Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Free IQ Test


When I was in college, a teacher told me about an experiment a group once did.  They went to a bookstore and put cards in the middle of all the best sellers.  Written on the cards was a note that said if the reader called a number, the researchers would send them $20.  Nobody ever called the number.

While I was writing Pinhole I decided to see if anyone actually read my book, so I put in a secret: an intelligence test.  See for yourself.  Download and read the book (http://www.amazon.com/Pinhole-ebook/dp/B00BVFLY6W/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top/). 

It’s important you do not read the appendix or reread the book (you can do that later).  See, part of the point of my book is telling a complicated set of stories with many characters.  The appendix helps you sort out which characters were which, and it skews the results of the test.  The point is to see how much of the story you can follow without it.

Finished reading?  Okay, question one:

How would you rate the book on a scale of one to five stars (five being the best rating)?

There’s only one question.  Check the chart below to see your IQ level:

* * * * *  Genius (150 IQ or higher).  You’re also more attractive and empathic than the general population.  Good candidate for President of the United States or whatever other career your mother said you’d be good at.

* * * *  Above-average (120 IQ).  You’re smart, but you could work harder at being smart.  Try reading the book again; it tends to make people smarter.  Career options include: CEO of a small corporation and television personality.

* * *  Average (100 IQ).  There’s nothing to be ashamed about; you’re just average.  It’s like being medium or moderate.  Suggested careers: middle-management, truck driver.

* *  Moron (75-80 IQ).  It’s impressive you were able to read the book in the first place, so you got that going for you.  I’m assuming you dig ditches or work for McDonalds.  Perhaps you do both at the same time.

* Dead (50 IQ or below).  You’re a Republican congressman, aren’t you?

 

No comments: