and give to themselves. By the time they reach adulthood, they often have two or more decades of failed plans and failed relationships behind them. Their ADHD is discovered for the first time when they seek help—not for their impulsivity, not for their attention problems—but for their depression. We need to do right by all children. The current methods of assessing ADHD are clearly suboptimal, but if applied competently, work reasonably well. Currently I (along with many other scholars) am trying to find better methods of assessment of ADHD.

11. Tell me about your software, the “Compositator”.

The Compositator , despite its silly name, was a labor of love many years in the making. It was a demonstration project of the kinds of features that I believe should be available in the next generation of test scoring and interpretation software. I hope that the next editions of the major cognitive batteries borrow from it as much as they please. The software manual lays out every equation needed.

The feature that gives the Compositator its name is its ability to create custom composite scores so that all assessment data can be used more efficiently and reliably. This is a useful feature but it is far from the most important one. The major contribution of the Compositator to the art and science of psychological assessment is that it frees the clinician to ask and answer a much broader set of questions about individuals than was possible before. It can do this because it not only calculates a wealth of information about custom composite scores, but it also calculates the correlations between official and custom composite scores. This seemingly simple feature generates many new and exciting interpretive possibilities, from the use of simple regression to path analysis and structural equation modeling applied to individuals and presented in user-friendly path diagrams and interactive charts and graphs.

Traditionally, the first step in detecting a learning disorder is to show that there is a discrepancy between academic achievement and expectations, given some estimate of general reasoning ability. Whether they are aware of it or not, assessment professionals who use the predicted-achievement method to estimate expected achievement scores are using a simple regression model. A single predictor, usually IQ, is used to forecast an outcome. Unfortunately, this method typically involves numerous, unwieldy tables and tedious calculations.

The second step in the process is to identify relevant predictors (e.g., rapid automatic naming, phonological processing) that can plausibly explain the discrepancy. The Compositator gives the user the ability to select any set of predictors that are judged to be relevant to an outcome. That is, including additional predictors in the analysis should allow us to more fully explain the academic outcome and tailor the explanation to the individual. With the help of the Compositator program, the user is also able to calculate whether actual achievement is significantly lower than the predicted achievement, the estimated proportion of the population that has a discrepancy as large as the observed discrepancy, and how each of these predictors contributes to the academic outcome. Thus, the Compositator uses an individual’s WJ-III NU profile to automatically generate a large amount of information that was previously difficult or tedious to obtain.

One innovation made possible by the Compositator is the freedom to include not only cognitive predictors but also other academic achievement variables as predictors. For example, it is possible to determine if a child’s reading comprehension problems can be plausibly explained by reading fluency or single-word decoding problems, after controlling for relevant cognitive abilities.

Going beyond basic multiple regression analysis, the Compositator allows users to examine both direct and indirect effects of different abilities using path analysis. For example, after controlling for crystallized intelligence, auditory processing has an almost insignificant direct effect on reading comprehension in almost every age group; however, it has a substantial indirect effect through single-word decoding skills. Identifying this previously hidden indirect connection between auditory processing and reading comprehension has important implications for interpretation of assessment data and for intervention planning. The Compositator can estimate “what-if” scenarios. For example, if auditory processing skills were to improve by 15 points, how many points is single-word decoding skills likely to improve and, in turn, by how many points is reading comprehension likely to increase?

12. What else are you currently working on?

Humans are fantastically good at pattern recognition and making sense of complex configurations. Unfortunately, humans (including and especially me) are fantastically bad at thinking about probability. I have created several computer programs that are used as interpretive aids for psychological evaluations. My approach is to let computers do what they do best: calculate. Human judgment is enhanced once relevant probability estimates have been calculated.

I am writing a book in which I explain how psychometrics can be used to understand individuals.

I am making software that extends the Compositator idea but making it much more flexible. I want to make it so that you can put in any SEM model and apply it to any psychological measure.

I am doing research in which I am trying to understand why self-rated attention is so poorly correlated with cognitive measures of attention.

I am doing a series of studies in which I hope to show that Gs (Processing Speed) = Gt (Perception Speed/Decision Time) + Attentional Fluency (The ability to direct the spotlight of attention smoothly from one thing to the next).

© 2014 Scott Barry Kaufman , All Rights Reserved.

image credit #1: my.ilstu.edu ; image credit #2: assessingpsyche.wordpress.com ; image credit #: assessingpyche.wordpress.com

IQ test questions examples with answers

IQ tests consist of different types of questions. The questions focus on various aspects of the examinee, to get as accurate an analysis as possible.

Is familiarity with such questions likely to give the examinee an advantage? Can practicing sample questions of an IQ test affect your IQ score? The answer is controversial, but the sure thing is that it can not harm your score.

In this article, we will present IQ test questions examples. Also, we will understand how to solve them correctly.

• The questions are of varying degrees of difficulty.
• The correct answer appears after each question.
• If you want to examine yourself, we recommend that you do not scroll down the page, but try to solve the question yourself.

Question 1 explanation:

In this question, there are nine different shapes. You can notice that there is a relationship between the shapes. The relationship is both horizontally and vertically.

Vertical: In each row from top to bottom, the circle is on the right side of the line going to the middle and to the left.

Horizontal: In each column from left to right, the line starts up, goes to the middle, and goes down.

The missing shape consists of a bottom line, with the circle in its left part. Therefore, the correct answer is C.

Question 2 explanation:

Such questions are more confusing than the previous question. The challenging part is to understand that although all the shapes are similar to each other, there is no relationship between the columns.

If we look at each column individually - we will not find a pattern that will lead us to a solution. The pattern will only appear if you look at each line individually.

The rightmost shape in each row contains only the overlapping green parts that are in the shapes to its left.

Therefore, the correct answer is D.

Question 3 explanation:

These questions are also called mirror questions. The purpose of these questions is to test your ability to imagine what the shape will look like from a different angle.

The shape does not have to be a reflection of a mirror, but also rotates at different angles - 90, 180, or 270 degrees. In this case, the rotating object is a shape, but it can also be text.

The correct answer is F.

Question 4 explanation:

Arithmetic progressions and geometric series are also very common.

It is important to know that these questions do not require extensive mathematical knowledge. Only addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division.

In this question, the pattern is the subtraction of 1, the addition of 2, the subtraction of 3, the addition of 4, and so on. Therefore the correct answer is A.

Question 5 explanation:

Some questions can not be prepared for. These questions test your ability to think outside the box. Therefore such questions are considered more difficult questions. What characterizes such questions is that some people can find the solution relatively quickly, and some people will not find it.

In this question, you can draw all the shapes with a pen, without repeating the lines and without lifting the pen from the paper. The correct answer is F, because it is the only shape that maintains the same pattern.

If you have not found the solution to this type of question, there is something crucial to know:

There is no need to stress because of only one question. The effect of one question on your score is minor. Wasting time on one question will leave you less time to concentrate on the following questions and may hurt your score.

In addition, there is no need to take the feelings that you have not been able to solve one question for the rest of the test and lower your confidence. Do not let a single question affect you on the overall test. Just leave it for the end of the test.

It is important to note that the above questions exist in Culture Fair IQ tests.

In tests of this type, the examinee is not asked vocabulary questions to avoid an advantage for speakers of a particular language.

In non-Culture fair IQ tests, there are other types of questions, such as vocabulary questions, logic, word analogies, and more.

Discover your accurate IQ, and take Brainalytics' free IQ test →

related topics

7 things to know before taking an iq test

Is it possible to increase your IQ?

IQ Tests essay

The concept of intelligence tests began with the work of Francis Galton in the late 19th century. Galton believed that measurement of intelligence was to be as direct as possible and hence suggested reaction time as a feasible approach (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2005). He used various sensori-motor measurements and it is interesting to note that modern day psychologists such as Arthur Jensen and Mike Andersen are working on similar lines.

Intelligence testing began in France in 1904 when psychologist Alfred Binet was asked by the French Government to find a method of differentiating between normal children and intellectually inferior children so that the latter could be put in special schools. The Binet scale (also known as the Binet-Simon scale) was developed in 1905. German psychologist L. Wilhelm Stern was the first to coin the term “intelligence quotient” (IQ), a figure derived from the ratio of mental age to chronological age. Binet warned that his instrument was not to be used as a general device for measuring intelligence.

According to Binet, “the scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured. ” Binet feared that IQ measurement would be used to condemn a child to a permanent “condition” of stupidity, this negatively affecting his or her education and livelihood. H. H. Goddard, director of research at Vineland Training School in New Jersey, translated Binet’s work into English and used it for admission purposes in his school.

He classified people as being normal, idiots, or imbeciles and even developed a new word “morons,” to describe people who were somewhere between normal and idiots. Unlike Binet, Goddard considered intelligence a solitary, fixed and inborn entity that could be measured (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2005). Lewis M. Terman revised the Simon-Binet Scale and his final product launched in 1916 was the Stanford Revision of the Binet – Simon scale of Intelligence or Stanford- Binet. Terman also changed the concept of a mental age into a standardized IQ score, which is the approach still used today.

Related essays:

• Approaches in Understanding the Cognitive Process essay
• Mainstream culture essay
• Psychological Bulletin essay
• Intelligence Scale essay

This became the standard intelligence test in the United States for the next several decades. Goddard’s believed firmly in the innateness and inalterability of intelligence levels so much he lobbied for restrictive immigration laws and allow only immigrants of superior intelligence into the United States. Charles Spearman (1927) argued that, as a rule, people who do well on some intelligence tests also do well on a variety of intellectual tasks such as vocabulary and mathematical and spatial abilities.

And if people did poorly on an intelligence test, then they also tended to do poorly on other intellectual tests. That is, he observed correlations among performance on a variety of intellectual tasks. Thus, he proposed, a ‘two-factor’ theory of intelligence: General Ability (g): which was required for performance of mental tests of all kinds; and Special Abilities: which were required for performance on just one kind of mental test. The concept of a general intellectual capacity was his major theme (Chamorro-Premuzic, 2005). Another test designer was David Wechsler.

Wechsler designed an instrument for measuring intelligence by measuring both verbal and nonverbal abilities. The original Weschsler-Bellevue test in 1939 was used in civilian and military applications. In 1949, Wechsler produced the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC) and in 1955 he produced a revision of the adult scales named the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS). Revised versions of these scales are used till today (Intelligence, 2005). Thurstone (1938) identified 7 ‘primary mental abilities’ which he judged to be more important.

These were: verbal comprehension, word fluency, number, space, associative memory, perceptual speed and reasoning (Intelligence, 2005). This was the first multi-factor approach to intelligence. Thurstone’s tests have become extinct mainly because they were not able to predict academic or occupational performance. Raymond Cattell (1963) suggested that there are two related but distinct components of g: fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence is the ability to see relationships whereas crystallized intelligence is acquired knowledge and skills.

Fluid intelligence decreases with age and crystallized intelligence increases with age. Guilford denied the existence of any general factor at all. Instead, he proposed that intelligence comprises 180 elementary abilities that are composed of a combination of three dimensions: operations: what a person does (6-types); contents: the material on which operations are performed (5-types) and products: the form in which the information is stored and processes (6-types) (Intelligence, 2005).

The most widely accepted factorial description of intelligence is a hierarchical one, e. g. Vernon and Carroll. Vernon accepted that both Spearman (single g factor) and Thurstone (multiple primary mental abilities) were right. He suggested that intelligence can be described as comprising abilities at varying levels of generality with g as the highest level and major group factors at the next level. Howard Gardner (1983) argues that there are seven different types of intelligence that are independent of one another: verbal, mathematical, musical, spatial, kinaesthetic, interpersonal (social skills) and intrapersonal (self-understanding) functioning.

Today, the most popular intelligence tests are the Stanford-Binet, the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS), and the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (Kaufman-ABC). Significance to Teaching/Learning Process: Intelligence is often seen as synonymous with learning ability (Jensen, 1989). This is because of two reasons: IQ test scores (a measure of general intelligence) correlate in complex ways with measures of learning. Second, researchers have different concepts regarding intelligence.

Charles Spearman (1904; 1927) proposed that there is a largely innate general ability (called g) that is distributed unequally in humans. G is the ability to reason and to educe (draw out) correlates. It is the ability to abstract, to see similarities and differences, and to extrapolate trends. The major rationale of most traditional IQ tests is that they tap g by assembling a variety of mental tasks. Outstanding achievers need a high g level. There is evidence that g exists. On average, persons who do well on one task do well on all, and those who do badly on one do badly on all.

A factor analysis of the data typically reveals a general factor that aids performance on all tasks. A lot of research has investigated the IQ-learning link. According to Jensen (1989) IQ has little or no effect on relatively simple types of learning, such as classical conditioning and rote learning, except in very low scorers. IQ effects are strong when learning is intentional, the task is of moderate difficulty and complexity, the task is of meaningful information, and learning is helped by transfer from related past learning (Howard, 1995).

Early work found little effect of IQ on learning simple motor skills (Ferretti and Butterfield, 1992). However, later studies suggest that IQ has a big impact in the early stages of skill learning and progressively less as task performance becomes more automated. Ackerman (1987; 1988) presented supporting data and the following theory to explain this finding: Initially, IQ and abilities specific to the task (such as spatial and verbal abilities) are important because higher scorers can better devise new procedures to do the task and may better and more rapidly work out novel task requirements.

In the second phase of skill learning, as performance becomes more automatic, the effect of IQ decreases and that of perceptual speed increases. In the third phase, when performance is largely automated, psychomotor ability differences then have most impact. Even so, individuals eventually converge on the same performance level, given enough practice. This implies that almost anyone may become an expert with enough practice (Howard, 1995). People differ in their general preferences for using certain types of strategy, in their learning processes (Scheck, 1988).

These preferences are called cognitive and learning styles. Cognitive style is seen as a general, habitual way of processing information, whereas a learning style is a preferred way of acquiring knowledge. It is now believed that basic cognitive processes, such as inspection time, may account for approximately 20% of the variance in an IQ test. Both Binet and Spearman, pioneers in the psychological study of intelligence, believed that there was a strong hereditary basis for individual differences in intellectual ability; however, they also acknowledged the influence of sociocultural (i.e. , environmental) factors on the development of specific skills.

Thus, although individuals with the same education may differ in ability due to biological causes, two individuals with the same IQ may experience different intellectual developments if exposed to unequal—in particular, opposite—training or environments. This debate has affected the reputation of IQ tests and even differential psychology. There has been evidence both in favor and against the hypothesis that intelligence can be inherited, and this ambiguity has probably increased the debate.

Piaget (1952; Piaget & Inhelder, 1969) identified various developmental stages in the evolution of adult intellect and his theory of intellectual development is based on four universal stages—namely, sensorimotor, preoperational, operational and formal operational (Howard, 1995). The essence of Piaget’s (1952) theory is that there is a universal interaction between biological and environmental variables that accounts for the progressive development of adult human intelligence. Therefore, this theory explains the passage from basic sensorial and motor skills (at the age of 2 years) to very abstract (formal/logical) mental operations.

It has been argued that individual differences in IQ scores should be conceptualized in terms of multiple intelligences, rather than a single, general intelligence because individuals may be good at some, but bad at other, ability tests. This idea has gained support in the last two decades, but was most emphatically defended by Guilford (Howard, 1995). Impact on Society: The US army at the beginning of WWI was faced with the problem of assessing the intelligence of great numbers of recruits in order to screen, classify, and assign them to suitable tasks.

The Stanford-Binet test was found to have limitations and hence, Robert Yerkes, a psychologist and army major, assembled a staff of 40 psychologists including Terman to develop group intelligence tests. This resulted in the Army Alpha and Army Beta tests. After the war, industry, business and education saw potential value of psychological testing (Lemann, 1995). Broad-scale testing in America was intended to be two things at once: a system for selecting an elite and a way of providing universal opportunity. The second purpose generates the public consent that supports the first.

Admissions to universities require the applicants to take the SAT test (Lemann, 1995). Recruitment to top firms needed the applicants to pass basic IQ tests. Finally, the government ensured that recruitment to the Army was based on IQ tests and during a certain period, it even ensured that immigrants should take the IQ test. Congress passed laws severely restricting immigration in 1921 and 1924, with the result that people stopped worrying that the country was being flooded by the mentally inferior (Lemann, 1995).

In the April, 1948, issue of a publication called The Scientific Monthly an article appeared under the title “The Measurement of Mental Systems (Can Intelligence Be Measured? ). ” The authors, W. Allison Davis and Robert J. Havighurst, believed that intelligence tests were a fraud and served to label the fortunate children of the middle and upper-middle classes as scientifically superior. This created a controversial situation regarding IQ tests (Lemann, 1995).

5M+ takers, completely free, no hassle, instant results

Experience a top IQ test crafted by psychology experts in IQ research! Since 2014, and refined over time, over 5 million have engaged with our test. What distinguishes ours? Immediate, free results without hidden fees or personal data requests.

Defining “Intelligence Quotient” is intricate, but our expert-designed test aims for utmost accuracy. On average, it takes just 10 minutes. Afterward, delve into our sections: IQ Stats, IQ Chart, Celebrity IQ Scores, and Answers with stats.

• 🔥 IQ Test (Most taken)
• A New Milestone Reached! Over 2 million people have taken this test! - Aug 25, 2018
• Bug fixes and experience enhancements - Aug 25, 2018
• A New Milestone Reached! Over 3 million people have taken this test! - Jun 1, 2021
• A New Milestone Reached! Over 4 million people have taken this test! - Jan 18, 2022
• Optimized questions SVG content size, added support for dark theme - Feb 28, 2022
• A New Milestone Reached! Over 5 million people have taken this test! - Oct 5, 2023

About the A Real Me IQ Test

Wow, it’s been over a decade since the first version of our IQ test went live in November 2013. Time flies, and I sometimes find myself missing those younger days.

Fast forward to February 2014, while soaking in the sights of Singapore, I took a chance and translated the test into English, curious to see what might happen. I never expected what happened next: it blew up. Suddenly, everyone was jumping on it, taking the test, and blasting their scores all over Facebook and Twitter—or “X,” as it’s called these days. That was my lightbulb moment. The sheer power of social media hit me like a ton of bricks, and I knew I had to up my game. This IQ test couldn’t just be a one-off giggle.

So, I got to work. I’ve been tweaking and refining the scoring system, adding new content, and listening to what people wanted. It became a bit of a passion project. A couple of years down the line, when I finally had a moment to breathe, I started diving into the data behind the tests, sharing insights that were as surprising to me as they might be to our users.

Here’s the deal with our IQ tests: They’re totally free. No hidden fees to get your results, no need to hand over your email or sign up for anything. I wanted it all out in the open, easy and accessible. And for a bit of fun, there’s a comments section where you can boast about your score or, you know, moan about it.

Now, I’ve got pals in academia, and here’s the skinny: Online IQ tests are a bit of fun, a curiosity. They’re not the be-all and end-all measure of your smarts. They’re cool for bragging rights but don’t take them as gospel. If you’re serious about getting your IQ measured, you’ve gotta do it the old-school way, in a lab, with professionals. But hey, I’ve done my best to make sure our tests are as on the level as they can be.

Fun Facts about the IQ Test

When was it first created.

To be frank, I don’t remember. The first version should be around Oct 2013, but its official launch was in Nov 2013. I have to go back and check the Wayback Machine on my personal website. The test’s first appearance on the arealme.com domain is Feb 2014. It’s a pity that the Wayback Machine can only prove the date back to Mar 2, 2014.

How many people have taken the test?

According to the Google Analytics report, more than seven million people have taken the test, including all other translations. This doesn’t count those who copied our test and distributed it on their own websites. What’s cool is that people from the following places have even taken the tests, according to Google Analytics: British Indian Ocean Territory, St. Helena, Eritrea, Tuvalu, Antarctica, Christmas Island, Kiribati, Norfolk Island.

Which question has the most correctly answered?

The question 4.

Which question has the least correctly answered?

The Question 15.

What is the avg. time for one person to complete the test?

About 15 minutes.

Why am I seeing people showing off very high scores in the comment system?

There are two reasons for this. The first is that people with average scores usually don’t feel compelled to leave a comment about their scores, especially since we have thousands of visitors every day. The second reason is related to our recent update of the scoring system. The new system is calibrated to reflect a broader range of abilities, leading to lower scores for many. Thus, any comments posted before March 2024 were made under the old scoring system, which might not reflect the current standards.

How do I read the comments and post a comment?

After you’ve completed the test, simply scroll down the page. You’ll find the comment section waiting for you at the bottom. Here, you can read what others have said about their test experiences and share your own score or thoughts. It’s a great way to see how you stack up or just join in the community conversation.

Which number fits the question mark?

• 29, 27, 24, 20, 15, ... What's next? 7 9 10 11 I don't know
• A, 1, B, 2, C, 3, D, ... What's next? E 5 4 F I don't know
• 2, 10, 12, 60, 62, 310 ... What's next? 312 360 1550 4650 I don't know
• Which comes next in this series of images? ? A B C D A B C D I don't know
• If all Bloops are Razzies and all Razzies are Lazzies , then are all Bloops definitely Lazzies ? Yes No I don't know
• 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 ... What's next? 90 100 140 256 128 I don't know
• Mary, who is sixteen years old, is four times as old as her brother. How old will Mary be when she is twice as old as her brother? 20 24 25 26 28 I don't know
• 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 13, 21 - Which one doesn't belong to this series? 2 3 4 5 8 I don't know

Which comes next in this series?

• 121,144,169,196 ... What's next? 225 260 298 310 I don't know
• A said: C won't cheat unless B cheated.
• B said: Either A or B cheated.
• C said: B didn't cheat, I cheated.
• D said: B cheated.

Eight identically sized squares of paper have been placed on top of one another as follows. Which one is at the bottom?

• 5,10,19,32,49,70... What is next? 89 95 121 135 99 I don't know

Which one should be next?

• You are almost done ... May we know your birthday? It's what I've chosen above. No. It's a secret.
• May we know your gender? No. It's a secret. female male other
• Is English your native language? Yes No

IQ Chart Celebrity IQ IQ by Country Answers & Stats

To see how other people scored on this test, please follow our Facebook Page .

Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests

This essay about the debate surrounding IQ tests, discussing their role in assessing cognitive abilities and their limitations. Advocates argue that IQ tests provide a standardized measure of intelligence, aiding in academic and vocational placements. They emphasize the tests’ structure and ability to measure various cognitive domains. Detractors, however, challenge the notion that intelligence can be captured by a single metric, pointing to different forms of intelligence and cultural biases. They raise concerns about socioeconomic disparities and situational factors affecting test performance. Despite criticisms, IQ tests remain widely used but should be complemented with other assessments for a more comprehensive understanding of human cognition.

How it works

The aptitude quotient assessments, alternatively labeled as IQ tests, have perennially stood as a cornerstone of psychological evaluation, proffering a numerical appraisal of an individual’s cerebral prowess. They wield substantial influence in scholastic placements, vocational evaluations, and psychological inquiries. Despite their pervasive application, the veracity of IQ tests in appraising intelligence engenders contentious debate, with adherents and detractors embroiled in fervent discourse over the reliability and equitability of these evaluations.

Advocates of IQ tests posit that these appraisals furnish a standardized gauge of cognitive capacity, concomitant with triumph across manifold spheres of life, encompassing academic attainment and occupational efficacy.

They underscore that IQ scores portend scholastic accomplishments, innovativeness, and vocational triumph to a marked degree. From this vantage, the tests emerge as invaluable instruments for identifying intellectual proficiencies and deficiencies, thus facilitating scholastic assistance and allocation.

Furthermore, proponents assert that IQ tests are meticulously structured to mitigate cultural biases and tender a broadly veracious appraisal by centering on cogent ratiocination, pattern discernment, and quandary resolution proficiencies. Contemporary IQ tests frequently encompass an array of subtests delving into specific cognitive domains, encompassing spatial ratiocination, mnemonic retention, and verbal comprehension. This holistic approach engenders a multifaceted comprehension of intellect transcending mere rote memorization.

Conversely, detractors impugn the very foundation of IQ evaluation, contending that intellect is excessively intricate to be encapsulated within a solitary metric. They cite Howard Gardner’s postulation of diverse intelligences, delineating distinct forms of intellect such as linguistic, logical-mathematical, and interpersonal, eluding encapsulation by IQ tests. Detractors posit that by foregrounding logical ratiocination and quandary resolution, IQ tests neglect other intellectual modalities equally imperative in pragmatic contexts, inclusive of creativity, emotive intelligence, and pragmatic aptitudes.

Moreover, cultural and socioeconomic biases furnish another impediment to the precision of IQ evaluations. Detractors asseverate that even judiciously devised IQ tests may evince favoritism towards individuals from particular milieus, perpetuating systemic disparities. For instance, progeny hailing from affluent households frequently avail themselves of superior educational amenities and preparatory tutelage, endowing them with an advantage over their less privileged counterparts. In this vein, detractors contend, IQ evaluations risk cementing extant societal strata rather than revealing objective cerebral potential.

Beyond partiality, examination trepidation and circumstantial exigencies may also impinge upon IQ appraisals. An individual beset by anxiety, fatigue, or infirmity during assessment may evince suboptimal performance, engendering an inaccurate portrayal of their intrinsic capabilities. Furthermore, queries subsist regarding the stability of IQ scores over temporal epochs, conspicuously during juvenility, as cerebral development persists and cognitive adeptnesses undergo metamorphosis.

Notwithstanding these censures, IQ evaluations persist as ubiquitous metrics in educational and psychological arenas, and their efficacy eludes dismissal. They proffer invaluable insights when construed with sagacity, furnishing illumination upon specific facets of cerebral functioning. However, to verily discern an individual’s potentialities and capabilities, it is imperative to conflate IQ scores with alternative evaluations whilst factoring in idiosyncratic, cultural, and environmental influences.

In summation, whilst IQ tests furnish a standardized barometer of certain cognitive capacities, their fidelity is circumscribed by biases, the intricate nature of intellect itself, and circumstantial exigencies. They may yield instructive data when judiciously employed but ought not to be enshrined as the quintessential measure of cerebral acumen. As our comprehension of intellect evolves, prospective evaluations must strive for enhanced inclusivity and reflective acuity concerning the multiplicity of human potentialities. Ultimately, a holistic approach to cerebral appraisal, one that attends to the manifold facets of human cognition, shall yield a far more profound comprehension than any solitary evaluation can impart.

Cite this page

Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/

"Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/ [Accessed: 15 May. 2024]

"Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed May 15, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/

"Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/. [Accessed: 15-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Assessing the Accuracy of IQ Tests . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/assessing-the-accuracy-of-iq-tests/ [Accessed: 15-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

David Wechsler Intelligence Test Essay (Critical Writing)

General information, test description, technical evaluation, summary evaluation and critique.

In 1967, David Wechsler created the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, and the test has been updated several times since then (Keith, 2009). The complete test kit (including manuals, tests, scoring, and so on) is quite costly and may cost between $1,000-2,500. It is possible to find some materials for training or sample test online the price may range between $10 and $200. Of course, these are only parts of the test. It is also possible to find some sample questions online.

The test is designed for children between 2 years, six months and seven years 7 months (Goertzel, 2013). The test is aimed at measuring academic, intellectual, socio-emotional, and behavioral features of a child and can be utilized for diagnosing possible developmental retardation, problems with reading, and so on (Keith, 2009).

The test contains five major areas: full-scale IQ, verbal IQ, performance IQ, processing speed IQ, and global language. The test questions depend on the age of children.

Thus, for 2- and 3-year-old children, the following tasks are provided: receptive vocabulary, block design, object assembly, and picture naming. For ages between four and seven, the following tasks are utilized: block design, similarities, coding, picture concepts, vocabulary, matrix reasoning, comprehension, symbol search, picture completion, information, word reasoning, object assembly, receptive vocabulary, picture naming.

The test consists of 14 subtests. The scores range from below 70 (extremely low where 70-79 is the borderline) and more than 130 (very superior). The rest of the scores include 80-89 (low average), 90-109 (average), 110-119 (high average), and 120-129 (superior) (Goertzel, 2013). The test is helped by an examiner in one-to-one format (a psychologist works with one child).

The test can be applicable to a quite a wide range of children. Watson and Flamez (2014) note that the test was designed to address the peculiarities of various ethnic minorities living in the USA.

The tasks are adequate for children of the given age. It is necessary to add that the test cannot be employed with children having certain disabilities (blind, severe developmental disabilities, and so on). The test has been used for decades and has been examined clinically numerous times (Keith, 2009). The research shows that the test is reliable and valid in evaluating the five scales mentioned above.

The test in question has certain strengths and weaknesses. The strengths of the test include the applicability of the test as it may be used with a broad audience (there are only a few limitations). The test has proved to be reliable and valid. It helps identify children’s academic, psychological, behavioral, and developmental features.

At the same time, it focuses on the average performance. Children with exceptional and unsatisfactory scores simply fall out. The scoring is also quite confusing, and it is not clear how exactly each group (average, high average, and so on) differs. It can also be somewhat difficult to measure the results.

Therefore, it is clear that the test needs certain improvements. It is necessary to carry out research to identify the features of each level of competence (low average, high average). It can also be effective in reducing the number of these levels (very superior seems superfluous). It can also be beneficial to add more levels to unsatisfactory scores. To make the measurement process easier, it can be effective to use the 1-100 scale.

Goertzel, B. (2013). The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI): A Brief Overview . Web.

Keith, T. (2009). Wechsler intelligence test . Web.

Watson, J. C., & Flamez, B. (2014). Counselling assessment and evaluation: Fundamentals of applied practice . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2020, May 1). David Wechsler Intelligence Test. https://ivypanda.com/essays/david-wechsler-intelligence-test/

"David Wechsler Intelligence Test." IvyPanda , 1 May 2020, ivypanda.com/essays/david-wechsler-intelligence-test/.

IvyPanda . (2020) 'David Wechsler Intelligence Test'. 1 May.

IvyPanda . 2020. "David Wechsler Intelligence Test." May 1, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/david-wechsler-intelligence-test/.

1. IvyPanda . "David Wechsler Intelligence Test." May 1, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/david-wechsler-intelligence-test/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "David Wechsler Intelligence Test." May 1, 2020. https://ivypanda.com/essays/david-wechsler-intelligence-test/.

• Child Psychology. “Music Lessons Enhance IQ” by Schellenberg
• Psychological Testing of Intellectual Disabilities
• The Applications of a Psychometric Approach in the Study of Personality
• Psychology Research Methods
• How Fathers Affect a Child’s Life?
• Teen Pregnancy Causes and Consequences
• Erik Erikson' Views on Self-Identity Development
• Temperament and Social Development

Psychology Discussion

Intelligence: essay on intelligence (940 words).

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Essay on Intelligence: Definition, Intelligence Quotient and Distribution of Intelligence !

“Intelligence is what you use when you do not know what to do” – Jean Piaget.

Meaning and Definition :

Human being is considered to be the most intelligent animal in this world. He is capable of controlling all other beings and many other things in this world.

Intelligence has a very important role in day- to-day activities of the individual.

The word intelligence has been derived from a Latin verb ‘intellegere’ means to understand.

What is intelligence? There are many answers for this question. The concept of intelligence has been understood by psychologists in different ways. Therefore, there are a number of definitions. The following are some of the important definitions:

Alfred Binet:

Intelligence is something which sensory acuity tests or reaction time experiments measure.

Intelligence is the capacity of the organism to adjust itself to an increasingly complex environment.

Intelligence is the ability to carry on abstract thinking.

It is the capacity for flexible adjustment.

Intelligence is the degree of availability of one’s experiences for the solution of immediate problems and the anticipation of the future ones.

Intelligence is the capacity for constructive thinking, which involves a discovery of appropriate qualities and relations of the ideas, that are before us and bringing in of other relevant ideas.

All these definitions define intelligence in their own way, but they are incomplete, because they give incomplete picture. In view of this problem, many psychologists have accepted a definition by Wechsler. David Wechsler (1944) who devised the intelligence tests for children as well as adults tried to provide a somewhat comprehensive definition:

“Intelligence is the aggregate or global capacity of an individual to think rationally, to act purposefully and to deal effectively with his environment”.

This definition includes three important processes, viz., to act purposefully means, to act in a determined way without any ambiguity, to think appropriately in a rational way without any prejudices and to deal effectively with the environment or to adjust in a proper way with the environment.

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) :

As said above every individual will possess some amount of intelligence. We may be able to say whether the individual is less intelligent or more intelligent on the basis of his performance in activities. But to know the exact quantity of intelligence possessed by an individual, administration of an intelligence test is essential.

When a test is administered we get a score which may be converted into Mental Age (M A), the concept developed by Alfred Binet. This is an index of his mental ability. But this score does not give us the quantitative measure of his mental ability or intelligence.

Hence, in order to know a quantitative measure, a German psychologist by name William Stern proposed a formula, i.e. MA/CA x 100.

The output we get out of this formula was called as Intelligence Quotient (IQ) by Stern, which is the index of the quantity of intelligence possessed by the person. The Chronological Age (CA) will be the actual or real age of the person.

The resultant product of MA divided by CA may be in decimal point, which does not give a clear picture. Hence, in order to overcome this problem of decimal points, Stern suggested that the product be multiplied by 100. This product will be supposed to be the quantity of intelligence possessed by the individual.

Binet and other psychologists had a firm belief that the IQ remains constant and it will not change though the individual grows chronologically. They believed that the growth of intelligence will be ceased by 16th year in almost all individuals.

Hence, they restricted CA to 16 years-irrespective of the age of individuals after 16 years. That is why the actual CA will be considered if the age is below 16 years while calculating IQ. But it will be taken as only 16, even if the age of the individual exceeds 16 years.

Examples: IQ=MA/CA× 100

= 10/10×100=100

= 12/10×100=120

= 8/10×100=80

Distribution of Intelligence :

Every individual in a society will have some amount of intelligence. But they differ in the level of intelligence.

Some may be very dull, some may be average and some other people may be more intelligent. But how many of them in a group or a society are dull or intelligent or average? The answer to this question lies in knowing the distribution of intelligence in a given population.

If we measure the intelligence of a large number of people and plot the IQ scores of these people on a graph, it assumes the shape of a “Normal Distribution Curve” or otherwise called ‘Bell Shaped Curve’ (Fig. 3.11).

This curve indicates that, a very few people will be at the lowest score and the equal number will be at the highest level of the IQ. The number gradually increases as we go up from the lowest point till we reach the midpoint or the average. A large number of people in a population will cluster around the mean score.

The number gradually decreases from the midpoint till the highest level is reached wherein there will be very few individuals. The lower side of the curve indicates the people with low intelligence and the higher side indicates people with above average level of intelligence.

Table 3.1 showing the distribution of individuals according to IQ scores and their classification:

Mentally retarded are divided as follows:

(According to American Association for Mentally Retarded)

Terman and Goddard have classified MR as follows:

(a) Idiots: IQ: 0-25,

(b) Imbecile: IQ: 26-50

(c) Moron: IQ: 51-70

Related Articles:

• Requisites of a Good Test of Intelligence | Intelligence Tests | Psychology
• Essay on Creativity (910 Words)
• Aptitude: Short Essay on Aptitude (450 Words)
• Emotional Intelligence: Short Essay on Emotional Intelligence

Intelligence

21 Best Free IQ Tests

Explore 21 fantastic free online iq tests to uncover your iq score and see how it stacks up against some of the brightest minds in the world.

What exactly is an IQ Test?

Iq test video - are you a true genius find out now .

What is a great IQ score?

What are the different types of iq tests available, can i practice iq tests , 21 best free iq test sites.

• QuickIQTest.org: Best Free IQ Test for Comprehensive Results
• World Wide IQ Test: Unleash Your Potential
• Memorado App: Best for a Tailored Testing Experience
• Genius Tests: Best for Quick Results
• Free-IQTest.net: Best for Sharing Your Score
• MyIQTested: Best for Learning Strengths and Weaknesses
• Brain Metrix: Best for Quick Starting
• PsychTest: Best for Optional Premium Results
• 123Test’s Culture Fair Edition: Best for Non-English Speakers
• IQHaven: Best for Collecting Trophies
• IQ Test Prep: Best for Further Research
• All IQ Tests: Best for Variety
• IQ Exam: Best for Certification
• Simple IQ Test: Best for True/False Only Questions
• The IQ Test App: Best for Brain Training
• Cryptex Challenge App: Best for Gamifying IQ Tests
• Mensa IQ Check App: Best for Testing on the Go
• Wechslertest.com: Best for Accurate Results
• TiptopGlobe.com: Best for Comparing Scores
• Psychology Today: Best for Verbal-Linguistic Intelligence 
• MentalUp: Best for Kids

Which IQ test is most accurate?

What iq is genius, who has the highest iq ever, what is albert einstein’s iq, our list of the best free iq tests, 1. quickiqtest.org : best free iq test for comprehensive results.

2. World Wide IQ Test : Unleash Your Potential

3. memorado app : best for a tailored testing experience, 4. genius tests : best for quick results, 5. free-iqtest.net : best for sharing your score, 6. myiqtested : best for learning strengths and weaknesses, 7. brain metrix : best for quick starting, 8. psychtest : best for emotional intelligence testing, 9. 123test’s culture fair edition : best for non-english speakers, 10. iqhaven : best for collecting trophies, 11. iq test prep : best for further research, 12. all iq tests : best for variety, 13. iq test labs : best for testing novel and prior knowledge, 14. iq exam : best for certification, 15. the iq test app : best for brain training.

16. Cryptex Challenge App : Best for Gamification

17. mensa iq check app : best for testing on the go, 18. open psychometrics : best for accurate results from home, 19. tiptopglobe.com : best for comparing scores, 20. psychology today : best for verbal-linguistic intelligence , 21. mentalup : best for families, related content .

• 12 Greatest Chess Players of All Time (2023)
• IQ Scale Explained
• What Is Emotional Intelligence?
• What is my IQ?

Does ChatGPT Plagiarize? Examining the Chatbot's Sources

ChatGPT is notorious for its training methods, but does that mean it actually copies work?

Quick Links

What exactly is plagiarism, and how do llms work, does chatgpt plagiarize essays, does chatgpt plagiarize code, does chatgpt plagiarize mathematical solutions, does chatgpt use content from blogs, should you use chatgpt for work or school, key takeaways.

• The plagiarism detected in an essay and a programming code generated by ChatGPT was relatively low, indicating that it doesn't typically copy such content from online sources.
• The plagiarism rate was a bit higher when calculating a mathematical solution. This might be because mathematical reasoning is usually similar across sources, so the responses can match other materials.
• ChatGPT's responses to questions about information publicly available on blogs showed higher plagiarism percentages.

While ChatGPT can answer any question you may have, some users wonder whether its responses contain plagiarism. To investigate this, we generated four different types of texts using ChatGPT and then evaluated their originality using various plagiarism detection tools.

To determine if ChatGPT is guilty of plagiarism, you should first understand what constitutes plagiarism. Plagiarism involves using another person's words, ideas, or work without proper attribution. This includes directly copying text from a source without citation or closely paraphrasing someone else's ideas without acknowledgment.

ChatGPT, like other Large Language Models (LLMs) , is trained on large datasets, mostly from publicly available content. However, collecting such vast amounts of data raises ethical questions, as the original creators haven't consented to their work being used in training the LLMs. This leads to debates about the ethics and legality of such practices.

Although ChatGPT generates responses based on the prompts it receives, the issue lies in the broader context of how OpenAI (ChatGPT's developer) obtained the data used to train it, which involves using content without proper consent. Many see this as plagiarism and, for many websites, content theft. However, pinpointing the exact sources of plagiarism is difficult.

For the remainder of this article, we'll concentrate on whether ChatGPT plagiarizes its output from other sources without delving into the specifics of where its responses come from. Let's check the originality of ChatGPT's responses using various plagiarism detection tools to see whether the chatbot uses text from online sources directly.

In this first example, we tasked ChatGPT with composing a 300-word essay on mental health issues.

Following that, we used various plagiarism detection tools to assess the originality of the essay generated by the chatbot. These tools included the Quetext plagiarism checker, Microsoft Word's built-in plagiarism checker, Grammarly's plagiarism checker, and the Duplichecker plagiarism scanner.

Microsoft's built-in similarity checker reported zero percent similarity with online sources. The levels of plagiarism detected by other tools were also minimal: Grammarly's plagiarism detector found four percent, QueText's plagiarism detector found five percent, and Duplichecker's plagiarism scanner showed zero percent.

Considering the small percentage of detected plagiarism, it appears that ChatGPT does not directly copy essays from existing sources.

To assess whether ChatGPT plagiarizes code, we tasked the chatbot with writing code for a calculator in Python.

Following this, we conducted a plagiarism check on the code using a specialized programming plagiarism checker called Dolos , which detected zero percent similarity. Also, when we checked the code using general text plagiarism detection tools mentioned above, the results were consistent, with almost none of the programs detecting more than four percent plagiarism.

When we prompted ChatGPT to generate a code for a calculator from different accounts, the responses appeared different. This observation and the results from the plagiarism checks indicate that ChatGPT doesn't simply replicate codes from online sources. Instead, it draws upon the dataset it was trained on to generate code independently.

During the third test, we tasked the chatbot to solve a mathematical problem and provide detailed reasoning for each step.

To check the originality of the response, we tested its output using several academic-specific plagiarism detection tools , including PapersOwl plagiarism checker, AI-powered Trinka plagiarism scanner, as well as general plagiarism checker tools such as Grammarly, Duplichecker, and QueText.

PapersOwl's plagiarism detector indicated a nearly 46 percent similarity between the chatbot's generated reasoning and online sources. Similarly, the Trinka plagiarism detector reported more than 10 percent similarity. Additionally, Grammarly's plagiarism detector detected 14 percent similarity, QueText found 17 percent, and Duplichecker showed seven percent.

The detection of high plagiarism in the generated response doesn't suggest that the chatbot directly copies reasoning for mathematical questions from online sources. This is mainly because solutions and reasoning for math problems are often standard and widely available online.

So, even though ChatGPT comes up with its own responses, finding the same answers and reasoning online is possible, which might have added to the high plagiarism percentages.

To check whether ChatGPT uses content from online blogs, we asked the chatbot to provide tips for maintaining laptop battery health.

Microsoft Word detected 10 percent plagiarism in the generated text. Duplichecker showed four percent, Grammarly's plagiarism checker indicated 14 percent, but Quetext found 58 percent plagiarism in the text. Upon digging further, some of the text in the chatbot's response matched the content on some blogs.

To double-check if the high plagiarism detection wasn't just coincidental, I asked the chatbot a few more questions about information that is easily available online. The plagiarism percentage in the generated responses was much higher. Based on our testing, it appears that the chatbot sometimes uses phrases and text from online sources, which is quite surprising.

Although many free online plagiarism checkers haven't detected major plagiarism in ChatGPT's responses, you shouldn't use it for academic or professional purposes.

Don't use ChatGPT for your school assignments if you're a student . Instructors can use tools such as GPTZero and Turnitin's AI writing detector to spot AI-generated content. If your work gets flagged as AI-generated by such tools, you could fail the assignment or even be expelled from school. Even though many GPT-detection tools specifically state that they shouldn't be used for this purpose, they are, and it could land you in trouble. Not to mention, you're really only cheating yourself by not studying the topic properly.

Can you use the chatbot to improve your work performance ? It depends. If you want to improve your writing flow in emails or other text forms, using AI can save you time and effort. However, you should only use it as a tool to assist you in your tasks rather than relying on it to do the entire job for you.

In contrast, if your job, like professional writing, prohibits using such tools, you should avoid using ChatGPT or any other tool altogether.

Hopefully, our testing has given you insight into the extent to which ChatGPT may draw from resources available on the web. However, it's important to note that we've used free plagiarism tools and tested only a limited dataset. So, while our findings might be helpful, they shouldn't be taken as absolute facts.