0 | **** |
3 | * |
4 | * |
4.5 | ** |
5 | * |
6 | *** |
6.5 | * |
7 | *** |
7.5 | *** |
8 | ***** |
8.5 | ** |
9 | ***** |
9.5 | ** |
10 | ***** |
10.5 | **** |
11 | ********** |
11.5 | * |
12 | *********** |
13 | ************ |
13.5 | ** |
14 | ********* |
14.5 | ** |
15 | ****** |
15.5 | ** |
16 | **** |
16.5 | *** |
17 | ************* |
18 | ****** |
18.5 | * |
19 | *** |
20 | * |
20.5 | * |
21 | * |
21.5 | * |
22.5 | * |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
Association and Analogies (German) | 4 | 0.99 |
European I.Q. Test | 5 | 0.95 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 58 | 0.94 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 81 | 0.91 |
Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 8 | 0.90 |
Long Test For Genius | 14 | 0.86 |
Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 5 | 0.86 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 17 | 0.85 |
Narcissus' last stand | 13 | 0.85 |
The Alchemist Test | 9 | 0.85 |
The Marathon Test | 16 | 0.84 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 23 | 0.84 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 20 | 0.83 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.82 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 15 | 0.82 |
Advanced Intelligence Test (Randy Myers) | 4 | 0.82 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.80 |
Only idiots | 4 | 0.79 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 22 | 0.78 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 13 | 0.77 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 22 | 0.76 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 39 | 0.74 |
Cartoons of Shock | 28 | 0.73 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 41 | 0.73 |
The Piper's Test | 4 | 0.73 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.72 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 19 | 0.72 |
Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 18 | 0.70 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 20 | 0.69 |
Dicing with death | 5 | 0.68 |
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 15 | 0.67 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 23 | 0.67 |
A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 16 | 0.67 |
Psychometric Qrosswords | 9 | 0.66 |
The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 9 | 0.66 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 49 | 0.65 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 6 | 0.65 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.65 |
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 13 | 0.64 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 23 | 0.64 |
The Blue Test (Andres Gomez Emilsson) | 4 | 0.64 |
The Test To End All Tests | 27 | 0.64 |
The Nemesis Test | 18 | 0.63 |
Associative LIMIT | 33 | 0.63 |
Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 18 | 0.63 |
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 15 | 0.61 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 36 | 0.60 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 19 | 0.60 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 36 | 0.57 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 25 | 0.56 |
The Final Test | 25 | 0.55 |
A Relaxing Test | 4 | 0.55 |
Qoymans Automatic Test #3 | 4 | 0.55 |
The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 10 | 0.55 |
Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 7 | 0.54 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 36 | 0.52 |
Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 15 | 0.51 |
Numbers | 16 | 0.49 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 114 | 0.49 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 | 7 | 0.48 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 12 | 0.47 |
Bonsai Test | 10 | 0.47 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version) | 8 | 0.47 |
Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 61 | 0.45 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 13 | 0.43 |
Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 10 | 0.42 |
KIT Intelligence Test - first attempts | 7 | 0.41 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 18 | 0.41 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 17 | 0.41 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 31 | 0.40 |
The Sargasso Test | 25 | 0.39 |
Tests by Paul Laurent Miranda (aggregate) | 5 | 0.39 |
Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 8 | 0.39 |
Genius Association Test | 43 | 0.39 |
Test of Shock and Awe | 9 | 0.39 |
Reason | 20 | 0.36 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 19 | 0.36 |
Isis Test | 26 | 0.35 |
The LAW - Letters And Words | 7 | 0.35 |
Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg) | 6 | 0.29 |
Letters | 8 | 0.29 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 12 | 0.28 |
Logima Strictica 24 (Robert Lato) | 8 | 0.27 |
916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 11 | 0.26 |
Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 46 | 0.25 |
Odds | 9 | 0.23 |
Words | 9 | 0.21 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 11 | 0.21 |
Short Test For Genius | 4 | 0.19 |
Spatial Insight Test | 8 | 0.13 |
Test of Inductive Reasoning / J.C.T.I. (Xavier Jouve) | 9 | 0.10 |
Labyrinthine LIMIT | 9 | 0.10 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 11 | 0.06 |
Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 13 | 0.03 |
Concep-T (Laurent Dubois) | 5 | 0.02 |
Daedalus Test | 13 | -0.02 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 16 | -0.03 |
Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 6 | -0.07 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam II (Jonathan Wai) | 9 | -0.08 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test | 5 | -0.11 |
Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 7 | -0.15 |
Scholastic Aptitude Test (old) | 4 | -0.17 |
Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 4 | -0.18 |
Cattell Verbal (also known as Cattell B) | 4 | -0.21 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 10 | -0.25 |
G-test (Nikos Lygeros) | 5 | -0.34 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 4 | -0.58 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.548 (N = 1822)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.74
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.
Type | n | g loading of Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 394 | 0.70 |
Numerical | 134 | 0.73 |
Spatial | 137 | 0.76 |
Logical | 83 | 0.56 |
Heterogeneous | 461 | 0.77 |
N = 1209
Balanced g loading = 0.70
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Greece | 4 | 15.5 |
Germany | 8 | 15.0 |
Canada | 4 | 14.5 |
Norway | 4 | 14.5 |
Sweden | 7 | 14.0 |
Italy | 5 | 13.0 |
Korea_South | 3 | 13.0 |
United_Kingdom | 7 | 13.0 |
Netherlands | 5 | 12.0 |
Australia | 5 | 11.0 |
United_States | 33 | 11.0 |
Spain | 5 | 10.5 |
Finland | 6 | 10.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.41 |
PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.41 |
PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.40 |
PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.35 |
Observed associative horizon | 9 | 0.34 |
PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.34 |
PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.34 |
PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.33 |
PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.32 |
PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.29 |
PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.28 |
PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.23 |
PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.20 |
Sex | 132 | 0.19 |
Educational level | 124 | 0.18 |
Observed behaviour | 27 | 0.16 |
Mother's educational level | 122 | 0.10 |
Year of birth | 132 | 0.09 |
Father's educational level | 120 | 0.07 |
PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 15 | -0.03 |
PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 15 | -0.05 |
Disorders (own) | 125 | -0.06 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 123 | -0.28 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 25 | -0.30 |
PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 15 | -0.35 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 9 | -0.78 |
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 these values to be lower than the test's full-range g loading.
Below 1st quartile | 0.62 (391) |
---|---|
Below median | 0.73 (1043) |
Above median | 0.52 (938) |
Above 3rd quartile | 0.52 (435) |
Age class | n | Median score |
---|---|---|
60 to 64 | 2 | 8.0 |
55 to 59 | 6 | 12.0 |
50 to 54 | 6 | 8.8 |
45 to 49 | 12 | 11.0 |
40 to 44 | 13 | 11.0 |
35 to 39 | 15 | 13.0 |
30 to 34 | 19 | 13.0 |
25 to 29 | 26 | 13.3 |
22 to 24 | 17 | 16.5 |
20 or 21 | 3 | 13.0 |
18 or 19 | 7 | 13.0 |
17 | 4 | 10.3 |
16 | 2 | 12.3 |
N = 132
Year taken | n | median score |
---|---|---|
2004 | 14 | 14.3 |
2005 | 18 | 12.0 |
2006 | 10 | 16.8 |
2007 | 13 | 11.0 |
2008 | 7 | 13.0 |
2009 | 6 | 15.0 |
2010 | 9 | 13.0 |
2011 | 12 | 11.8 |
2012 | 5 | 12.0 |
2013 | 4 | 12.5 |
2014 | 10 | 11.0 |
2015 | 16 | 11.5 |
2016 | 4 | 15.8 |
2017 | 2 | 14.5 |
2019 | 1 | 12.0 |
2020 | 1 | 13.0 |
2021 | 1 | 15.0 |
ryear taken × median score = -0.00 (N = 133)
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.