Contents type: Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical. Period: 2022-present
| 0 | **** |
| 1 | * |
| 3 | * |
| 4 | * |
| 5 | ** |
| 6 | *** |
| 7 | ** |
| 8 | * |
| 11 | ** |
| 12 | * |
| 13 | * |
| 18 | * |
| 19 | * |
| 21 | * |
| 22 | * |
| 23 | * |
| 27 | * |
| Test name | n | r | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 4 | 0.90 | 0.12 |
| The Smell Test | 16 | 0.88 | 0.0006 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 5 | 0.88 | 0.08 |
| Gliaweb Recycled Intelligence Test | 7 | 0.88 | 0.03 |
| The Piper's Test | 18 | 0.87 | 0.0003 |
| Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 8 | 0.86 | 0.02 |
| The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 4 | 0.85 | 0.14 |
| Dicing with death | 13 | 0.84 | 0.004 |
| Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 7 | 0.83 | 0.04 |
| Divine Psychometry (Matthew Scillitani) | 10 | 0.82 | 0.01 |
| Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 10 | 0.81 | 0.02 |
| Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 8 | 0.81 | 0.03 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 6 | 0.81 | 0.07 |
| Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 19 | 0.80 | 0.0008 |
| A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 17 | 0.79 | 0.002 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 19 | 0.79 | 0.0008 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the fourth degree | 4 | 0.78 | 0.17 |
| Test of the Beheaded Man | 19 | 0.77 | 0.001 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 15 | 0.77 | 0.004 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 19 | 0.77 | 0.001 |
| The Sargasso Test | 19 | 0.76 | 0.001 |
| Narcissus' last stand | 14 | 0.76 | 0.006 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 15 | 0.76 | 0.005 |
| The Marathon Test | 13 | 0.76 | 0.009 |
| Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 16 | 0.76 | 0.003 |
| Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 14 | 0.75 | 0.007 |
| Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 16 | 0.74 | 0.004 |
| The Gate | 10 | 0.74 | 0.03 |
| The Nemesis Test | 17 | 0.73 | 0.004 |
| The Test To End All Tests | 12 | 0.70 | 0.02 |
| Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 11 | 0.68 | 0.03 |
| Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 10 | 0.68 | 0.04 |
| Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 16 | 0.67 | 0.01 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 16 | 0.66 | 0.01 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 21 | 0.65 | 0.004 |
| Numerologica (Andrei Udriște) | 4 | 0.64 | 0.27 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 15 | 0.64 | 0.02 |
| The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 18 | 0.64 | 0.009 |
| Psychometric Qrosswords | 9 | 0.64 | 0.07 |
| Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 17 | 0.63 | 0.01 |
| Associative LIMIT | 13 | 0.60 | 0.04 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 6 | 0.59 | 0.19 |
| Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 15 | 0.58 | 0.03 |
| Genius Association Test | 13 | 0.57 | 0.05 |
| A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 13 | 0.57 | 0.05 |
| Reflections In Peroxide | 17 | 0.56 | 0.02 |
| Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 15 | 0.56 | 0.04 |
| Labyrinthine LIMIT | 12 | 0.54 | 0.07 |
| Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 16 | 0.53 | 0.04 |
| Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 5 | 0.52 | 0.30 |
| Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 17 | 0.49 | 0.05 |
| The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 16 | 0.45 | 0.08 |
| De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 5 | 0.45 | 0.37 |
| Isis Test | 13 | 0.43 | 0.13 |
| Miscellaneous tests | 9 | 0.42 | 0.25 |
| Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 5 | 0.40 | 0.42 |
| Reason - Revision 2008 | 15 | 0.36 | 0.17 |
| Daedalus Test | 12 | 0.34 | 0.27 |
| Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 6 | 0.20 | 0.66 |
| De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 5 | 0.16 | 0.74 |
| Strict Logic Sequences Examination I (Jonathan Wai) | 4 | -0.10 | 0.87 |
Weighted mean of correlations: 0.667 (N = 743)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.82
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.
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 Only idiots on that type |
|---|---|---|
| Verbal | 89 | 0.83 |
| Numerical | 44 | 0.80 |
| Spatial | 57 | 0.79 |
| Logical | 27 | 0.59 |
| Heterogeneous | 369 | 0.84 |
N = 586
Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.
Balanced g loading = 0.77
| Country | n | median score |
|---|---|---|
| United_States | 6 | 6.5 |
Total number of countries: 16
For reasons of privacy, only countries with 3 or more candidates are included in this table. Ranking is based on the medians, and then alphabetic.
Notice: A correlation is generally considered significant if its p value is 0.05 or less.
| Personalia | n | r | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observed behaviour | 6 | 0.92 | 0.04 |
| PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.64 | 0.07 |
| PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.43 | 0.22 |
| Educational level | 22 | 0.35 | 0.11 |
| PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.26 | 0.46 |
| PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.14 | 0.68 |
| PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.13 | 0.71 |
| PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.12 | 0.74 |
| PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.12 | 0.74 |
| PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.07 | 0.84 |
| PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.05 | 0.90 |
| PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.04 | 0.92 |
| Disorders (parents and siblings) | 21 | -0.04 | 0.87 |
| Year of birth | 25 | -0.12 | 0.54 |
| PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.16 | 0.64 |
| PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.19 | 0.60 |
| Father's educational level | 19 | -0.21 | 0.38 |
| Mother's educational level | 19 | -0.24 | 0.30 |
| PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.25 | 0.48 |
| PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.27 | 0.44 |
| Disorders (own) | 23 | -0.28 | 0.19 |
| Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 6 | -0.36 | 0.42 |
| Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 7 | -0.40 | 0.34 |
| PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.40 | 0.26 |
The goal of estimated g factor loadings for restricted ranges 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 (4.0) | 0.71 (N = 170) |
|---|---|
| Below median (7.0) | 0.71 (N = 379) |
| Above median (7.0) | 0.76 (N = 392) |
| Above 3rd quartile (13.0) | 0.65 (N = 174) |
| Age class | n | Median score |
|---|---|---|
| 70 to 74 | 1 | 6.0 |
| 60 to 64 | 1 | 19.0 |
| 55 to 59 | 1 | 8.0 |
| 50 to 54 | 1 | 0.0 |
| 45 to 49 | 2 | 17.5 |
| 40 to 44 | 6 | 12.0 |
| 35 to 39 | 1 | 13.0 |
| 30 to 34 | 4 | 6.5 |
| 25 to 29 | 3 | 5.0 |
| 22 to 24 | 2 | 8.0 |
| 20 or 21 | 2 | 3.5 |
| 18 or 19 | 1 | 7.0 |
N = 25
| Year taken | n | Median score | protonorm |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 11 | 6.0 | 390 |
| 2023 | 4 | 6.0 | 390 |
| 2024 | 3 | 1.0 | 320 |
| 2025 | 3 | 11.0 | 431 |
| 2026 | 4 | 19.5 | 547 |
N = 25
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.