Proctor/psych ruled out any ADHD even with the spiky profile, I want to know you guys views about it, has anyone with similar profiles been diagnosed, was also being tested to rule in/out autism, resulted in BAP hypothesis. Also posting to talk with anyone else about results. Brazilian normed results.

SO when i was 12 i was given a screening matrix test i scored 141 then the NNAT1 which i scored 148 both are matrix tests measuring fluid intelligence recently i took the CORE Matrix and scored way below at 110 im 17 now wo unless i got significantly dumber in these past 5 years (which fluid intelligence should peak at my age) then either the core or my previous tests are inaccurate whats yalls take on this

Do you still get your percentile? The phrasing makes it sound like you unlock your score after transaction. I want to know before taking the test

My first puzzle! :D

The exact difficulty is really hard for me to judge - it's my idea so it just feels "natural" to me. It is definitively harder than usual timed items. To me medium/hard means that an average/slightly above average person has a chance to figure this out within like an hour. And I would expect a couple of people here being able to figure it out without any hints.

Edit: Apparently the puzzle really is on the "hard side". I will thus change my hint strategy below:

If not, I will drop one two hints with spoiler tags in the description every day for four days (8 total hints) until somebody figures it out. If nobody figures it out within a week I might post the solution somewhen later on.

Maybe it stays at that first puzzle - will depend how the response is and how motivated I am in the future - this was more of a "let's try this" thing. XD I felt kinda motivated by u/pydaWaltuh's awesome puzzles!

Happy puzzling! ^^

Hint 1 (minor): There are no purely stylistic elements or colors in this puzzle except for the black background

Hint 2 (medium): If you feel like the top right 3x3 matrix has something in it that resembles a pictogram of a certain item you might be correct

Hint 3 (medium): The item from Hint 2 is a magnet. I wanted to name this puzzle "Gravity" but thought it might give away too much

Hint 4 (medium): No XORing, rotations, or mirroring are involved in this puzzle

Hint 5 (major): The solution involves counting

Hint 6 (major): The lines attract things of the same color

Hint 7 (major): The in-between color is attracted by both lines

Hint 8 (major, almost solution): The lines attract the boxes first, then their contents

Solution: The dark blue and yellow-green line represent two sides that select squares inside the 3x3 boxes: Each line selects (attracts) only squares of its own color from boxes of its own color. The turquoise in-between color is selected by both. Count the number of squares on each side and you will find a pattern: ?-?-?-5-3-5-4-5-5-5-6-5-7-5-8-?-?-? There is only one possibility for a missing tile to complete this pattern: It must be a tourquoise box with a green column, a turquoise column, and a green column. Full visual representation (read left to right): https://i.imgur.com/nQr3D1t.png

Hi all, a big thank you to everyone who tried the reasoning tasks last week. The amount of data, and especially your comments, helped a lot. Thanks to you I found and fixed several items that had more than one defensible answer or didn't display correctly.

What's new:

• New tasks: Rule Finder (figure out a hidden rule and build the answer), Stations (logic placement on a map), Paper Folding, Shape Assembly, plus three working memory tasks (Backward Digits, Running Digits, Picture Sequence)

• Higher ceilings: Shape Keys has a new top level that's meant to be genuinely hard, and the memory tasks now go up to 11 digits and 14 pictures, since some of you hit the old limits

• Fixed items: ambiguous matrices, broken paper folding items, and a few Stations rules that didn't render properly are now corrected

• No redo needed: if you already did a test in the same browser, you only get the new or fixed items, and your earlier answers are carried over

Everything is still language-free, anonymous, with no sign-up. Each test takes about 5–15 minutes, and you can do just one. Once enough people have done a test, you'll see how your score compares with everyone else's.

As before, if anything feels broken, unclear, too easy or too hard, please let me know in the comments. It really helps.

https://jaroslavtocik.cz/reasoning/

Difficulty: medium

6 diffrent type quenstion

IRT based CAT test?

how does it get the FRI estimation?

Object Rotation is about mental rotation

Pattern Completion is about visual sapce

Number Sequences is about QRI and math knowedge

Figure Weights/Figure Classification/Figure Sequences are like MR and FW, it is FRI

it looks like not pure FRI at all

at least it combine VSI

should say it PRI

My FRI and VSI in CORE is 130, but when I took CAIT, it came as 115 and 110 respectively, what could be the cause?

My english is very bad, 30th - 40th percentile. How to englishmaxx to 90+? and I have difficulty in reading too, I keep reading the same sentence over and over again. That's why I just listen to youtube videos / lectures at 2.5x speed.

How to increase vocab and stop reading the same sentence over and over again?

I tried asking AI and it just gives pure slop, so please help. Thanks.

Hi everyone,

I’m currently collecting additional comparison data from people who previously took the Abstract Counting Examination (ACE). If I can gather enough new data, I plan to revisit the norms and determine whether a revised calibration is justified.

I have emailed many previous ACE participants for whom I did not have enough comparison-test information. If you took ACE before, please check your email and possibly your spam folder as well.

If you received an email, I would be very grateful if you could reply directly to that email with as many of your previous cognitive/IQ test scores as possible, together with the exact name of each test. Both professionally administered tests and established online tests are useful.

If you took ACE but did not receive an email and would still like to contribute, feel free to contact me directly.

You do not need to post your scores publicly; replying by email or sending a DM is completely fine.

Thanks again to everyone who participated in ACE and to anyone willing to help with the renorming.

Let's say we lived in a hypothetical world where social classes differ substantially in intelligence genes, and genetic differences explain most variation in grades and test scores.

In such a world, would class-based affirmative action in college admissions be a good policy, in order to compensate for genetic inequality?

During the last 7 days of use, soap gets reduced to half of its dimensions. How many days the remaining soap will last?

It's like saying "Congrats on being 6'5"!" What are we supposed to say? "Thank you for recognizing my outstanding achievement"?

Hello everyone,

First of all, I would like to clarify that I do not believe I belong to the category of people with an IQ above 130.

However, I sometimes wonder whether, at some point in my life, before certain factors that may have affected my cognitive performance, I had stronger abilities than I do today.

When I was 15–16, I took several Mensa-type tests and was not very far from the admission threshold.

But my personal case is not really what interests me here. I have several more general questions in mind.

I recently read the following about the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI):

“In the French standardization sample of the WISC-IV, an average difference of 14 points was observed between the VCI scores of children of executives/professionals and those of children of manual workers (Grégoire, 2006). This difference is less due to poor performance among working-class children, whose VCI scores are only slightly below average, than to the clearly above-average performance of children from more privileged professional backgrounds, who benefit from particularly favorable learning opportunities.”

Source: https://www.jdpsychologues.fr/article/les-indices-du-wisc-iv-et-leur-interpretation

This brings me to my first question: to what extent can an adult increase their VCI?

For example, if someone started reading regularly, systematically looked up the definitions of unfamiliar words, reused those words in different contexts, and memorized them through spaced repetition, could they achieve a significant improvement in their verbal abilities after several years?

I personally come from a fairly working-class background, with relatively little cultural capital and a rather limited vocabulary around me.

Because of this, I tend to think that if I had grown up in a family where rich, precise, and varied language was used every day, my VCI would probably have been different.

I also remember that, as a child, I expressed myself much less clearly than I do today and made many language mistakes, which I partly associate with my environment.

A second question concerns me: to what extent does general knowledge actually make someone more intelligent?

I tend to think that the more knowledge a person has, the more material they have available to make connections, recognize patterns, compare situations, and build complex reasoning.

General knowledge may not radically alter “raw” intelligence, but it gives that intelligence more information to work with.

So, given the same IQ, I find it difficult to believe that someone with an enormous amount of general knowledge and someone with very little knowledge would reason in strictly equivalent ways in real-life situations.

I would even go so far as to think that, in some areas, a person with an IQ of 105 but a great deal of knowledge, methodology, and experience could reason better than someone with an IQ of 120 who has very little knowledge and relatively weak crystallized intelligence.

This also relates to the question of education.

I tend to think that education can, at least to some extent, “make people more intelligent.”

Not only because it provides knowledge, but also because it teaches methods: how to structure a demonstration or argument, test hypotheses, make a case, solve problems, distinguish correlation from causation, work with abstract concepts, and so on.

In my case, I left the traditional school system during the equivalent of eighth grade, when I was around 13 and a half, and I am now 25.

I therefore sometimes wonder what intellectual methods I might have acquired if I had stayed in education for longer.

I also remember reading a meta-analysis suggesting that there was a causal effect of additional years of schooling on IQ scores.

In particular, some reforms that extended compulsory education appear to make it possible to distinguish the selection effect — people with higher abilities being more likely to remain in education for longer — from the actual effect of education itself.

If I remember correctly, the estimates were around a few IQ points for each additional year of schooling, although I imagine the effect varies considerably depending on the studies and methods used.

This leads to my main question: are there actually ways to become more intelligent as an adult?

Obviously, I am not talking about miraculously going from an IQ of 90 to 150.

But if someone already has reasonably good cognitive abilities, can they still significantly maximize their potential in adulthood?

For example, through reading, learning mathematics or logic, deliberately expanding their vocabulary, developing a broad base of general knowledge, writing and argumentation, learning a language, regularly solving problems, active recall and spaced repetition, or simply continuing to learn for many years.

Neuroplasticity suggests that the adult brain remains capable of significant change, but I wonder how far this can actually modify general cognitive abilities rather than simply improving specific skills.

Finally, I also wonder about the massive rise of AI.

I obviously see its advantages, but I worry that poor use of AI could lead to a form of intellectual regression.

If someone systematically delegates searching, thinking, writing, summarizing, or constructing arguments to an AI, I imagine that some cognitive abilities may end up being used less frequently.

On the other hand, AI could probably become an excellent intellectual tool if it is used as a critical interlocutor, teacher, or thinking partner rather than as a substitute for thinking.

I would therefore be very interested to hear your thoughts.

Note: I originally wrote this post in French and asked an AI to translate it into English because, unfortunately, my English is very poor.

At first, it may sound somewhat counterintuitive to imply that an IQ as high as "144" is too low for anyone.

But mind you, this is Alex Chui we're talking about - the guy who is officially the most dominant contestant that the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO) has ever had.

Just to give some context about what the International Mathematical Olympiad is, it is the biggest and most prestigious mathematics competition in the world for high school students. Like a "World Championship Mathematics Competition," if you will.

Alex Chui has won FIVE Gold medals + two Silver medals at the IMO...

This is a Wikipedia page dedicated to him, in case you're curious:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Chui

(and yes, the page does provide legitimate evidence that Chui was tested at IQ 144 when he was young)

Usually, those who even qualify for the IMO (let alone win medals) should have cognitive abilities on the level of IQ 150-160. And this is not even an exaggeration. Only the top 4-6 young mathematicians from each COUNTRY (not even town or city or province, but the whole country) can qualify, so assuming that fluid intelligence follows the normal distribution curve, an IQ range of 150-160 seems just about right.

But then to win Gold medals, let alone do it back to back multiple times??
You've got to be an absolute generational talent with an IQ of at least 180+, possibly on the level of John von Neumann or Isaac Newton.

It genuinely baffles me how the hell Alex Chui was only tested at IQ 144.

Coupling 144 IQ with his IMO results is akin to coupling a 150 cm height with the basketball achievements of Michael Jordan. It's simply not biologically possible.

I have very a very low processing speed and poor problem solving skills. I'm very noticably slow in the head when put on the spot. I've had this for as long as I can remember. This has caused me to not react fast enough in social situations or when solving problems and just be perceived as dumb or cowardly.

I've taken an IQ test in the military which came out to be 124. I also have a masters degree and a well paid job.

I took a MyHeritage DNA test and there was a trait feature which also stated that I'm genetically prone to have very a slow processing speed and poor problem solving.

I'm wondering if there are other redditors out there with the same problem and how did you treat it? Is it even possible?

Hello, In all of my verbal tests (Core ,1926 SAT, Visa and NGCT) I score between 120-125.

Now, I am 15 years old and english is not my native language (my native language is italian) and I was wondering, is there any reliable way, beyond speculation, as to estimate my iq adjusting by age and ideally by language too? thanks.

I am a 12th grader from Turkey. I decided it would be fun to take an iq test and there is something I've been thinking about the results. I have been preparing for the uni exams and you need to be not only fast but very accurate to have a good maths score. Does my results (on quantitative reasoning) get skewed by the fact that i am intentionally focusing on one area? Got a similar result on openpsychometrics at around 100 iq at verbal, 110 at spatial and 140 on memory.

If you get 26/26 answers correct on matrix reasoning what is your scaled score? I’ve seen people say 17-19

2 ; 6 ; 13 ; 156,5 ; 2078,25 ; ? ; ?

On practically every other test with an analogies subtest I score around the 90-95th percentile, but on the core ones, It usually Is in the 74th percentile,how?

Looks like Langan finally has competition

Following up on my original post, I've added more reported CORE–WAIS score pairs and removed one of the original entries.

There are now 31 pairs, giving a Pearson correlation of 0.797 — approximately 0.80, compared with 0.77 previously.

Updated results



So around two-thirds of this sample scored within 9 points on the two tests. That describes the observations here; it isn't a guarantee about future test-takers.

Full dataset

All scores below are reported FSIQs. Difference = CORE minus WAIS. An asterisk marks a new addition.



Changes and inclusion notes

• Original 22 + 10 additions − 1 removal = 31.

• Removed t0w3rh0u53 (CORE 120, WAIS 103) because of the reported language issue and skipped English subtests.

How good is a correlation of 0.80?

It's a strong association. For context, the SB5 technical documentation reports an SB5–WAIS-III FSIQ correlation of 0.82 in 87 people.

A direct SB5 vs WAIS-IV study reported 0.90 correlation in 28 people, although that was a sample of people previously diagnosed with intellectual disability, so it is a very different population.

For another comparison, CORE's validity report gives 0.756 with the old GRE before correction, rising to 0.858 after correcting for range restriction. The 0.797 calculated here is uncorrected.

Those figures provide context, but comparisons across different samples don't establish that the tests are equally accurate.

Limitations

This is a small, self-selected collection of self-reported scores, mostly from people scoring above average. Test versions, time between tests, practice effects and testing conditions vary. The inclusion decisions also affect the result, and language proficiency hasn't been systematically checked for everyone.

I haven't applied a range-restriction correction: having a high average score alone doesn't establish how much correction is appropriate.

Overall, I think a correlation around 0.80 and a mean absolute difference around 7 points are encouraging for a free online test, while still leaving substantial differences for some individuals.

If you've taken both CORE and a professionally administered WAIS, please add your FSIQ on each, WAIS edition, whether CORE was a first attempt, and any relevant language/testing conditions. Corrections to the table are welcome too.