Honestly there is no real such thing as a true iq test. It's pretty much bullshit.
Iq test isn't an actual measurement of intelligence or knowledge gained. And there is no standard for it so there are thousands of tests to be taken, all different.
You don't have to be smart to have a high IQ. All you need to be is a good test taker. I saw it a lot in nursing school. A lot of people could pass tests with no real knowledge just because they were good at taking tests and seeing patterns in answers. I saw so many fail out because they couldn't do the application tests where you had to actually understand to answer.
That's why there is no job where they want to know your IQ, it isn't a requirement for anything because it isn't a science or fact. It's just an arbitrary number people drop. You could take one test and be a genius and take another and be a dummy.
RUBBISH. As someone who has both studied and published in the field, I can tell you that:
- No stupid people score high on an IQ test.
- People who are not good test takers (nervous, etc.) may UNDERperform, but knowledge is knowledge and being good at taking tests just means you won't sell yourself short.
The problem with IQ is that no one knows how to define it. There is academic knowledge, math skills, excellent memory, the sorts of things that help you do well on game shows like Jeopardy, but what about abstract thought? Creativity? Inventiveness? Originality? Musical talent?
No IQ test can be deemed complete w/o taking into account the whole of the human mental production.
Because no one can agree on the scope of what constitutes "intelligence," and few can agree on just how or the best way to weight these other qualities, the results of an IQ test are at best somewhat uncertain. Ideally, any group compared should all be compared having been tested via the same means.
This will result in a percentile score which can be converted to an "intelligence quotient." No dumb people will do well on an IQ test, there is no way you can "trick" or "cheat" one, but there are some people with known exceptional scores who have done nothing extraordinary in their lives, and there are some known people to have accomplished amazing mental feats of ideas, invention and original thinking whose recorded IQ scores are high, but not entirely unremarkable.
I attribute half of that fudge factor to uncertainty within the tests themselves, the other half to the variability of individuals themselves in their proficiency at taking tests. One thing seems fairly certain though is that as the IQ goes down, the margin for error in the final score range NARROWS (test becomes more accurate), whereas as an individual's IQ raises up into the exceptional range, the margin for error or variability in the outcome due to testing flaws and/or individual idiosyncrasy response go way up.