52 | ** |
60 | * |
69 | * |
71 | * |
72 | ** |
74 | * |
75 | ** |
77 | *** |
78 | * |
79 | *** |
81 | ** |
82 | * |
84 | * |
86 | **** |
87 | ***** |
89 | * |
90 | **** |
91 | ** |
92 | * |
93 | ** |
94 | *** |
95 | ** |
96 | * |
97 | ** |
98 | ** |
99 | ** |
101 | * |
102 | ** |
103 | * |
104 | * |
106 | * |
107 | * |
108 | * |
110 | * |
113 | * |
114 | * |
118 | ** |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
The Nemesis Test | 4 | 0.93 |
Test of Shock and Awe | 4 | 0.90 |
Genius Association Test | 9 | 0.85 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 (batch scored by Paul Cooijmans) | 8 | 0.78 |
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 15 | 0.76 |
Analogies #1 | 9 | 0.76 |
Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 15 | 0.73 |
Long Test For Genius | 14 | 0.72 |
Cartoons of Shock | 4 | 0.69 |
The Final Test | 16 | 0.69 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 24 | 0.64 |
The Test To End All Tests | 8 | 0.61 |
Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg) | 8 | 0.52 |
Scholastic Aptitude Test (old) | 7 | 0.48 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 6 | 0.45 |
Numbers | 19 | 0.41 |
Miscellaneous tests | 22 | 0.39 |
Short Test For Genius | 10 | 0.38 |
Mega Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 13 | 0.37 |
Omega Contemplative Items Pool (Tommy Smith) | 5 | 0.37 |
Encephalist - R (Xavier Jouve) | 6 | 0.36 |
Bonsai Test | 10 | 0.36 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 7 | 0.31 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 4 | 0.26 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 11 | 0.17 |
Tests by Kevin Langdon (aggregate) | 4 | 0.16 |
Hoeflin Power Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 6 | 0.13 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test | 5 | 0.12 |
W-87 (International Society for Philosophical Enquiry) | 7 | 0.11 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 4 | 0.06 |
European I.Q. Test | 5 | -0.05 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 13 | -0.09 |
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 5 | -0.09 |
Graduate Record Examination | 7 | -0.23 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 4 | -0.27 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 8 | -0.42 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 5 | -0.51 |
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 4 | -0.70 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.395 (N = 335)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.63
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 Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 98 | 0.75 |
Numerical | 19 | 0.64 |
Spatial | 28 | 0.71 |
Logical | 5 | 0.34 |
Heterogeneous | 75 | 0.60 |
N = 225
Balanced g loading = 0.61
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Belgium | 3 | 113.0 |
Canada | 3 | 98.0 |
Finland | 10 | 94.0 |
Netherlands | 4 | 92.0 |
United_Kingdom | 4 | 90.5 |
United_States | 21 | 87.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen, later Lynn and Becker:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
Observed associative horizon | 9 | 0.65 |
Observed behaviour | 15 | 0.50 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 6 | 0.40 |
Mother's educational level | 16 | 0.23 |
Father's educational level | 16 | 0.19 |
Disorders (own) | 18 | 0.01 |
Educational level | 19 | 0.01 |
Sex | 65 | 0.01 |
Year of birth | 59 | -0.14 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 18 | -0.21 |
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 | -0.17 (59) |
---|---|
Below median | 0.50 (179) |
Above median | 0.53 (158) |
Above 3rd quartile | 0.67 (102) |
Age class | n | Median score |
---|---|---|
60 to 64 | 1 | 94.0 |
55 to 59 | 1 | 90.0 |
50 to 54 | 7 | 84.0 |
45 to 49 | 4 | 96.5 |
40 to 44 | 7 | 98.0 |
35 to 39 | 8 | 89.0 |
30 to 34 | 10 | 92.5 |
25 to 29 | 6 | 86.0 |
22 to 24 | 7 | 91.0 |
20 or 21 | 3 | 87.0 |
17 | 2 | 85.5 |
16 | 1 | 75.0 |
N = 57
Year taken | n | median score | protonorm |
---|---|---|---|
1998 | 2 | 99.0 | 496 |
1999 | 13 | 94.0 | 465 |
2000 | 15 | 88.0 | 437 |
2001 | 11 | 91.0 | 451 |
2002 | 8 | 89.5 | 445 |
2003 | 8 | 83.0 | 394 |
2004 | 6 | 74.5 | 377 |
ryear taken × median score = -0.92 (N = 63)
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.