Statistics of Cooijmans On-Line Test — Two-barrelled version

© November 2018 Paul Cooijmans

Norms

Scores on Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version

Contents type: Verbal, numerical, logical.   Period: 2008-present

0 ***
1.5 ****
2 *******
9.5 **
10.5 **
11 ***
11.5 *
12 **
12.5 *
13 ****
16 *

Correlation of Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version with other tests by Paul Cooijmans

(Test index) Test name n r
(54) Test of Shock and Awe31.00
(57) Space, Time, and Hyperspace31.00
(56) Short Test For Genius31.00
(107) The Alchemist Test40.99
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice30.98
(49) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry40.98
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords60.98
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism50.97
(79) Association subtest of Long Test For Genius30.96
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #440.96
(75) Analogies of Long Test For Genius30.89
(42) The Marathon Test60.88
(82) Reason30.88
(11) Isis Test100.82
(69) Odds30.80
(7) The Final Test100.78
(1) Cartoons of Shock90.74
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 200480.74
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test90.73
(15) Letters40.73
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man100.72
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test90.72
(36) Reflections In Peroxide90.71
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree50.71
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test90.69
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words30.67
(18) The Nemesis Test80.64
(48) Narcissus' last stand90.58
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT40.57
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 201650.56
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test70.55
(44) Associative LIMIT80.55
(5) Daedalus Test80.53
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 201650.53
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment150.52
(10) Genius Association Test110.52
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 250.50
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011100.49
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010130.48
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004130.47
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 201090.47
(25) The Sargasso Test120.46
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 201670.45
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 201650.45
(28) The Test To End All Tests100.44
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test120.43
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004130.43
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree40.41
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008160.41
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5160.40
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 201640.39
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3140.37
(24) Reason - Revision 2008160.32
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree80.30
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude110.29
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010110.25
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 490.21
(68) Numbers60.19
(29) Words40.09
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 55-0.08
(104) The Final Test - Revision 201314-0.11
(50) Qoymans Automatic Test #23-0.41

Weighted average of correlations: 0.521

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.72

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 3 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Correlation of Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version with tests by others

(Test index) Test name n r
(235) Nonverbal Cognitive Performance Examination31.00
(231) Mysterium Entrance Exam40.98
(239) Titan Test40.78
(248) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version)50.71
(220) Cattell Culture Fair40.28
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests16-0.01
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I5-0.14
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II3-0.94
(246) Sequentia Numerica Form I3-1.00

Weighted average of correlations: 0.171

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 3 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Please be aware that correlations with these external tests are in most cases affected (depressed, typically) by one or more of the following: (1) Little overlap with the object test because of the much lower ceilings and inherent ceiling effects of the tests used in regular psychology; (2) Candidates reporting scores selectively, for instance only the higher ones while withholding lower ones; (3) Candidates reporting, or having been reported by psychometricians, incorrect scores.

Estimated loadings of Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version 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.

Typeg loading of Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version on that type
Verbal0.70
Numerical0.72
Spatial0.73
Logical0.67
Heterogeneous0.71

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

Balanced g loading = 0.71

National medians for Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version

Country n median score
Canada212.8
Germany311.5
Spain211.3
Greece27.0
United_States82.0

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 On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version

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

Correlation of Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version with personal details

Personalia n r
Observed associative horizon40.99
P.S.I.A. Introverted90.34
Observed behaviour80.32
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes30.31
P.S.I.A. Rational90.28
Educational level290.24
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor130.23
P.S.I.A. Rare90.23
P.S.I.A. Cold90.17
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor130.17
P.S.I.A. True90.12
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid90.08
Sex300.07
P.S.I.A. Orderly90.00
P.S.I.A. Antisocial9-0.06
P.S.I.A. Cruel9-0.08
Year of birth30-0.08
P.S.I.A. System factor10-0.09
Candidate's self-estimated I.Q.9-0.15
P.S.I.A. Neurotic9-0.17
P.S.I.A. Extreme9-0.18
Mother's educational level29-0.21
Father's educational level27-0.26
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms9-0.27
P.S.I.A. Just9-0.35
Disorders (parents and siblings)28-0.43
Disorders (own)28-0.57

The only significant correlations here are those having to do with disorders.

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)
00.72 (478)NaN (0)
4.50.33 (155)0.81 (239)
9.50.33 (155)0.67 (262)
120.74 (41)0.67 (399)
14.5NaN (0)0.72 (469)
16NaN (0)0.72 (478)

Reliability

Remark: In terms of internal statistics, this test functions as a two-item test (the two barrels) so these reliability values rest solely on the correlation between the two barrels. This is so because each individual item of a barrel has to be solved in order to be admitted to the next item of that barrel, so that computing correlations between individual items is meaningless; any candidate reaching a particular item must have solved all of the previous ones. In addition, the second barrel appears only after exceeding a certain threshold in the first barrel, so that the correlation between the barrels is inflated by the construction of the test. In other words, this high reliability is enforced by the test construction and not a result of item quality. The second barrel serves to provide finer resolution in the higher range of the test.

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
60 to 6419.5
50 to 5420.8
45 to 49410.0
40 to 4432.0
35 to 3946.5
30 to 34311.5
25 to 29812.0
22 to 24113.0
20 or 2112.0
18 or 1910.0
1412.0

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
2008111.0
2009311.0
201019.5
2012110.5
201352.0
201466.3
201520.8
201626.0
201759.5
201832.0

ryear taken × median score = -0.63 (n = 29)

Robustness and overall test quality

Item analysis

Item statistics can not be meaningfully computed due to the construction of the test (see remark above). To detect bad items, answers and comments from candidates are studied. Possible bad items are removed or revised, resulting in a revised version of the test.