Statistics of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5

© Paul Cooijmans

Scores on Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 as of 15 January 2023

Contents type: Verbal, numerical, spatial.   Period: 2016-present

0 *
1 ******
2 ******
3 *******
4 ********
5 **
6 *******
7 ***
8 *****
9 ****
10 *
12 ***
13 *
15 **
16 *
18 *
23 ***
24 *
27 *
28 *

Correlation of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 with other mental ability tests

(Test index) Test name n r
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 240.89
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #450.89
(239) Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin)40.88
(35) Only idiots80.87
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004140.87
(113) The Piper's Test110.85
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 200470.85
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism60.85
(114) Dicing with death80.83
(28) The Test To End All Tests160.81
(1) Cartoons of Shock70.80
(215) Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate)60.80
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test200.78
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016240.77
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 2016240.77
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man180.76
(48) Narcissus' last stand140.75
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010100.74
(42) The Marathon Test130.74
(115) De Laatste Test - Herziening 201940.74
(20) De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 201940.73
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai)40.73
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test130.73
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test190.69
(104) The Final Test - Revision 201370.69
(262) Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate)40.68
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4400.68
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree210.67
(220) Cattell Culture Fair40.67
(44) Associative LIMIT210.66
(10) Genius Association Test220.66
(118) Divine Psychometry70.65
(5) Daedalus Test110.64
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010380.64
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5240.63
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010150.63
(119) A Relaxing Test50.62
(107) The Alchemist Test120.61
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004180.61
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree130.61
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales60.60
(18) The Nemesis Test220.59
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests160.57
(15) Letters40.55
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008240.55
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011210.55
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3440.54
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016310.54
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test200.54
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words40.53
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016250.53
(36) Reflections In Peroxide220.52
(29) Words40.52
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test270.47
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree190.44
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords70.44
(11) Isis Test210.43
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude230.42
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016320.42
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT70.37
(25) The Sargasso Test210.34
(24) Reason - Revision 2008240.32
(260) Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate)70.25
(216) Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate)60.25
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 201360.23
(7) The Final Test50.21
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version110.04
(259) Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate)5-0.23
(82) Reason4-0.49

Weighted average of correlations: 0.590 (N = 993, weighted sum = 585.58)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.77

Ranking in above table is based on the unrounded correlations. All available data is present in this table, no tests are left out except for those with less than 4 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Estimated loadings of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 on particular item types

These are estimated g factor loadings, but against homogeneous tests (containing only particular item types) as opposed to non-compound heterogeneous tests. Although tending to surprise the lay person, it is not uncommon for tests to have high loadings on item types they do not actually contain themselves. Such loadings reflect the empirical fact that most tests for mental abilities measure primarily g, regardless of their contents; that the major part of test score variance is caused by g, and only a minor part by factors germane to particular item types. It is of key importance to understand that this is a fact of nature, a natural phenomenon, and not something that was built into the tests by the test constructors.

Typeng loading of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 on that type
Verbal1490.83
Numerical620.78
Spatial970.74
Logical390.57
Heterogeneous3950.76

N = 742

Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.

Balanced g loading = 0.74

National medians for Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5

Country n median score
Belgium218.0
Norway213.5
Canada39.0
India29.0
United_Kingdom26.5
China46.0
Greece36.0
United_States196.0
Korea_South65.0
Australia24.5
Spain34.0

For reasons of privacy, only countries with 2 or more candidates are included in this table. Ranking is based on the medians, and then alphabetic.

Correlation with national I.Q.'s of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5

Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:

Correlation of Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 with personal details

Personalia n r
Observed behaviour120.69
Observed associative horizon50.39
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007170.35
Educational level600.28
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007170.27
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007170.26
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007170.13
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007170.11
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes90.09
Father's educational level560.05
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 2007170.01
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 200717-0.00
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 200717-0.01
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 200717-0.01
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 200717-0.01
Mother's educational level56-0.03
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 200717-0.06
Disorders (own)61-0.07
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 200717-0.08
Disorders (parents and siblings)59-0.10
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 200717-0.10
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 200717-0.22
Year of birth64-0.25
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 200717-0.33
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms14-0.35

Estimated g factor loadings upward and downward of particular scores

In parentheses the number of score pairs on which that estimated g factor loading is based. The goal of this is to verify the hypothesis that g becomes less important, accounts for a smaller proportion of the variance, at higher I.Q. levels. The mere fact of restricting the range like this also depresses the g loading compared to computing it over the test's full range, so it would be normal for both values to be lower than the test's full-range g loading.

Raw scoreUpward g (N)Downward g (N)
00.77 (993)NaN (0)
30.74 (746)0.46 (288)
60.66 (481)0.69 (621)
90.85 (190)0.65 (811)
120.67 (68)0.69 (841)
40NaN (0)0.77 (993)

Reliability

Remark: In recent years, the extremely mistaken notion has arisen in incompetent dilettante circles that a very high reliability (such as reported above) be bad because it supposedly mean that "all items measure the same" and the test lack diversity. An explanation as to this grave fallacy can be found here under "Confusion with internal consistency".

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
70 to 7413.0
65 to 6927.0
60 to 6449.5
55 to 59420.5
50 to 5424.5
45 to 4938.0
40 to 44414.5
35 to 3983.0
30 to 34127.5
25 to 2984.0
22 to 2465.0
20 or 2166.5
18 or 1918.0
1736.0

N = 64

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
201654.0
201753.0
201857.0
201963.0
2020219.0
2021156.0
202267.0
202311.0

ryear taken × median score = 0.02 (N = 64)

Remark: In 2020, this test was used for the Prize of the Beheaded Man, which likely explains the high median and many scores of that year.

Robustness and overall test quality

Correlations of sections with total score

Verbal0.90
Numerical0.91
Spatial0.89

Correlations between sections (internal consistency versus profile information)

Verbal × Numerical0.69
Verbal × Spatial0.69
Numerical × Spatial0.75

Ideal values for correlations between sections are around .5, thus being a compromise between the test's ability to yield a "profile" and its ability to provide an indication of general intelligence. With a too high correlation (like .8 or higher) the sections measure basically the same so there is almost no profile information in them, with a too low correlation (like .2 or lower) the sections are so different that there is little point in combining them into a measure of general intelligence.

Section histograms

Prop. = proportion of candidates outscored in this section. In parentheses the proportion outscored for any possible scores higher than the present score but lower than the next-higher score in the table.

Verbal

ScoreProp.# scores (* = 1 score)
00.063 (0.125) ********
10.141 (0.156) **
20.281 (0.406) ****************
30.500 (0.594) ************
40.656 (0.719) ********
50.781 (0.844) ********
60.859 (0.875) **
70.883 (0.891) *
80.898 (0.906) *
90.930 (0.953) ***
120.977 (1.000) ***

Numerical

ScoreProp.# scores (* = 1 score)
00.211 (0.422) ***************************
10.531 (0.641) **************
20.719 (0.797) **********
30.813 (0.828) **
40.836 (0.844) *
50.859 (0.875) **
60.883 (0.891) *
70.914 (0.938) ***
80.945 (0.953) *
90.969 (0.984) **
100.992 (1.000) *

Spatial

ScoreProp.# scores (* = 1 score)
00.109 (0.219) **************
10.344 (0.469) ****************
20.547 (0.625) **********
30.719 (0.813) ************
40.836 (0.859) ***
50.883 (0.906) ***
60.922 (0.938) **
70.945 (0.953) *
80.977 (1.000) ***

Item analysis

Item statistics are not published as that would help candidates. To detect bad items, answers and comments from candidates are studied, as well as, for each problem, the correlation with total score on the remaining problems (item-rest correlation) and the proportion of candidates getting it wrong (hardness of the item). Possible bad items are revised, replaced, or removed, possibly resulting in a revised version of the test.