Top 3% of World Population
I conducted the test in Manchester, UK at the beginning of September, 2020 in my early 30s.
Due to my high openness scores, I was told by a psychologist in Germany to do the Cattell Culture Fair test. As it would be best suited to test my intelligence quotient compared to the other types of IQ tests.
Therefore, I did the test in the UK where the Cattel test is the default IQ test for the entire country. Alongside that, I was living in Germany at the time, which is further from Australia, America, and Canada than the UK to take an English instructed test.
As top 3% of the population, the calculation is 97.3657942589%, which you can see here in the .16 Standard Deviation (SD) column. This means I am 1 in 38 people. In a randomised room of 100 people representing the average human population there would be 2.6 people of my IQ in the room or higher.
“British Mensa can offer supervised tests using two separate, industry-standard tests, the Cattell III B and the Cattell Culture Fair III A. A score which puts you in the top two per cent of the population on either of these papers would qualify you for membership of Mensa… The two papers test different types of IQ.”
The Culture Fair is used for fluid and crystalline intelligence, which is the ability to learn, problem solve, and apply abstract concepts. Ie, think outside the box to solve a problem. Some other IQ tests I would argue, test your ability to think inside the box to a highly proficient manner. The test I scored high on was how well you can think abstractly and logically at the same time, which is usually used in creative pursuits, like creativity, inventing and entrepreneurial thinking.
“… the current view of psychologists and other scholars of genius is that a minimum level of IQ (approximately 125) is necessary for genius but not sufficient, and must be combined with personality characteristics such as drive and persistence, plus the necessary opportunities for talent development. For instance, in a chapter in an edited volume on achievement, IQ researcher Arthur Jensen proposed a multiplicative model of genius consisting of high ability, high productivity, and high creativity.” (Source).
In psychological personality tests, creativity is called openness to experience and productivity is termed industriousness which derives from conscientiousness as I understand it. In these areas, I score in the 91st percentile for creativity (where the average for the general population is between 45-55) and 88th percentile for industriousness (where the average is between 49.5-51.5).
This implies I have the required skill set to be able to use my IQ adequately.
I will understand all complex requests made to me.
I can learn new skills very quickly.
The skills I can learn are generally more complex than tasks which can be given to most workers.
I have high industriousness, meaning that when I am given tasks to do or skills to learn, then I pour my blood sweat and tears into it.
I am intelligent and creative enough to find new ways to solve complex business problems. This is due to my high openness.
Due to my low agreeableness and politeness, I have the ability to explain flaws to even to a highly feared authority. If I notice there are issues in the business which may lead to less efficiency or a financial loss, if I think it in the best interest of the business to explain it, I do without hesitancy.
I am a jack of all trades due to my type of IQ so I tend to have basic knowledge of all departments. Meaning that I have a better understanding of the stresses other departments are under and can negotiate a better working environment. Gaining a more efficient incorporation of tasks workplace-wide.
Mensa’s post test questionnaire for personality type
I find the Mensa quiz results are an apt general descriptor. Though I would say I do also ponder things quite a lot but it may be that this is only in regards to certain subjects.
I do prefer to discuss things with others when trying to problem solve. I have found this forces me to simplify complex issues to people whom may have less knowledge on the subject. This always makes me explain, from the most basic concept, step-by-step, my analysis and justifications for my own thinking process. Sometimes this can lead me to paths I may have missed due to being overly linear in one direction of thought due to confirmation bias.
I agree with the statements that I thrive on debate, and I find myself drawn specifically into environments, or towards people, who are looking for a change. I find that I fuel people.
I have an overabundance of energy which kicks things, with extreme force if there is a lot of resistance, into gear. For example, I will force someone into bettering their life even if they protest to laziness as long as it does indeed serve their needs in the long run. If the person internally believes this is the direction they want to go I will help them battle the resistances they face temporarily.
I try to find places where I am needed for my skill set specifically. I tend to feel pulled towards businesses or people looking for a catalyst and I am relatively fine-tuned now at realising when my role has finished.