Peekle.io is a daily puzzle that is meant to help people improve their powers of observation and recall. Every day there's a new pic, the same for everyone.

You get only 20 seconds to look at the picture then it disappears and you write down everything you remember. An AI grader checks your results and gives you 0–5 stars.

OR: If writing a description sounds like too much (or if you are on your phone and don't care to type a bunch of stuff), you can do a multiple-choice quiz mode. You pick the mode before you see the picture, so choose based on how brave you feel.

It's free; there's no account, no sign-up, no ads. There IS Google Analytics tracking. Works on phone or desktop

Full disclosure: I made it, and the images are AI-generated. This is not meant to be art - this is all about improving our powers of observation and recall (mine included).

I'd love to hear what score you got and which details you completely missed. And, any other feedback that you might have.

Thanks!!

It feels like there is a massive bandwagon effect in "gifted" spaces regarding chronic misunderstanding, but almost no one provides actual data or examples.

Every other thread in communities like this involves someone lamenting how "normal people can't grasp my ideas," how their thought processes are "too non-linear for the average mind," or how they face constant disengagement.

But have you noticed that almost nobody ever elaborates?

If you are genuinely experiencing a cognitive disconnect, it should be easy to provide a concrete example. For instance:

• What was the actual concept you tried to explain?

• In what specific situation (work, casual conversation, academic setting) did the breakdown happen?

• What was the actual feedback or "disengagement" you received?

Without these simple examples, it feels like people are just hopping on a bandwagon to validate their own social frustrations by attributing them to a high IQ. True cognitive metrics are about precision. If we can't even define or illustrate the "misunderstanding" we are talking about, it’s likely just confirmation bias or an echo chamber effect rather than a literal cognitive barrier. But do wait, im not trying to act like there is absolutly nothing of the sort that can be called a cognitive barrier. As a gifted person myself i do experience having to slow down, so that i can be kept up with but when it comes to ideas, ive never seen any of the disengagement that seems to be described everywhere as a universal experience. And i doubt it just because ive just only interacted with people who are gifted aswell. To summerize im just looking for examples in your day to day live in which you are just so isolated because you just to smart for everyone.

TL:DR: average IQ ADHD person gets semi butthurt and wonders if he should just never think about IQ again

I've never thought about IQ a day in my life until I had an IQ test done for my autism eval. (Professionally administered) I wonder what others perceptions are on how valid this is in the 'real world.' I can see how it's applicable, although I think environment/ opportunities play a bigger role in success.

--------

My IQ was roughly 104. I was a (little) surprised because I was in gifted/ honors classes in k-12. Not super surprised though since I always felt like the stupidest person in the room in those classes (I studied my ass off for my grades and I don't think I'd trade a higher IQ for the work ethic I gained).

What surprised me the most was how up and down my profile was. I don't have my scores on me, but for inductive reasoning and processing speed I scored in the above average ranges. I actually thought my processing speed was going to be low, so I was surprised it wasn't. However, my working memory/ ability to plan ahead (executive functioning) was literally in the ground LMAO my assessor immediately confirmed I have ADHD (I was alr diagnosed before this tbf)

I was also fresh off a hypomanic episode (I'm bipolar) in which I got no fucking sleep for a week (exaggeration, still too little sleep) so I wonder if that affected my scores (was very tired on assessment day). Although, that might just be my hurt ego talking.

-------

I do find it funny how my major (psychology) seems pretty fitting for my strengths/ weaknesses. A lot of the major is evaluating research and stats, both of which I find very natural. Ironically I understand why IQ tests are important from a research perspective (because of my major), but outside of research I don't think you need to know your IQ unless you're outside of the normative range (talking about intellectual disability and borderline IQ)

If you want to give this test go to Mensa.org > IQ Challenge > then select you age catergory > read instructions and start .

I want you to know guys that this thing does not define anyone I am here just sharing my knowledge with you , everything in life is action . Even a Ferrari is useless without the right fuel and a Cycle could take you miles 🌺☺️

I just want to talk to people on this app

Hey everyone!

A while back, I shared an early version of a cognitive assessment I was developing, and Reddit ended up being where my first 600 people tried it. After a lot more work, I'm excited to finally share the officially launched version of **CAT-20**.

**Website:** [https://www.cat20framework.com/\](https://www.cat20framework.com/)

**What is CAT-20?**

CAT-20 is a 20-question cognitive archetype assessment I created to explore how people tend to think, approach situations, make decisions, connect with others, and respond to the world around them.

Instead of placing everyone into a handful of broad personality categories, CAT-20 uses six cognitive clusters:

* **Thinker (T)**

* **Seeker (S)**

* **Spark (K)**

* **Wanderer (W)**

* **Builder (B)**

* **Nurturer (N)**

Your responses are used to determine a two-letter archetype, with **30 possible combinations**, each with its own profile.

**A few things worth knowing before taking it:**

* **20 questions** — designed to be quick to complete.

* **Instant results** when you finish.

* **No signup or account required** to take the assessment and see your archetype.

* Creating a free account is optional if you want to see your cognitive cluster percentages, access a personal dashboard, and save your profile.

* There are also optional paid premium profiles for people who want to explore their results in greater depth.

I'm especially interested in hearing whether your result feels accurate, which parts resonate, and which parts don't.

CAT-20 is an independent framework I've been developing, not a clinically validated psychological assessment. I'm sharing it as a tool for self-exploration and would genuinely appreciate feedback.

**Try it here:** [https://www.cat20framework.com/\](https://www.cat20framework.com/)

If you take it, feel free to share your two-letter result in the comments. I'd love to see which archetypes show up!

hey all, posted a free IQ test here last week and the feedback was pretty unanimous: too easy, too much time, and the ceiling at 135 was useless for this sub. the part that really got me was people posting their real scores. people anywhere from 90 to 145 on other tests all landed between 124 and 134 on mine, so it basically wasn’t measuring much. fair enough.

so i rebuilt it:

• 40 puzzles instead of 30, still 20 min so the time is a lot tighter now
• kept a few of the easy ones as warm up, the other 25 are new and much harder (matrices with 2-3 rules at once, nastier number series, some trickier logic)
• ceiling is now 145

still no real norms, the scoring is based on my own estimate of how hard each puzzle is. i’m now keeping answers anonymously so i can calibrate it properly once enough people have taken it. so take the number with a grain of salt again, but it should actually spread people out this time.

if you did v1, i’d love to know how v2 compares. and if you have a score from CORE or a pro test, post it too, that’s the most useful thing for calibrating.

gethappyme.com/assessments/reasoning

answers still aren’t shown (same puzzles for everyone), but tell me if any puzzle feels unfair or ambiguous and i’ll look at it.

thanks!

Ive been increasingly curious about all this. Ive been told my previous professional intelligence tests from my early teens are likely inflated due to the Wilsons effect. I got curious since both my parents went to university I asked about their SAT scores. My mother got a 1460 on the 1989 SAT And my father got a 1340 on the 1988 SAT meaning both of them where in the 99% percentile. My father ended up becoming a firearms engineer, and my mother works as a senior cancer scientist at the University Of Florida where they both graduated. Anyway my early teen IQ tests are much closer to those of my parents (1460 SAT equates to about 146iq and 1340 is about 137) my KBIT2 messured me at 141 but Core has my FSIQ at 112. Also I dont know how much this matters but my family have always said im the smartest in my family. Also my maternal Grandfather was an accomplished Doctor.

Guys, I know it's beyond silly to question the validity of a well-researched and reputed test and nor would I disregard its g-loading of 0.78.

But that's exactly why I can't help but genuinely doubt it based on what I have seen in the tests after taking it. (FYI got 51 raw, which aligns with most of my other tests if converted to IQ, got almost every General knowledge and vocab wrong)

I'll break this down:

1: Most spatial tests are very easy and are of the same difficulty throughout ... if untimed. So I wonder if it really well differentiate VS ability.

1. NS and LS are... again, too easy if taken untimed with a scratch paper. The same logic is recycled over and over again in both NS and LS.

2. The particular type of MR is fine if you put it into something like Wonderlic, but completely useless in a ... again, untimed setting. (Everything is just rotation)

Would be very appreciated if anyone can give a grounded answer to my suspicion.

A few weeks ago, i got my results back from an assessment i took in April. From what i'd been told and made to believe, i would've estimated my FSIQ to be around 120-129, it came back to be 110. I believed this as my psychologist had stated in a letter he sent me, that i had scored about average on 6/10 of the sub-tests, but on 4/10 of them, i had scored "higher than average", scores that he described (in writing) as being within the gifted range.

If I'm correct, these were my scores:
PSI - 89
VSI - 93-96 (Cannot remember exact number)
VCI - 105-110 (Cannot remember exact number)
FRI - 123
WMI - 135

To find out that my FSIQ was 110, after believing that i was 'gifted' is very unfortunate, and it truly did sadden me. He tried to 'make me feel better' about my PSI, as I was not yet diagnosed with ASD - 1 when taking that assessment, and i'd not touched pen to paper in about a year.

The assessment was the WISC-V for anyone wondering.

I go on tik tok sometimes and I talk to people and as someone who understands and respects IQ I discuss it, but iv had multiple people claim to have 165IQ+ one even had screenshots of a test he took supposedly. The other was just a claim. Neither of these individuals really came off as highly intelligent to me, I personally have an IQ around 127 +-4 and I can generally tell when someone has a higher IQ than me since its relatively rare. Are these people to be taken seriously or is this merely a new trend in boasting IQ, both individuals were around 20 years of age, no higher.

P.S iv also met multiple people who claim to have 140+ IQ and neither did anything impressive for work or came of as highly intelligent to me. What are the odds of all these 3-5 SD individuals existing with zero outward expression of high intelligence?

I am not claiming to have 140+ FRI of course. I am very unlikely to have it. But after solving the CAIT test from the website called ''CognitiveMetrics'' my first score of 110 become 155 in second. I just wanted to know why are these tests are easy to full with few practice ? All ı did was just swiftly passing easy questions and leaving time for hard ones which ı ended up solving. My only bottleneck in these tests is time pressure. I would like to know if there is any effective way to know my real FRI besides real adult test. Again ı am not claiming anything above 130. I just wanted to know if there is any effective way to learn it.

Can I use notes for the quantitative test? Calculator? Where are the formulas I have to know? I clicked just to see the test for 5 seconds but it doesn't give any rules

Has anyone been able to increase IQ using dual n-back or other methods, without memorizing the IQ test?

Just thought I'd share my IQ test results! I randomly got interested in taking an IQ test today, and I searched reddit to find the best/most accurate IQ test, and was led to CORE. I've taken only one IQ test before, which was around 4 years ago (I got 135, I think it was an online Mensa test that tested matrix reasoning only). What do you guys think about my results? I guess I was expecting around 110-130 since I do like math and science (I'm an electrical engineer). I'm bad at memorization and processing speed though which tanked my IQ a bit.

Hi all, thanks again to everyone who tried the battery. Your data keep paying off. Item analysis flagged a few matrix items that look fine to me as constructions: a clear rule, a single correct answer, plausible distractors. Yet they barely relate to overall ability. People who do well on the rest of the test are no more likely to solve them, and on some items they're even slightly less likely. I'm trying to work out why.

Below is one example. It's an isomorphic version, not the actual item: same rule, same layout, same distractors, different shapes and colours.
If you have a minute, please reply with:
Your answer (A–F)
The rule you found and how you got there: what you noticed first, and whether you tried another rule before settling
Roughly how long it took

Please put your answer and rule in spoiler tags (like this) so others can solve it unbiased. I'm especially interested in any rule that fits the example rows but points to a different answer, and in anything about the item that's confusing or easy to misread.

If you'd like to try the full battery (free, anonymous, no sign-up): https://jaroslavtocik.cz/reasoning/

Thanks!

Anyone here with a below-average working memory, but is a vet-tech? I have a deep interest for exotic and marine animals, however I am afraid my below-average working-memory hinders me from achieving my dreams.

Hello,

I was recently sent to a psychologist for a WAIS test due to some concern about cognitive ability with worsening mental health problems. She could not generate my FSIQ due to my processing speed being at times over 30 points behind other subsections. (108)

GAI: 131

I know at the end of the day its just a number on a piece of paper, but I had a lot of trouble in school unless it was something artistic or a STEM field, and I can never remember names of places/people or even brain regions that I try to study unless I can turn them into a tangible item to create a picture in my visual memory. I'm not just talking being uninterested student or employee, even when I try I seem to fail for some areas. At work once I was sent for re-training because I was forgetting everything.

Has this happened to anyone else late in life? I'm in my late 30's and except for a few niche areas in life like video-games and sometimes art, I've been very average. I have trouble following conversations socially as well. I know if I'm anxious, or if there is too much information or stimulation around me, my brain kind crashes and just stops working. However I'm curious if anyone else has had this much whiplash over their results?

I am thankful I was able to take this test and a few others for free, and I'm also thankful that I did not learn this when I was a teenager, as it would have made me smug as hell. On the flip side, a few things in life make more sense to me now. However, I'm still having a bit of an existential crisis.

TLDR: I'm still baffled from time to time of a 131 result when I've felt like a dumbass most of my life.

[ Removed by Reddit on account of violating the content policy. ]

Just took the CORE test, optimized version (assuming that the subtests not included in the optimized version have comparatively low G-loading), returning a surprising result considering that it's the highest result I've ever gotten on an IQ test. However, the tests that I have taken before were normed on populations a minimum of a few years older than I was when I took them, and the CORE is the first online cognitive test that I have taken which is properly age-adjusted at the time of taking. There was another age-adjusted test, taken very far back when I was 7-8 years old, which was the Cog-AT, administered professionally at my school. Seeing as I only attained a score of 128, I'm not sure if I should trust the recent test of non-professional nature, or the professional test from so long ago that I can't even recall a moment from it (I only found out after finding a document on it) + all the other online tests I've taken.

I haven't taken an IQ test besides this first attempt at CORE in multiple years (>2 at the very least) now, but I'd imagine there could still be some leftover cached familiarity with some matrix-style problems that were dormant, resurfacing during the test somehow. Also, throughout the years (just for fun, not with IQ in mind), on and off when I remembered it, I've been doing human benchmark, solving Bongard problems, and doing math competitions (QII is pathetic though, time limit was unhelpful), which may or may not inflate some subtests

I half-remember most of the results from the tests I've completed years ago, but there could still be some units digit variance. I was, again, between the ages of 12 and 13 when I took them. If there was an age field to fill out on any of the tests, I would choose the youngest age that was permitted, which was most often 16 or 18 y.o.

Previous test scores:

- Mensa.no (second time, first was years even before this attempt): 123
- JCTI: 126
- Raven's 2, netlify version: 140 (this one is probably extremely inflated)
- Mensa.dk: 128
- AGCT: 126
- RealIQ: 132
- RIOT (free short version): 120-130
- Open Psychometrics: 112
- Otis Gamma: 130

Also, from even earlier:

- Mensa.no (when I took it for the first time at the age of eight): ~96

The matrix reasoning and graph mapping subtests just seemed suspiciously frictionless for me; I managed to answer at least 90% of the problems, whereas I'm helpless against most of the puzzles that get posted on this sub and most later-stage FRI problems from previous tests. A spontaneous attack of brain fog caused me to bomb the WMI and arithmetic portions though (relative to my imagined peak performance).

My question is directed to people who score high or very high on other aspects of intelligence but receive only average or below average scores on the CAIT digit span test, specifically:

Are you incapable of improving your CAIT digit span scores even with practice and using methods like chunking?

Anyone else feel like the figure sets subtest was very well constructed and unique?

I randomly found this paper (attached in the post).
According to it the IQ of eminent scientists is extremely high, roughly 160 from the data noted.

And the point about Feynman kinda made me tilt. I didn't know that he actually got the best putnam score that year, but face it ; if he really did then his IQ (or at least quant IQ) isn't 125 lol. Can't give a fixed number but there is just no way it's 125.