As most of you already know I am very fond of doing IQ-tests, quizzes and puzzles of different sorts. I am a member of Mensa just because I felt like taking the test and then two years later ended up deciding I could join the society as well since I did pass the test. There are many great things about Mensa that I like - for example we had a meeting/seminar/get-together the other day regarding being a consultant, starting your own business, etc. Very interesting, especially to meet some of the member that have just been names so far. Another thing I like about Mensa is their mailing lists - especially the one where anything goes. On this mail any kind of subject could be discussed for a long time. It is very interesting to read some of those discussions when you have the time for it.
One of the current discussions is about IQ vs. EQ. EQ is for those of you that haven't heard about it Emotional Quote - something rather like IQ, but instead of measuring logical-analytical skills it measures social skills. I haven't read that much about EQ before and I did not know there were any tests for it. However there seems to be a few tests out there and they had some interesting results that seem to be at least to some point valid. People that have been diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome got low scores, most people got around 100 points and some got quite high scores - 120 and above would be high I guess.
Seeing as I see myself and is seen by others as a very social and outgoing person I wanted to the tests myself. And so I did. And perhaps there is a reason that friends have said things like "You could melt into any group of people and just talk to them in a natural way", "You are a social chameleont", "You are a social freak" or "You are mano-social!".
The tests I did you can find on the following two links. They are kinda lengthy with 70 questions in the first and 106 questions in the second, but it doesn't take more than 30 minutes or so each to finish them. The first one was interesting, but I always felt that "this will be the answer that gives you the highest EQ" and then I tried to pick the one that felt most true to me. The second one was harder and more interesting - often I didn't have a clue what would be "the correct answers", but just answered them as truthfully as I could. The second test had pictures where you were going to determine the feelings of the participants in the picture, or scenarios where you'd pick the feelings most likely felt by those in the scenarios. As I said - second one was harder to guess what would be seen as the "best"answers - so you ended up picking the answers you felt were right from your point of view instead which I guess is very good for those kinds of tests.
My test scores?
On the first test I got 126 points - which is well above average, probably within something like the highest 2% of the population.
On the second test I got 146 points - which is extremely high and would place me higher than 99.91% of the population.
Mano-social was it? :)
tja.. jag är inte ett dugg förvånad :-)
tog testen själv.. 116 och 127. Så är inte totalt socialt inkompetent även om det kan kännas så när man jämför med dig.
Jag har omkring 180. Skall senare kolla om testen är pålitlig och ger korrekta värden. Det är många personer som jag gillar, särskilt min hustru. I princip gäller detsamma för min intelligens. Funderar på att lägga in värdena på min egen blogg i profilen.
Hur ska man kunna kolla att testet är tillförlitligt då?! Jag måste erkänna att jag är rätt skeptisk till dessa tester när det gäller EQ. Ibland skulle man kanske vilja välja fler alternativ och frågorna känns inte så djuplodande.
Skicka en kommentar