(no subject)

[arethinn]

Saw this puzzle in a book I am cataloging today and am very confused.



Which toothpick would you need to move to create two, and only two, squares?

This is multiple-choice; the answers are 8, 5, 9, or 7.

It's taken me a while of looking at it to conclude that the answer I think they want is 9 (move it to connect 7 and 1, and you have a small square in the upper left corner of a bigger one). But without looking at the answers at first, I thought 4 or 3 or 2 could work, moved to the same space (yielding two small squares stacked on top of each other, and an open figure on the right), which you can also do with 5; and similarly, 8 or 7 can be moved to bisect the right rectangle and leave the open figure on the left.

Am I just dumb (this is in an IQ test after all; I am not brilliant with this sort of spatial stuff) or is the question really misleadingly phrased? To me "two and only two squares" means "two squares, no more and no fewer" but doesn't specify anything about the other toothpicks. It seems like they may have meant "two squares and nothing else, no open ends left".

Comments

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

It seems to me that, the way the question is phrased, you are absolutely correct. I tend to take words literally too; this is why I hate standardized IQ tests. They ask vague question with multiple possible answers and then score you wrong for not intuiting the meaning behind their words.

I probably would go with 9, though, if I had to choose one, because that would be my guess as to what they meant.

But if I have to guess at what you mean, then it's your communication fail not mine.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

They ask vague question with multiple possible answers and then score you wrong for not intuiting the meaning behind their words.

And then there's the occasional ones where all the answers are wrong, such as one in the language section which asked, "______ are words which sound the same, but are spelled differently." The answer they wanted from the ones provided was "homonyms" (the others were synonyms, antonyms, and something else obviously [well, to me obviously] incorrect), but that's wrong, or at least imprecise; it should be "homophones" if you mean it strictly (apparently "nym" can be used for the form of the sound as well as the form of the letters, adding confusion). So I'd have to go, well, do I pick this answer because I'm guessing it's what they want, or leave it blank...?

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

I think that an aspect of intelligence is being able to figure out what people mean when they say things. I often fail on this.

[twopiearr.livejournal.com]

I am not faulting your logic at all - from a literal interpretation of the question your reasoning is all sound. With that said, if we go with the literal interpretation, the question as stated has 2 answers - 5 could be moved to connect 7 and 1, leaving 2 squares and some leftover, just as easily as 2-4 could. If we assume that the question can only have one correct answer from the four presented, AND we assume that we can have no toothpicks leftover, 9 becomes the only viable answer.

[interactiveleaf.livejournal.com]

Based on a literal reading, every answer presented is potentially correct--there isn't a one of them that can't be moved to form two squares--as well as a few others.

I'd go with nine, eventually, because it's the only one that falls into the class of "leaving no open spaces"; even though the question doesn't specify that condition, when there is one answer that falls into a category by itself, I'll tend to pick it as being the one they want.

I'd still just be guessing, though. I have no confidence in my ability to suss out what people mean when they're being that imprecise.

[billfl.livejournal.com]

I think you're correct in your assumption that what they want is 2 squares with no leftovers - but due to lack of specificity, your answers will also work.

#10 will work, too.

[iro-liyulio.livejournal.com]

I agree with everyone. What's fun on IQ tests is to tell the monitor all of the possible answers and then say, "Perhaps the question should be worded better?"

Then again, IQ tests are full of problems. I took one where I had to identify what was wrong with a phone. It turned out it was missing the curly cable attached to the receiver. It may or may not have been a rotary dial, I can't remember. The monitor said, "We don't expect anyone to get this question anymore" and then proceeded to explain how deficient IQ tests are because they are based upon a certain socio-economic/cultural background.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

This book mentioned the "culture fairness" aspect and at various points said "don't take this specific aptitude section as a real measurement if ____" such things as "English is not your first language" (in verbal questions) and even "if you have visual or fine motor disabilities" (solving mazes in a certain time limit -- god I suck at those). Supposedly the pattern recognition, mathematical, and non-verbal/spatial reasoning kinds of questions are "culture neutral".

[blamebrampton.livejournal.com]

Yes, badly worded. They want you to say nine, so it should have been 'to arrange all the toothpicks into two (and only two) squares'. (I looked at the diagram first and was looking for a sequence beyond the obvious linear in the number placement. Sigh.

[silvaerina-tael.livejournal.com]

8. If you want only two squares, move 8 over between 10 and 7.

[silvaerina-tael.livejournal.com]

Make that slide 8 over so that it splits 10 and 4, and 9 and 3 into 2 squares. I confused myself.

[silvaerina-tael.livejournal.com]

In rereading the question again, they really didn't word it very well at all. Nothing was said about whether or not an enclosed figure (all the toothpicks connecting up) had to be formed or whether any two squares would do.

[starlightforest.livejournal.com]

Which was essentially my point (and I feel less silly since others are agreeing with me), that the question didn't seem to be specific enough.

[silvaerina-tael.livejournal.com]

I guess it wasn't specific, unless it was designed to be open to interpretation...

[elethian.livejournal.com]

Yes, but you can also move 5 or 7 (or 9 for that matter, which consensus seems to be is probably the answer they meant to be correct) in similar ways to accomplish the same type of figure, so what would pick 8 out as being the "correct" of the four choices in that case?

[silvaerina-tael.livejournal.com]

That was the first thing I saw. And given there wasn't a stipulation that all tooth picks had to be conjoined... That's where the wording was too vague, and possibly deliberately so - not that anyone can say for sure.

[michiexile]

IQ tests measure mainly how good you are at solving IQ tests. And there is one piece of information that will help solving this: namely the fact that we know that the test author intended for there to be one unique solution.

[silussa.livejournal.com]

The problem with being intelligent is that you can end up with reasoned multiple answers to a problem that the TEST designer only saw one for.

Best not to overthink it, if you can. Myself, my boss every so often tells me not to overthink things work throws at us....even when the results are stupid.

[kistaro]

The problem with not overthinking things is that I, for one, find it very easy to find a non-"obvious" answer first. I can usually figure out it's the wrong one, but I know I have to keep going, and I may miss the real answer when I do find it...