Statistics of The Alchemist Test

© Paul Cooijmans

Scores on The Alchemist Test as of 19 September 2022

Contents type: Numerical, logical.   Period: 2014-present

0 ***
2 ***
4 *
7 ***
8 *
9 *
10 ***
11 **
12 **
13 *
14 *
15 **
18 ***
19 ***
20 **
22 *
23 *
25 *
26 *
27 *

Correlation of The Alchemist Test with other mental ability tests

(Test index) Test name n r
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 201070.96
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai)40.95
(114) Dicing with death60.95
(42) The Marathon Test80.93
(119) A Relaxing Test50.93
(260) Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate)40.91
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 200480.91
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 201690.90
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test130.89
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test130.89
(104) The Final Test - Revision 201350.88
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man120.86
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 200490.85
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords70.84
(1) Cartoons of Shock70.84
(36) Reflections In Peroxide170.84
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree190.83
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 201090.83
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism70.82
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test130.82
(48) Narcissus' last stand100.81
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011150.81
(18) The Nemesis Test90.80
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4170.80
(113) The Piper's Test80.80
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree80.78
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016120.77
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test90.76
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test160.75
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3180.75
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 201690.74
(44) Associative LIMIT120.70
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree90.67
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010190.67
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version80.67
(11) Isis Test110.65
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016130.65
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008190.64
(215) Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate)50.64
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5200.63
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016130.63
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5120.61
(28) The Test To End All Tests100.61
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 201340.58
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude170.57
(10) Genius Association Test120.56
(216) Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate)70.54
(25) The Sargasso Test110.54
(35) Only idiots60.46
(5) Daedalus Test120.43
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests140.41
(24) Reason - Revision 2008200.37
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT70.35

Weighted average of correlations: 0.714 (N = 574, weighted sum = 409.99)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.85

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 The Alchemist Test 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 The Alchemist Test on that type
Verbal800.84
Numerical360.87
Spatial510.88
Logical320.63
Heterogeneous2270.86

N = 426

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

Balanced g loading = 0.82

National medians for The Alchemist Test

Country n median score
Canada320.0
China319.0
Korea_South314.0
United_States712.0
Italy39.0
South_Africa28.5

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 The Alchemist Test

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

Correlation of The Alchemist Test with personal details

Personalia n r
Observed associative horizon40.88
Observed behaviour90.71
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 200780.62
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 200780.57
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 200780.43
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 200780.39
Educational level340.34
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 200780.33
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 200780.20
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 200780.17
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 200780.16
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 200780.13
Sex360.13
Year of birth350.10
Father's educational level310.04
Mother's educational level32-0.03
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms6-0.06
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 20078-0.07
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 20078-0.11
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 20078-0.18
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 20078-0.19
Disorders (parents and siblings)33-0.25
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 20078-0.26
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 20078-0.32
Disorders (own)34-0.40

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)
00.85 (574)NaN (0)
60.72 (419)0.63 (59)
120.76 (150)0.82 (364)
180.46 (86)0.84 (439)
30NaN (0)0.85 (574)

Reliability

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
65 to 69111.0
50 to 5412.0
45 to 49112.0
40 to 4429.0
35 to 39423.0
30 to 34618.0
25 to 29912.0
22 to 24416.0
20 or 2114.0
18 or 1937.0
17210.5
1619.0

N = 35

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
201468.5
201539.0
201612.0
201726.0
2018315.0
2019410.0
2020314.0
2021815.0
2022620.0

ryear taken × median score = 0.77 (N = 36)

Robustness and overall test quality

Correlations of sections with total score

Numerical0.90
Logical0.92

Correlations between sections (internal consistency versus profile information)

Numerical × Logical0.67

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.

Numerical

ScoreProp.# scores (* = 1 score)
00.042 (0.083) ***
20.153 (0.222) *****
30.250 (0.278) **
40.292 (0.306) *
50.347 (0.389) ***
60.417 (0.444) **
70.472 (0.500) **
80.556 (0.611) ****
90.694 (0.778) ******
100.806 (0.833) **
120.889 (0.944) ****
130.958 (0.972) *
140.986 (1.000) *

Logical

ScoreProp.# scores (* = 1 score)
00.083 (0.167) ******
10.194 (0.222) **
20.278 (0.333) ****
30.347 (0.361) *
40.389 (0.417) **
50.472 (0.528) ****
60.542 (0.556) *
70.583 (0.611) **
90.653 (0.694) ***
100.736 (0.778) ***
110.833 (0.889) ****
120.917 (0.944) **
130.958 (0.972) *
140.986 (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.