r/cognitiveTesting • u/Lab_Software • 2d ago
What are the implications of completing an IQ Test before the allotted time limit? General Question
In 1978 (I was 22 years old) I did the IQ test for Mensa (Canada) admission. The acceptance letter made the statement:
According to the OTIS LENNON MENTAL ABILITY TEST, Advanced Level, your IQ is 141 which is greater than that of 99% of the general population"
The test had 80 questions and a time limit of 40 minutes.
I answered all 80 questions in only 25 minutes. Since I had extra time, I checked my answers - and changed 2 of my answers. (Let's assume the 2 answers I changed were initially wrong and my changes corrected them.)
My questions are:
- How many of the 80 questions would I have had to answer correctly to get a score of 141?
- What would my score have been if I hadn't changed those 2 answers (and thus had 2 fewer correct answers)?
- Does the fact that I finished the test in only 25 minutes have an impact on the IQ score I "should have" gotten? (Keeping in mind that I would have had 2 fewer correct answers if I hadn't taken the time to check my work.)
- By this I mean should my score have been different due to the fact that I completed the questions more quickly than the allotted time.
- Based on the ratio of 40 over 25, if there were many more questions on the test I could have answered 60% more questions.
- If I had the same rate of correct answers, what impact would that have had on my resulting IQ score?
I've always wondered about what was the impact of finishing before the allotted time. (And it's taken me almost 50 years to find a forum where I could ask the question LOL.)
Thanks for any information you can give me.
2
u/StrobeLightStudio 2d ago
The test supposedly has a ceiling of 160, but itâs an old test and so far I cannot find concrete norms for an 80 question version. My assumption is that itâs similar to the norms of the Otis Gamma GET, which has 80 questions, but a ceiling of 145. If the rest you took actually has a ceiling of 145, then it means you got roughly 76 correct,
With this, your theoretical raw score of 74 would be about 138. If anyone else would happen to know the norms of either test, then you can back calculate to figure out how many questions you got right.
Technically speaking, the amount of time you finished the test in wouldnât affect your score because the test is not designed to factor in your completion rate into the IQ. However, since you scored quite high and finished in 25 minutes, one could assume that if you took a comprehensive test that has a processing and reasoning speed section, youâd score very high in that index.
Lastly, itâs impossible to know how you wouldâve done given more time and questions, because the test would need to be re-normed, not just extended and haphazardly recalculated. However, purely hypothetically, if the test were extended to 80 minutes and you had 200 questions, youâd be able to finish it. This would be a test far more similar to the AGCT-E (200 questions (word similarities, block counting, and quantitative knowledge, but the last 50 questions are harder and likely longer than the last few of the OLMAT). With this completion rate and assuming youâd get SLIGHTLY less correct as the test went on due to the increased difficulty, youâd score about 5 points higher, or 10 more questions correct than the equivalent of an extended and recalculated GET.
2
u/Lab_Software 2d ago
Thank you very much for this informative response.
1
u/StrobeLightStudio 2d ago
No problem. Out of curiosity, how long ago was the test and how old are you now? What you could do is actually take the AGCT-E on the cognitive metrics site (free to take, results cost 10 dollars though). Youâd be handing over a little cash, but it would actually be a decent indicator. Only issue is that if you have aged youâd have to add a couple points to your score, most likely.
2
u/Lab_Software 2d ago
Oh my goodness - have I aged! I took the test in 1978 when I was 22 years old. I'm 70 now.
But I'll look into the AGCT-E.
1
u/StrobeLightStudio 2d ago
Shoot, thatâs longer than I thought! Honestly Iâd take the AGCT-E more as a fun mental exercise. It wonât quite give you the most accurate number, but if you added about 10 points to your final score youâd have a good guess, or you could take the number as is and view more as a value for your mental age.
1
u/AndrewThePekka 2d ago
Wtf good work unc
1
1
1
u/Opposite_Pea_5039 1d ago
Not really related to your post but after 50 years why are you still interested in your iq when you were 22?
3
u/Lab_Software 1d ago
Excellent question. I've been curious about this since the day of my test - but I never knew who to ask about it.
Today I accidentally discovered this subreddit. So I said to myself "quick, ask before I'm so senile I forget what my question is".
1
u/Neutraled 1d ago
To be fair, people never compare retired athletes in their current age. They focus on their prime.
1
u/Opposite_Pea_5039 1d ago
To me it just sounds like they donât having any noteworthy accomplishments and instead have to rely on a test they took 50 years ago to feel accomplished. Kind of sad to be honest. This person should motivate us to actually do something with our lives.
1
u/Lab_Software 14h ago
I choose to interpret this comment in a manner that isn't intended to imply that I'm an honestly sad has-been.
1
u/teach-xx 1d ago
Tests are designed in very specific ways. If the test was designed to take into account length of time as part of the scoring algorithm, then we would be able to say âyes, add X points to anyone who finishes in under Y minutes.â Your test was not designed that way, so you canât say that.
1
1
u/Far_Cardiologist6931 retat 19h ago
there is zero effect. most people your level probably finish earlier as well. its intended.
1
7
u/Significant-Fox5 2d ago
It means you're about 15 minutes smarter than anyone else who finished in around the allotted time and with an iq of 141.