My bad, accident. Also, I got a PM notification! (dangit, wrong thread again!)

IQ: 135 (scoff... isn't it supposed to an average of 100? I'm guessing mine is closer to 110)
Personality: ENTJ
GR: 436.530877431899

ENTJ
Extravert(11%) iNtuitive(38%) Thinking(12%) Judging(1%)
You have slight preference of Extraversion over Introversion (11%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have marginal or no preference of Judging over Perceiving (1%)

That's odd, I often get INTJ. It changes a lot. Some things stay consistent but the questions about self-discipline tend to change with the seasons. And I forget what Judging means but I usually have a much stronger preference for that. Odd.

IQ: 149
Personality: INTJ
Peak GR: 319.979
Penis length: 10" (funny, I found a penis length test on the same website as the IQ test)

I've taken the Briggs-Meyers test several times and I've occasionally gotten ISTJ, but I would agree more with INTJ.

Yeah I know what you mean 2WL. I have to say I really believe I'm more of a INTJ I've just been more social lately. Lol. Nothing about personality is static, of course. But I identify as an introvert who knows the value of extraversion.

In fact I try to incorporate an ability to practice the other side on each of the dichotomies - feeling, sensing, and perceiving. As such I'm proud to say that my results have moderated a lot more over what they used to be (much higher percentages).

I get the feeling there aren't a lot of extraverts that are naturally drawn to Diplomacy. It's a game where you really need to be duplicitous and selfish, so if you're naturally extraverted, that may be more difficult or more unnatural an act.

My personality definitely changes depending on the group of friends I'm with or different social situations. I also agree with you that we moderate over time. I've definitely gotten more extroverted in certain situations, especially since I've left college, although I'd say I've gotten much more "thinking" and "intuition" as well.

I blame zultar. The subject of this thread only mentions three things, while win/draw percentage and "userid" requests are buried on the first page of this thread. Furthermore, "userid" is a bit vague since if you go to the Help page you can search for a user by "ID number" or "username", and our profile page lists our "User ID#". Help us, help you, zultar.

It also isn't really a site-wide study. It's a study of those who self-select to provide information to the study organizers.

Read Gardner's 'Multiple Intelligences' to see how this kind of IQ test only measures certain narrow categories of intelligence. I have always done really well on tests of standard IQ, SAT/GRE -type tests, National Spanish/French/German tests--but on my National French Test level 2 essay I spelled Dieu as "dieux" (wrote "gods" instead of God). Being a mosaic type who's great at induction but terrible at deduction, I had to be walked through the parts of an essay and the steps of the research-writing process, and will never forget my first college Spanish teacher, who said "Your Spanish is all right, but you don't know how to write a paragraph." I have disabilities with both music and visual-motor coordination, in high school always could re-derive the quadratic equation but couldn't make myself remember it. Absorbed tons of ideas in books but can't remember who said what to any great extent. It's sad that so many people with real inter-personal, intra-personal, artistic, athletic, spatial skills who aren't fast at basic writing and math skills get pegged as low intelligence, when intelligence tests measure only a narrow segment of possible abilities.

" It's a game where you really need to be duplicitous and selfish, so if you're naturally extraverted, that may be more difficult or more unnatural an act. "

Interesting that you think that. I've always seen social manipulation as the terrain of advantage for an extrovert.

An introvert, I imagine, might have a good idea in the abstract, or while alone, how one *would* or *should* play their cards to manipulate a person but would have a harder time of it in practice since so much of it relies on establishing an easy rapport (and false rapport).

Then again an introvert is less likely to approach social situations naturally and probably feels like they're forcing it all the time, making their "act" no different from normal, which would give them the advantage of being comfortable as they lie.

I'm certainly comfortable with lying lol.

I tried to stay quiet and it worked for about an hour, but I can't do it.

The vast majority of the people who claim to know Howard Gardner's Multiple Intelligences (MI) theory have actually never read his original book nor the scientific evidence for or against it. They read about his MI theory from somewhere and they think "Oh yeah, that makes sense. I'm not smart at logic but I'm smart at bodily-kinesthetic or visual-spatial or whatever." This theory is also very popular with parents who kids do not do well in school. "My kids aren't dumb. They are just smart at different things."

Please do us all a favor and actually read his original work along with his other works. While MI is an interesting conjecture, it is not a scientific theory. When people have measured his specific "intelligence," they have found a correlation to the 'g' factor or what most people would think of as IQ. There is little to no evidence that MI has any scientific worth. Since its proposal in 1983 and made popular in the 90s, there has been a constant dearth of evidence supporting his theory. Moreover, many people have tried to adapt the MI "theory" to education, and there has been a number of studies that show no evidence to support its premise in education; in fact, there has been some evidence showing that it might be harmful to one's academic progress. Gardner himself has even denounced the use of his MI theory in education.

Furthermore, he has recently come up with two more intelligences, natural and existential. I'll let you think about how ridiculous that is on your own.

And to battle against the metrics of 'g' factor, Gardner has created this so-called executive function that supposedly oversees all of his intelligences.

Yeah, the IQ test I linked is not a great one, but it is at least based on a generally accepted model of psychometrics. The vast majority of scientists who work in this field have discarded this MI theory because there is no evidence that supports it, and the people who still stick to it are almost entirely non-scientific folks who have not even read the original work.

Generally accepted *giant raspberry*

Is that scientific enough for ya? :-)

Ok as a college prof who teaches language (Intensive ESL, college reading, basic writing, second-year composition, graduate courses in teaching ESL, teacher certification in Cross-cultural, Language and Academic Development), here's the value of Gardner's multiple intelligences: Along with personality types and learning styles, preference for indoor or outdoor work, etc., one's varying levels of ability to read and write, analyze and synthesize (do critical thinking), get along with people, follow instructions, keep track of details, create, mediate, visualize, be dextrous or introspective or social... are all skills that can help guide people choose careers that they will excel at, or at least be competent in. Getting an accurate impression of these abilities (multiple intelligences, according to Gardner) also helps people focus clearly on which talents to develop further as well as which areas to try to bring up to a basic level of competency. It's extremely useful.

And we've barely mentioned an even better predictor of success: Emotional intelligence, or the ability to deny oneself something early on in order to get a better reward later. I'm thinking that neither Zultar nor I am very good at that. :-)

am? is? Grammar mavens??