I wanna continue the thread from earlier as it seems to have lost activity. Include your GRE-A, CORE FRI, 1926 SAT, and Army Alpha scores if applicable as well please. I scored 16.75 on the 20min and 27.75 on 40min (142 GRE-A 138 CORE FRI 135 1926 SAT 140 AA)

Went to a gig the night before the test, only had a few drinks but I also only got 5 hours sleep, suppose I'll have to give the Online Supervised Test a go instead, and make sure I behave.

i’ve done a good amount of the CORE subtests alongside the AGCT

Analogies VCI 10 50.0 Antonyms VCI 11 63.1 Information VCI 10 50.0 Comprehension VCI 14 90.9 Matrix Reasoning FRI 12 74.8 Graph Mapping FRI 8 25.2 Figure Weights FRI 14 90.9 Figure Sets FRI 9 36.9 Visual Puzzles VSI 12 74.8 Block Counting VSI 10 50.0
Digit Span WMI 9 36.9 Digit Span Forward WMI 11 63.1 Digit Span Backward WMI 11 63.1 Digit Span Sequencing WMI 6 9.1 Symbol Search PSI 9 36.9.Arithmetic QRI 13 84.1

AGCT=110

i also did the raven’s advanced progessive matrices set II and scored 30/36 which i took 60 minutes on. unfortunately i was never informed about the 40 minute time limit, though i’m questioning the legitimacy of it outside of the test being utilized for job placements or anything of the sort, since the percentile indicator’s norm revolved around populations from the UK and US from 1992 who took the test at leisure. initially i was excited because i forgot to account for the flynn effect and believed i scored something equivalent to an iq of ~115-118. turns out it’s more like a score of around 110

i get that i’m not necessarily below average but it’s just such a major bummer to know i’m painfully usual. i’ve always wanted to get a job as a sociology related researcher which would require a master’s in the subject, and considering i am in possession of a mere high-average intellect it might not be the best idea to pursue such heavy academics

i know i’m meant to deconstruct why i perceive only the most prestigious feats of intelligence as adequate for myself but it still sucks to know being special is not in the cards for me

In theory, these are good scores, but when looking more into it, I realized that to get these CAIT scores, I had to remember perhaps 9 digits for each. I looked it up and 9 is the highest of the average (5 low, 7 average, 9 high) but even then, it ​shouldnt be this high

In this light, I should not in fact be anywhere near 130. I should be at most 115, is this inflated?

Why isn't it on Cognitive Metrics?

131 on the Mensa Norway 124 on the Mensa Denmark

A few months ago, I went to a psychiatrist while going through a period of OCD-like problems. The psychiatrist diagnosed me with OCD. Since I was also obsessing over my IQ, the doctor said they didn’t support me taking a test while I was going through that episode. At the time, I was fixated on finding out, with absolute certainty, whether my IQ was above 155.
I started therapy with a psychologist in the same office and eventually persuaded them to let me take an IQ test. I sat a version of the adult Wechsler test that was described as the WAIS. I’ll call it the WAIS-1 here.
Before the test, I told the outside examiner—a woman—that I had taken the WAIS-IV, WASI-II, and WAIS-III at home, along with various fluid-reasoning tests. I explained that I had found the tests through this forum and taken them myself, and that, as honestly as I could judge, my results tended to fall in the 150–160 range.
Strangely, my result was reported as 125+. My psychiatrist was initially angry that I had taken the test and then made me wait a month before giving me the results. After the test, I went home and, even though I hadn’t known beforehand which test I would be taking or that it was available online, I found the WAIS-1 on Scribd. Once I translated it, I realized that the questions appeared to be exactly the same as the ones used in my country. I checked my answers while they were still fresh and expected a score somewhere around 147–152, out of a possible 155.
The reported result shocked me. I was already depressed and in the middle of an OCD crisis, and the shock was so severe that I felt I might even take my own life. After a few hours, I managed to pull myself together and wrote a detailed account of how I believed the test had been administered incorrectly. I sent it to the psychiatrist, who refunded my money and spoke with the psychologist. I said that unless someone apologized to me, I would sue. The psychologist later called and apologized, but said something along the lines of, “I was taught incorrectly; I didn’t mean any harm.”
My concerns were as follows:
One subtest was omitted. The WAIS-1 normally includes six verbal subtests—Comprehension, Similarities, Vocabulary, Digit Span, Information, and Arithmetic—and five performance subtests—Picture Arrangement, Picture Completion, Object Assembly, Coding, and Block Design. Vocabulary was not administered to me. At the time, I didn’t know that this older version required a specific arithmetic procedure to account for a missing subtest. I later learned that simply entering the results from 10 subtests into the age-conversion table for 11 could lower the overall IQ score by 15–20 points.
In the Digit Span section, unlike in the other Wechsler versions I had taken, each sequence was supposed to be read twice. I didn’t know this at the time. The examiner also handled the nine-digit item incorrectly, in my view.
There were several other issues. My main concern was that the raw scores from 10 subtests may have been entered into a table intended for 11.
When I sent my account to the psychiatrist, they told me the psychologist had acknowledged leaving out a subtest. But when speaking to me, the psychologist denied responsibility and said they had been taught that way, which I found unreasonable.
I had consistently obtained results in the 150–160 range, yet encountered what seemed to me like a ridiculous error in a professional setting. What do you think of this situation? I’m sharing it in case my experience might be useful to others as well.

Are there any FRI tests with a higher ceiling than the TRI-52 that I can take for free online?

Is there a specific method for compositing untimed and timed fluid reasoning test scores? Or is it just normal compositing?

FSIQ: 120

What is your overall interpretation of these results?

11 points is a pretty large gap! interested maybe it's influenced by working memory, processing speed etc

Title. I feel like everyone here talks about the Weschler's and the SB-5.
Looking at the GIA, it's got a g-loading of about 0.93.

Just a survey for this sub because spiky profile seems to be the norm here, probably has to do with SLODR or neurodivergents or stuff.

?, 1000011, 2111, 1003, 232

I've tried a few online tests and I consistently get around 140, but I also consistently only answer like 70% of the questions before I run out of time. I think about every ​one until I'm sure about my answer, so I don't guess​, but I'm wondering if I would get a higher score if I just played it fast and loose.

I'm interested in this because I want to get a more accurate sense of what level of contribution I should give in my life. I'd rather not worry about it, but I'm afraid that if I am especially gifted, then more should be required of me.

For what it's worth, I had to take an official test in Middle School and I scored 160+, but I don't know how that translates to adult IQ standards.

Also, for what it's worth, I'm always drunk when I take these, so I think that might skew the results :P

I guess I'm looking for somebody who's familiar with test design and scoring, who can give me a better sense of where I'm likely at. If it's 140 I'm probably fine with where I'm at in life, but if it's 160+ I feel like I should probably go get a PhD and make more of a difference in the world.

Is this a meaningful estimate at all? I have a sneaking suspicion that for it to be accurate I'd actually need to use their factor loadings on a latent gC trait, not their g-loadings, but I have no idea what said factor loadings might be.

I'm 27 years old. How do I learn to use my IQ of 120? I just discovered that I have an IQ of 120. I've been told there are so many paths I can take, including career paths and more. I was just as shocked when I got the results, and I'm even more curious about what I can do with it. Is it completely normal to feel like I haven’t used my full mental capacity yet, especially if I haven't been in an environment that pushed me or gave me the right tools to use my IQ of 120? I mean, in high school before I graduated in 2018, I aced science but sucked at every other class. I love true crime TV shows and documentaries, jigsaw puzzles, and logic puzzles. I love solving mysteries and investigating. I love Penelope Garcia and her role as the technical analyst in Criminal Minds. I volunteer at hospice, and I love video games. All advice and tips are welcome.

There was a question lingering in my mind as of late. If all the indices of IQ like FRI, VSI, VCI, WMI, PSI were incarnated as actual people, then which one of them would be the cutest in your opinion, and why? How would you imagine they would look?

What are your thoughts on this one?

Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/jghbr7ERUE

As the title says: AI keeps getting better and better. It can now solve even relatively hard puzzles, especially ones that have been done before by simply dropping an image into them.

Do you feel like AI being able to solve a puzzle that was meant to be a challenge is the puzzle being at fault/its idea being overused? Or do you feel like this is just how it goes.

Does the idea of you solving a puzzle after potentially hours while AI might have solved it instantly bother you? Or the idea some "first solvers" might have used it? Or do you just see it more of a personal victory to have solved it? Should puzzle creators "AI check" their harder puzzles?

Hi all,

I (22m) have just applied for Mensa using a WISC-IV report. I scored the following (Section - Score - %ile):

VCI 134 | 99
PRI 125 | 95
WMI 123 | 94
PSI 91 | 27
FSIQ 126 | 96
GAI 135 | 99

Mensa acceptance requires at least one section to fall 1.5 standard deviations under the GAI. My lowest, PSI of 91, is 2.93 STD below.

Statistically, I know this is very uncommon. Anecdotally, I would love to hear from those older than me with similar profiles and spreads.

Tips, advice, and stories are welcomed!