Anybody do this on Sunday?- or want to try it now, It would be interested to see what an above average cross section, which this site must be, comes up with as a score.

I did it before the programme aired. Got 113.

Not too bad, but probably lower than the average Empegger.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/testthenation/

Of course, this just tests how good you are at IQ tests nothing else. (notice how people who score badly always role that excuse out?!)

I just did it, got 118, comfortably above the national average so that will do me fine.

I just need to go and rest for an hour or so now

I wasn't too keen on the per question timing. Nearly every other IQ test that I've seen or taken has had a 'whole test' time limit which I think is preferable. I suspect that this test may generally score lower than most of those tests as a result.

133?? Well, IQ tests only test your ability to do IQ tests.

I got a 113. I usually get much higher on such tests, but I agree that the per-question timing threw me, as well as a few British-oriented questions.

as well as a few British-oriented questions.

Getting those right should actually decrement your score, shouldn't they?

/me ducks...

125...if I was a little quicker I'd do alot better.

130...I agree on the time thing
(although I got much higher than I expected, my guess was 100 assuming I was pretty average)

Mm.. got all but one correct in every category except "Perception", where I ran out of time twice, and once when the puzzle changed just as I went to click on my choice --> causing both the current (timeout) and new (wrong click) puzzles to be failed.. ugh!

I'd score better if I was smarter!

Cheers

Hmm. If I understand that correctly, you should have scored exactly the same as me in every category, 133.

Score varies depending on age. Its not just a plain conversion of points to IQ.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/testthenation/results/lookup.shtml

Yeah, just noticed that. Interestingly I could have only scored 137 maximum anyway. Apparantly you can't be a genius (150) until you're 55.

Who cares?

Ah.. I know what I did wrong now. When doing the perception puzzles, I assumed they would have scrambled the orientations of the pieces, so I took too long by mentally rotating all of the pieces to ensure there was only one solution -- ran out of time doing that.

So, maybe if I was dumber I'd have scored better!
But, if I was smarter, I'd have figured it out sooner, so..

This thing that is so amusing about this is the stats page http://www.bbc.co.uk/testthenation/results/index.shtml
This demonstrates that the most intelligent people are male, don't work, drink alcohol, were heavy babys who listen to classical music and live in Londonderry.
I am off to test now

Edit to add score
Just proves I am Mr Average! 116

Hmm, i did a test a couple of months ago and i was told i had an iq of 130 i did this one got told i had an iq of 100. The two tests were completely different so which one do i believe? I think i'll use the larger one!

Another 113 here. Not too bad considering I was a little thrown by the timing and a couple british oriented questions. Oh, and I am at work getting occasionally distracted. If you take it more than once does it skew the score (wondering if I can take it again later with less distractions)?

-Mike

Apparantly you can't be a genius (150) until you're 55.

O.K. Why do you think I made the post in the first place!!!
140
last year I got 113, which I think is nearer the truth. The questions this year seemed just to much more suit me, so I think whoever said that it only proves you're good at IQ tests is about right.
Fluke factor, 3 times I put C, when I didn't know the answer and it was right.

Heh heh.. yeah. The best I ever did on an IQ test was 172 once, never have come close again. Just liked that test, I guess.

Cheers

134.

My scores always tend to vary wildly on these tests - depends on whether the questions suit my mind, I guess!

And of couse we all know that IQ is calculated by your score / everage person your age's score. So if we all get smarter at the same time, all our IQ's actually go down. What a silly way to guage things. I happen to believe that there are simply people that score better on these "kinds" of tests. I mean, I could pass a nursing final exam right now if it were multiple choice. Give me an essay test, and I'm screwed. I've never scored in less than the top percentile on ANY standardized (scantron) test that I've ever taken. I beat people consistently on those types of tests that I KNOW are way smarter than me.

Add to your excellent point (that IQ is a relative measure) the fact that by the way this test is administered (via the web), it is not a representative sampling. I'm guessing that average computer users score higher, particularly on math and logic, than non-users of computers. (Bitt, how did I do there on the non-users???) :-)

J

I happen to believe that there are simply people that score better on these "kinds" of tests. I mean, I could pass a nursing final exam right now if it were multiple choice. Give me an essay test, and I'm screwed. I've never scored in less than the top percentile on ANY standardized (scantron) test that I've ever taken. I beat people consistently on those types of tests that I KNOW are way smarter than me.

I can see your point, up to a point. Most multiple-choice tests are poorly written and obvious. Someone with strong verbal skills can pick up the clues implied by the wording of the questions and answers and do much better than random selections would permit.
However... nobody has magical powers over scantron sheets. An expertly-written, 6 choice per question test can quickly weed out the guessers. There used to be (probably still is) a computerized multiple-choice AutoCAD test I would administer to job applicants when I managed a CAD department. I never scored 100% on it myself, and nobody applying ever got better than 80%. A good professional CAD guy would score about 50-60%. People who exaggerated on their resumes and were hoping to pick up training on the job scored 10-20%... same as random selections.

I don't think AutoCad really applies though, as that isn't aptitude but knowledge of a subject. The SAT or IQ tests are supposed to assume you know the basics of how the world works, but not that you've learned anything in particular. Of course, this is a flawed concept, and you can teach how to answer SAT/IQ test questions.

Matthew

134.

This can't be accurate.

This is true... I wasn't necessarily faulting the scantron style tests in particular, simply the way they are written. Usually at LEAST 2-3 of the normally 5 options could be ruled out from the start (for example, any answer that says "always" or "never") The rest can be figured from simple deduction. Oh, and don't forget that the C option is the most common option on a test.

I DO like the way the SAT's penalize you for guessing. Say you get 1 point for each right answer out of 5 choices, then you lose .2 points per wrong answer.

On the flip side, I hate to admit it but when I had to take the SAT's, I couldn't remember how to do long division with large numbers. I mean I know how, but I just couldn't pull it up. Of course, it was far easier and faster anyway to just multiply the last couple numbers of each answer to figure out the correct one... Oh well, I guess that should count for something. Oh, and I coulnd't remember how to convert decimals back into complex fractions either. (but again, it was easier to just devide the fractions out.)

The rest can be figured from simple deduction.

Far, far too many multiple-choice tests, even those not aimed at small children, fall into the trap of wanting to have several nearly-right answers to trap people. So there will be one right answer, and four more that differ from the right answer in one way only. So you can use that pattern to find the correct answer -- for a start, any two answers that differ in two respects are usually both wrong.

From the age of about seven, when I first worked this out, to the end of secondary school, I only encountered one test (the National Maths Contest) where this method didn't get me at least some free answers.

Peter

This is such an embarrassing story, but I suppose that it must be told:

I took a multiple choice test once and got something like 40% of the questions right. This was actually one of the better scores in the class, so I did end up making an "A". I should also point out that it wasn't simply multiple choice, but a "matching" test so once you identified that the answer "A" was used in a group, you knew it wouldn't be the answer to any of the other questions in the same group.

To get a 40% on such a test was bad enough, but then the teacher gave us all the answers so we see what we'd done wrong. After sitting back and looking at the test, it suddenly because obvious that there was a pattern:

1=A
2=B
3=C
4=D
5=E
6=F
7=A
8=B
...

This pattern kept up through the whole test (until the last two questions on which he reversed E and F with an obvious question of "The human body is made up of mostly . . ."). I was so steamed I didn't see the pattern (nor did anyone else), but I suppose none of us answered enough correct questions to figure it out. Not a great testimony to the professor's teaching abilities anyway.

I could pass a nursing final exam right now if it were multiple choice. -lectric

I don't think AutoCad really applies though, as that isn't aptitude but knowledge of a subject. -matthewk

I would hope a nursing final exam relates to knowledge of the subject of nursing (and not just aptitude), as well.
My response was more directed at lectric's comments than the overall subject of IQ testing. Of course, it's much easier to establish "Does the testee know X?" than "How smart is the testee?" I simply disagree with the notion that multiple-choice tests are necessarily easy by nature.

Agreed. I got a 130. But I've always done well on IQ tests. Does it mean I'm smart? Sure. I'm smarter than my boss, people who cut me off in traffic, the kid that drives through the neighborhood with his stereo all the way up, lots of people! Maybe I DO trust the scores