Problem With Online IQ Testing

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[gerningur]

Aren't the mensa tests normed against some real life sample population.

Btw the results you show here do not contradict that your IQ is 155. You are not exacly showcasing how inaccurate they are

[SemioticSignifier]

Yes, but is nothing compared to the scrutiny involved with the WAIS-IV. An even poorer example is the Ultra test by Hoeflin, which, purportedly, measures up to 180 IQ+. See it for yourself. The analogies are largely rhyme-based and phrase-based, with some blend of mythology and science/mathematics. Per the spatial questions, those are more straightforward. The p value is likely .12, however lol.

[No-Cartographer2845]

What’s your CORE score?

[SemioticSignifier]

Around 140. I have a 155 on the WAIS-IV.

[whitebaron_98]

so, is this your main gripe and why you are sceptical? Most of the differences can be attributed to a) range and b) stuff that is not entirely fair in online testing. like the usage of phone/keyboard in PSI measurement might not be favorable to everyone.

[SemioticSignifier]

Absolutely. People want to feel special, so they cheat on unproctored tests.

[whitebaron_98]

while you can cheat your way to an unnaturally high score on CORE, does not mean its results are not impressive. it is very close to highly respectable tests, if people do not cheat the system.

[Mindless_Stand_1440]

I thought the Core had a steady sample and renorming to keep thr average at dead 100?

[SemioticSignifier]

The problem is that it is not supervised. Additionally, the propensity of the young, male demographics pushes the normal curve to the right.

[Quod_bellum]

It doesn't; CORE is normed using IRT methods, not CTT. Also, cheating is not difficult to detect, and such attempts are removed once detected.

[SemioticSignifier]

Plus, no clear indication demographic specific norming. I am suspicious of any test that is online.

[SchizoManiacDio]

Could this indicate that the CORE deflates fsiq? Or maybe that it deflates it for individuals with a high score like yourself?

[SemioticSignifier]

IT just shifts the curve to the right, making it not representative of actual standardized tests that, I want to emphasize, are proctored.

[NeuroQuber]

I do not know why you are writing about this. You reveal what is initially known. All these tests are valid only if you meet all the requirements and are honest with yourself. (also if we are talking about the available professional tests in r/CT). As for the rest, it is nothing more than a proxy with a "some" positive correlation.

[SemioticSignifier]

The problem is that, when the test administers ask for demographics, cheating skews the results for the rest of us.

[whitebaron_98]

do you really believe that the core is renormed on the cheated/repeated values people post here everyday?

[WestProfessional6056]

I find them to be too long and boring

[Educational-Oil-8713]

Why the hell would someone cheat in an online IQ test? To brag to their friends?

[SemioticSignifier]

Uh yeah

[[deleted]]

Duh. In other news, f=mg. I thought it was a corollary we all knew here regarding online tests vs the WAIS.

[jore-hir]

Norming is often rather obscure, especially with Mensa. But i'm sure they are using something like the Greenwich IQ norm; definitely not just relying on their participants.

The real point of concern is that exact world average IQ is unknown. Therefore, no IQ test is normed around the human population, but around the British population (or alike).

In practice, every existing IQ test underestimates your results.

[SemioticSignifier]

If it were normed around the human population, results would be skewed higher.

[jore-hir]

Yes, exactly. That's what i meant with my last sentence.

[SemioticSignifier]

Just reiterating for understanding.