I said I would devote my first post of November to discussing my chronometric scores. Chronometrics is a method of measuring intelligence using reaction time (measured in milliseconds) to elementary cognitive tasks. The technique was pioneered by Sir Francis Galton in the 19th century but abandoned when Galton failed to find much if any correlation between measures of simple reaction time and school grades.
The idea was resurrected by psychologist Arthur Jensen in the late 20th century. With the advantage of modern statistical techniques and computer equipment, he discovered that there is indeed a moderate negative correlation between simple reaction time and IQ (the correlation is negative because the lower the reaction time, the faster the speed) especially when many attempts are average together. There’s an even higher negative correlation between choice reaction time and IQ. And there’s an even higher negative correlation between reaction time variability and IQ. Columnist Dan Seligman explained this by saying brains with more dense and redundant wiring will get the message consistently, while low IQ people have brains resembling a bad phone connection. Sometimes the message gets through clearly. Other times there’s static.
When I was a teenager (I’m now in my 30s) I discovered that there were many people on the internet who were as fascinated with IQ as I am. However unlike me who has a kind of dark gloomy view of IQ (comparing it to destiny), some of these people were incredibly positive and were big believers that IQ could be improved through practicing chronometric games.
At the time there was a popular chronometric game called Thinkfast that promised to boost your brain power (kind of like the lumosity of its day). At the time I dismissed this as nonsense and for years I avoided even purchasing the game, let alone playing it.
Then I read about a high school project where a bunch of high school seniors played Thinkfast for an hour a day for three weeks, and their highest Thinkfast score was correlated with their SAT score. The results were astonishing:
The correlation between SAT scores and Thinkfast Version 2+ was a potent 0.71. According to Arthur Jensen, the correlation between two mental tests is a product of their factor loadings, so assuming chronometrics and SAT scores share no variance other than g (general intelligence) and assuming the SAT has a g loading of about 0.8, then the 0.71 correlation implies maximum Thinkfast score correlates 0.71/0.8 = 0.89 with general intelligence.
It seemed that ThinkFast was virtually the most accurate measure of general intelligence ever invented. Other intelligence tests (the WAIS) also have g loadings around 0.9, but they were nowhere near as culture fair as Thinkfast. And on an IQ test you can have a bad day, and then you can’t take the test again because you’ve had a practice effect. By contrast with Thinkfast, if you have a bad day, you just try again the next day, and the day after that, and after that…as many times as you want…because it’s your maximum score (your physiological limit) that most correlates with intelligence, not your initial score. Indeed your initial score is culturally biased because some folks have more video game experience than others, but the maximum score one can obtain after practicing an hour a day for weeks is a physiological measure of the brain’s physical limits.
Although I was fearful about how I would perform on an intelligence test I had so little conscious or psychological control over, I found the courage to purchase Thinkfast (version 2+) and invited my pseudo-retarded friend to the house to play with me. The final score was a combination of speed, accuracy, and consistency on six games. The first game measured simple reaction time. Another game measured choice reaction time.
Game 4 (my personal favorite) measured working memory speed. The computer would flash a picture of a common object or scene with a very basic word underneath describing it and you had to press one arrow key if the picture matched the word and a different arrow key if it didn’t. Then it would get more complex (the word REVERSE would appear on screen) which meant that if it did match, you had to press the key which meant it didn’t match, and vice versa, and you would have to do all this with as rapid and consistent speed as possible. The final game measured working memory capacity (parallel processing). A bunch of abstract shapes would flash on the screen and then a few more would flash, and you’d have to press a key indicating from memory whether the new shapes were part of the previous set.
After playing dozens and dozens of times, I maxed out at a score of Brain Master+1 (45 units), and my pseuo-retarded friend maxed out at Theta Gold (41 units). To put that in perspective, among 1400 graduating students at a typical U.S. high school, where all the top talent were playing ThinkFast, only 14 reached Brain Master (43 units) or higher. From here it was estimated that Brain Master (43 units) equaled the 99 percentile in America (roughly IQ 135 on U.S. norms) and I was one whole level (and two whole units) above Brain Master. To put that in perspective, the average doctor, lawyer, PhD, Ivy League student etc, have IQs in the mid 120s when measured on random tests (not the ones used to select them).
And yet at the time I was friends with literally some of the smartest people in the entire World and so I would exaggerate my score by nine levels. Big mistake. Huge! My social IQ was not high enough to realize that lying about your IQ makes about as much sense as lying about your height. Smart people can see the real number whether you admit it or not. Later I would learn that falsification (lie scores) is negatively correlated with IQ, but lying about IQ in particular is especially offensive to high IQ people because it devalues the very trait that makes them special. One incredibly high IQ friend (180+) mentioned that over the years he had met dozens of people who supposedly had IQs above 170. His estimate for the actual IQ of these people? About 115.
not really sold on the reaction time IQ thesis. If IQ and reaction time were so highly correlated, wouldn’t we expect baseball players to have very high IQs. And also, just from observation in school, why do jocks, who tend to less intelligent than nerds, do so well in sports that involve timing (kickball, baseballl, etc). If the reaction test has elements of an IQ test then higher correlations would be noted, but not purely on reaction. The Thinkfast test seems like a very quick IQ test more than a test of only reaction time to stimuli.
One incredibly high IQ friend (180+) mentioned that over the years he had met dozens of people who supposedly had IQs above 170. His estimate for the actual IQ of these people? About 115.
I wonder how they can determine this from a casual acquaintance without having to administer a test?
Jensen commented on this. He said the skills athletes use depend more on physical coordination and endless practice, more than reaction time.
Nonetheless there is some IQ requirement to be a good athlete. Jensen estimated that below IQ 85 one could never play major league baseball
He said it to journalist Dan Seligman, mentioned in his book “A Question of Intelligence”
Speaking of Seligman, anyone’s who’s interested should estimate his IQ before I do a post on his intelligence. I want to see who guesses closest based only on reading his Forbes article:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/02/21/please-estimate-this-mans-iq/
“where did he say that?”
If you’ve ever played baseball you’d know that one of the most important things is reaction time. You don’t need a scientist to tell you that.
Someone Paul Cooijmans:
“Given the Thinkfast scores reported to you by people who took your tests, can you give an estimate as to the difference in IQ points (16SD) between brainpower levels?
Yes. To anticipate your next question, it’s 2.3 I.Q. points per BP level. The correlation between BP and I.Q. is -.53 over 28 score pairs. The norms according to what I have now (in I.Q.):
Theta Silver 156
Theta Gold 148
BrainMaster 147
BM+1 146
BM+2 145
BM+3 145
BM+4 145
BM+5 140
BM+6 138
Note for people who do not understand: Yes, the norms are “backwards”, because the correlation is negative. No, this is not a mistake.”
More on here http://iq-tests-for-the-high-range.com/faq_old.html
Those numbers are wrong. The correlation between IQ and reaction time and reaction time variability is negative but the correlation between Thinkfast scores and intelligence is positive (see the scatter plot in my post) because lower reaction times equate to higher Thinkfast scores.
Maybe in Paul Cooijmans’s sample of self-reported TF scores and scores on his tests, the correlation is negative, but the correlation between supervised TF scores and SAT scores is very positive.
OK. Now a step back in time. Did you drop your ” The 100 most influential persons sneakiest IQ test”? If not, would you please share any ideas about the survey/test raw scores and IQ’s correlation?
That was an idea I never bothered pursuing, so I have no idea how or if it maps to IQ.
Lol)Very sad. The idea to ask a person to rearrange – mentally and quickly – his/her entire picture of human culture/ history under some conditions and then estimate something about the person – it sounds meaningful. But I got you – lets skip the story)
Can we get that Thinkfast game somewhere?
That’s what I was about to ask…
I don’t think you can buy it anymore.
This is about as pathetic as celebrityheight.com. I scored 1656464! Look at me, I’m not insecure at all
Pointless.
The Anglo-Prole-Sphere should now be called the Anglo-Dumbo-Sphere.
America and much of the English Speaking world rank bottom with poorer Euro nations, when it comes to their students’ reasoning skills. They stink in every subject under the sun that is taught in school.
https://campustechnology.com/Articles/2015/03/04/American-Millennials-Not-Terribly-Bright.aspx?Page=1
And worse, poorer Euro nations like Italy and Spain, have higher household net worth, and less income inequality than Meriprolestan.
all commenters should take these two tests:
http://free.ultimaiq.net/ttt.htm
http://free.ultimaiq.net/numerus_basic.htm
they are untimed, high range tests, so you can retake them as much as you’d like, i believe.i got a 141 on the math test (after numerous tries, with much effort) and a 156 on the tic tac toe test (on the first try, with little effort). i’m interested to see if what others will get 🙂
What makes you think the results are reliable? Please tell me and I will share my experiance with one of those tests – my friend and I took it a year ago or so.
By the way, what do you think about Ivan Ivec’s tone? he is like, ” Hi, I m the smartest, I know this and that, I will make anothere 100 tests and 1000 HIQ societies” What is that? A pseudosimplicity of a real genius? New Mozart has come?
“What makes you think the results are reliable? Please tell me and I will share my experiance with one of those tests – my friend and I took it a year ago or so.”
I don’t know if they’re reliable. They might be bunk. That wouldn’t be surprising. That’s why I want to see what others get!
“By the way, what do you think about Ivan Ivec’s tone? he is like, ” Hi, I m the smartest, I know this and that, I will make anothere 100 tests and 1000 HIQ societies” What is that? A pseudosimplicity of a real genius? New Mozart has come?”
Hehe, that’s a funny way to put it. Actually, Ivan Ivec seems like a very humble and kind man. See here: http://www.ultimaiq.net/
As a genuine Christian, he believes pride in one’s high I.Q. is sinful, more or less.
I did the Numerus Basic and got a score somewhat higher that I was expecting. Ok, difference wasn’t lage, so I don’t think it’s needed to be picky here- a short test (20 items), just to estimate an IQ. But my friend’s situation was worse . Poor guy – he hit the ceiling . So now he is officially a man with IQ 160 (roughly 1/30000)/ I want to be understood – he is a brilliant guy, who got his PHD in Physics at 24 or 26 – don’t remember – to mention a few. But he was tested trice before( 2 tests were with high ceiling), getting iq’s just slightly higher than 99 % So, as we both think – with care – the test works not very well, especially at the high extreme , or it measures something different from general intelligence
Thanks for sharing your friend’s story, Konstantin. Ivan Ivec is a professional mathematician, so he probably does a good job norming his tests. Maybe your friend is an outlier.
a fun game that tests only pattern recognition is super hexagon. look up videos of it on youtube.
Dear PP,
Seth Roberts noticed better brain functioning when he took flax seed oil which contains omega 3. I have noticed playing poker better after eating salmon or sardines. I have also noticed that I can achieve a higher maximum heart rate after intense exercise after eating salmon.
Could you experiment and see if you do better at this game after eating salmon, sardines or flax?
thanks in advance
Seth Roberts also died at the age of 50, despite spending his whole life Quantifying himself and trying to optimize every aspect of his mental and physical health…
Just sayin’.
Argh, I meant 60. Same point tho…
I haven’t had that game in years so I can’t do experiments on myself using Thinkfast
Oh PP, shame on you)) If New Yorkers only knew) They, just opposite, are big fans of Canada – I have a real proof – a big crowd of teenagers chanting ” Justin Bieber, Justin Bieber ” near the hotel I stayed at (the guy was in too)
I found your old post on Brain Size.
https://brainsize.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/calculating-your-reaction-time-iq-using-a-user-friendly-reaction-time-test/
http://www.humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime
I scored on average 248.3 ms = (239, 247, 259) = IQ 121
On the 15 tries two were 122 ms and 124 ms.
(21 * 0.89) + 100 = 118.69
WAIS 4 says my g is 115
I know this is not the full test you took (Thinkfast) but to me it seems that self awareness increases how fast I am. Taking this test makes me a little bit nervous from anticipation. Nervousness disconnects me from paying attention. I think that if I relaxed more my muscle tone would allow me to react faster. I sit too much in front of the computer and neglect my peripheral vision. I think I need to exercise more.
The parallel processing part of Thinkfast you describe reminds me of what you said about how smart people look for challenging environment. That sounds like self awareness because the whole body and mind must coordinate. This is also what social intelligence does, creates balance and harmony. Feral children have low intelligence because of lack of social reinforcement. Instincts overcome delayed gratification. As humans evolved they needed to be in constant motion or they would atrophy. Neurosis is the inability to move forward in life. Signals degrade. There needs to be a constant refreshment (social / self awareness).
my mistake, it was 222 and 224
And what about your head size ? And your cognitive profile ? Are you more verbal or more spatial ?
I personnaly think that your head is pretty big (not huge ) and for the Pumpkin vs Mugabe question, I think Mugabe have a much higher verbal IQ than you but you probably have a higher performance IQ and thus, a more equilibrate cognitive profile.
My first comment wich was suppressed was:
Pumpkin, what are the IQ equivalents of all the different levels of thinkfast ?
And you said you took 2 IQ tests when you were 11 and 12, what about their results ?
On Thinkfast version 2+, BrainMaster = IQ 135 and BrainMaster+5 = IQ 147, so from these two data points you can estimate the rest through linear extrapolation (at least up to BrainMaster +10, after that the linear extrapolation breaks down because game 6 tops out)
In any event, no one plays Thinkfast anymore…I don’t think you can even buy it…they now sell a different chronometric game which I might research in the future.
My score at age 11 was not told to me…I could probably find it at my parents’ house if I looked hard enough. My score at age 12 I have a rough idea, but I don’t want to publicly say until I can confirm because I don’t think people will believe it. I also need to confirm which version of the WISC I took, because in those days, there was less awareness of the Flynn effect, so school boards would be administering IQ tests that were, in some cases, roughly half a century too old. If the test I took was decades obsolete, the scores may have been inflated by many IQ points, especially on the Performance scale.
If I ever find the official test report (which is somewhere at my parents house) I will do a post about it, with all the specific numbers and Flynn effect adjustments.
“I don’t think you can even buy it…”
It’s time to jump out of the bathtub and run naked through the streets: https://ganzir.info/2021/07/01/thinkfast-recovered/
I’ll skip the naked part but if you can get thinkfast on my Apple iPad, I’ll run the streets getting people to play
It won’t be easy, and without an iPad I can’t figure it all out for myself, but it might be possible. Installing THINKfast directly onto an iPad is a complete no-go, but with a virtual machine, it might – MIGHT be possible.
There is indeed an app for that, called UTM. Make sure to read the whole FAQ page: https://getutm.app/faq/
But this is not Apple-approved software, and Apple goes out of their way to stop you from using software they haven’t given their corporate stamp of approval, so you have to hack it into the machine through “sideloading” or outright jailbreak the device. I have zero experience with that, so it’s your problem now. Do so at your own risk since this could go seriously wrong and Apple might even brick your device for it. Even if you take your chances and successfully install it, I’m not sure it can run Windows 98, even with the disk image files that install it in VirtualBox.
Now, if you had a Windows laptop, this would be much easier.
I’ll have to put it on my lap top instead.
I was about to write exactly that but then removed it in favor of suggesting a laptop.
I’d just like to say that I once held a CRT reaction time (choice reaction time) thread, and I got 316 ms on a 60 Hz monitor on this website.
https://www.psytoolkit.org/lessons/experiment_simple_choice_rts.html
I have no clue what my IQ is, but I got 1140 on the 2017 SAT as a 20 year old man. (which is primarily studying for a good score)
I saw someone with a purported “160 IQ” on 4chan that manage to hit 241 ms on the CRT.
Here was the thread for that.
https://boards.fireden.net/sci/thread/9674197/#9677525
What are your thoughts on this?
How would you calculate IQ from something that is a better biometric than height, head circumference, or weight?
Still waiting for you to tell me whether or not you have a copy of ThinkFast somewhere pepe
No but I may know where you can get one
Could you tell me? By e-mail if you want
“Then I read about a high school project where a bunch of high school seniors played Thinkfast for an hour a day for three weeks, and their highest Thinkfast score was correlated with their SAT score.”
Pepe can you give me more information about this? I’d like to read their study results myself.
It was an unpublished study so you can’t read it.
what types of intelligences peak at what ages.