Contents type: Spatial. Period: 2004-2026
| 0 | ** |
| 2 | * |
| 3 | * |
| 4 | ** |
| 5.5 | * |
| 7 | ** |
| 9 | ** |
| 10 | * |
| 11 | ***** |
| 12 | ** |
| 13 | ** |
| 13.5 | * |
| 14 | ****** |
| 15 | ********** |
| 16 | ********** |
| 17 | ******* |
| 17.5 | * |
| 18 | ********* |
| 19 | ************** |
| 19.5 | * |
| 20 | ******************* |
| 21 | ********** |
| 22 | ****** |
| 23 | * |
| 24 | ****** |
| 25 | ** |
| 26 | * |
| 27 | *** |
| 28 | *** |
| 29 | * |
n = 127
| 0 | ** |
| 2 | * |
| 4 | ** |
| 5.5 | * |
| 7 | * |
| 9 | ** |
| 10 | * |
| 11 | ***** |
| 12 | ** |
| 13 | ** |
| 13.5 | * |
| 14 | ****** |
| 15 | ********** |
| 16 | ********** |
| 17 | ******* |
| 17.5 | * |
| 18 | ********* |
| 19 | ************ |
| 19.5 | * |
| 20 | ******************* |
| 21 | ********** |
| 22 | ***** |
| 23 | * |
| 24 | ****** |
| 25 | ** |
| 26 | * |
| 27 | *** |
| 28 | *** |
| 29 | * |
n = 5
| 3 | * |
| 7 | * |
| 19 | ** |
| 22 | * |
| Test name | n | r | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cooijmans On-Line Test | 4 | 0.98 | 0.09 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the fourth degree | 4 | 0.96 | 0.10 |
| The Marathon Test - Revision 2024 | 4 | 0.96 | 0.10 |
| Advanced Intelligence Test (Randy Myers) | 4 | 0.96 | 0.10 |
| Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 4 | 0.95 | 0.10 |
| Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg) | 4 | 0.90 | 0.12 |
| Cartoons of Shock | 26 | 0.90 | 0.000007 |
| Association and Analogies (German) | 4 | 0.86 | 0.13 |
| Narcissus' last stand | 25 | 0.85 | 0.00003 |
| Reflections In Peroxide | 32 | 0.82 | 0.000005 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 33 | 0.79 | 0.000007 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 17 | 0.79 | 0.002 |
| Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 42 | 0.79 | 0.0000004 |
| Gliaweb Recycled Intelligence Test | 8 | 0.79 | 0.04 |
| Bonsai Test | 8 | 0.78 | 0.04 |
| Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 34 | 0.78 | 0.000008 |
| Test of Inductive Reasoning / J.C.T.I. (Xavier Jouve) | 12 | 0.76 | 0.01 |
| Labyrinthine LIMIT | 36 | 0.76 | 0.000007 |
| Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 35 | 0.76 | 0.000009 |
| Spatial Insight Test | 11 | 0.75 | 0.02 |
| The Test To End All Tests | 33 | 0.75 | 0.00002 |
| Test of the Beheaded Man | 40 | 0.74 | 0.000003 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 32 | 0.73 | 0.00005 |
| Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 43 | 0.73 | 0.000002 |
| Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 13 | 0.73 | 0.01 |
| Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 52 | 0.72 | 0.0000002 |
| Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 18 | 0.71 | 0.004 |
| Associative LIMIT | 90 | 0.70 | 0.00000000005 |
| Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 35 | 0.69 | 0.00006 |
| Retro-actively constructed heterogeneous test 6SIT+QMC4 | 10 | 0.69 | 0.04 |
| Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 26 | 0.68 | 0.0007 |
| De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 4 | 0.68 | 0.25 |
| The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 36 | 0.68 | 0.00005 |
| The Marathon Test | 25 | 0.67 | 0.0010 |
| International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 12 | 0.67 | 0.03 |
| Divine Psychometry (Matthew Scillitani) | 14 | 0.67 | 0.02 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 37 | 0.67 | 0.00006 |
| The Final Test | 22 | 0.66 | 0.002 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 40 | 0.66 | 0.00004 |
| Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 12 | 0.66 | 0.03 |
| Odds | 8 | 0.65 | 0.08 |
| Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 52 | 0.65 | 0.000003 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 20 | 0.65 | 0.005 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 56 | 0.64 | 0.000002 |
| Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 18 | 0.62 | 0.01 |
| Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 8 | 0.61 | 0.10 |
| The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 27 | 0.61 | 0.002 |
| Psychometric Qrosswords | 16 | 0.61 | 0.02 |
| Letters | 7 | 0.60 | 0.14 |
| Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 61 | 0.60 | 0.000003 |
| Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 (batch scored by Paul Cooijmans) | 5 | 0.59 | 0.25 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 33 | 0.58 | 0.001 |
| Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 27 | 0.58 | 0.003 |
| Reason - Revision 2008 | 52 | 0.58 | 0.00004 |
| Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 52 | 0.58 | 0.00004 |
| 916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 11 | 0.57 | 0.07 |
| Dicing with death | 21 | 0.56 | 0.01 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 38 | 0.56 | 0.0007 |
| The Nemesis Test | 35 | 0.56 | 0.001 |
| Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 18 | 0.55 | 0.02 |
| Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 36 | 0.55 | 0.001 |
| Tests by Paul Laurent Miranda (aggregate) | 6 | 0.55 | 0.22 |
| Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 18 | 0.54 | 0.03 |
| Only idiots | 17 | 0.53 | 0.03 |
| Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 6 | 0.53 | 0.25 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 23 | 0.52 | 0.01 |
| The Gate | 12 | 0.51 | 0.09 |
| Numerologica (Andrei Udriște) | 6 | 0.51 | 0.26 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 45 | 0.50 | 0.0009 |
| The Piper's Test | 21 | 0.50 | 0.03 |
| The LAW - Letters And Words | 7 | 0.50 | 0.22 |
| A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 16 | 0.49 | 0.06 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 48 | 0.49 | 0.0008 |
| Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 22 | 0.49 | 0.03 |
| Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 12 | 0.49 | 0.11 |
| Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 27 | 0.49 | 0.01 |
| Long Test For Genius | 9 | 0.48 | 0.17 |
| A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 36 | 0.48 | 0.004 |
| The Sargasso Test | 46 | 0.48 | 0.001 |
| Miscellaneous tests | 48 | 0.48 | 0.001 |
| The Smell Test | 14 | 0.48 | 0.08 |
| The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 13 | 0.48 | 0.10 |
| Strict Logic Sequences Examination I (Jonathan Wai) | 25 | 0.45 | 0.03 |
| Logicaus Strictimanus 24 (Robert Lato) | 12 | 0.44 | 0.14 |
| Gliaweb Raadselachtig Analogieproefwerk | 6 | 0.42 | 0.36 |
| Numbers | 14 | 0.42 | 0.13 |
| Daedalus Test | 37 | 0.40 | 0.02 |
| Strict Logic Spatial Examination 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 17 | 0.40 | 0.11 |
| Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 10 | 0.39 | 0.25 |
| Mega Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 4 | 0.39 | 0.50 |
| Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 13 | 0.39 | 0.17 |
| Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 10 | 0.38 | 0.26 |
| The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 14 | 0.38 | 0.17 |
| Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version) | 6 | 0.36 | 0.42 |
| Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 10 | 0.35 | 0.30 |
| Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 16 | 0.35 | 0.18 |
| Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 26 | 0.34 | 0.09 |
| Words | 8 | 0.33 | 0.37 |
| Genius Association Test | 90 | 0.33 | 0.002 |
| Isis Test | 32 | 0.32 | 0.08 |
| Reason | 21 | 0.31 | 0.16 |
| Tests by Xavier Jouve, other than those listed separately (aggregate) | 8 | 0.30 | 0.42 |
| Test of Shock and Awe | 9 | 0.29 | 0.40 |
| Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 18 | 0.28 | 0.26 |
| Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 7 | 0.25 | 0.52 |
| Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 8 | 0.19 | 0.62 |
| Tests by Iakovos Koukas (aggregate) | 6 | 0.18 | 0.68 |
| Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 12 | 0.17 | 0.57 |
| De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 4 | 0.12 | 0.84 |
| Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate) | 7 | 0.11 | 0.78 |
| Cattell Culture Fair | 9 | 0.03 | 0.92 |
| Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 11 | 0.01 | 0.97 |
| Analogies #1 | 4 | -0.08 | 0.90 |
| Strict Logic Sequences Examination II (Jonathan Wai) | 8 | -0.09 | 0.81 |
| Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 8 | -0.23 | 0.54 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 | 4 | -0.27 | 0.64 |
| The Psychodrome | 5 | -0.38 | 0.44 |
| Tests by Arne Andre Gangvik (aggregate) | 4 | -0.53 | 0.36 |
| Tests by Nicolas Elenas (aggregate) | 5 | -0.68 | 0.17 |
| Concep-T (Laurent Dubois) | 5 | -0.70 | 0.16 |
| The Blue Test (Andres Gomez Emilsson) | 4 | -0.76 | 0.18 |
Weighted mean of correlations: 0.562 (N = 2511)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.75
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 Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test on that type |
|---|---|---|
| Verbal | 444 | 0.71 |
| Numerical | 164 | 0.75 |
| Spatial | 245 | 0.74 |
| Logical | 126 | 0.71 |
| Heterogeneous | 919 | 0.74 |
N = 1898
Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.
Balanced g loading = 0.73
| Country | n | median score |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 3 | 25.0 |
| Poland | 3 | 21.0 |
| Sweden | 8 | 21.0 |
| Korea_South | 5 | 20.0 |
| United_Kingdom | 3 | 20.0 |
| Australia | 3 | 19.0 |
| Germany | 7 | 19.0 |
| China | 4 | 18.5 |
| Canada | 9 | 18.0 |
| Finland | 8 | 18.0 |
| Spain | 5 | 18.0 |
| Greece | 5 | 16.0 |
| United_States | 33 | 15.0 |
| Italy | 6 | 14.5 |
Total number of countries: 36
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 associative horizon | 9 | 0.47 | 0.18 |
| PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 31 | 0.35 | 0.06 |
| PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 31 | 0.24 | 0.18 |
| PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 31 | 0.22 | 0.24 |
| Sex | 132 | 0.13 | 0.15 |
| Observed behaviour | 33 | 0.13 | 0.48 |
| Year of birth | 132 | 0.07 | 0.40 |
| Mother's educational level | 118 | 0.06 | 0.52 |
| PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 31 | 0.05 | 0.76 |
| PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 31 | 0.05 | 0.78 |
| Father's educational level | 115 | 0.03 | 0.78 |
| Educational level | 125 | -0.00 | 1.00 |
| PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.05 | 0.78 |
| PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.06 | 0.76 |
| PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.07 | 0.68 |
| PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.10 | 0.60 |
| PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.11 | 0.52 |
| PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.16 | 0.37 |
| PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.19 | 0.30 |
| Disorders (own) | 125 | -0.19 | 0.03 |
| Disorders (parents and siblings) | 123 | -0.21 | 0.02 |
| PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.21 | 0.25 |
| PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.25 | 0.16 |
| Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 27 | -0.29 | 0.13 |
| PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 31 | -0.37 | 0.05 |
| Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 18 | -0.67 | 0.006 |
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 (15.0) | 0.76 (N = 742) |
|---|---|
| Below median (19.0) | 0.75 (N = 1576) |
| Above median (19.0) | 0.55 (N = 1193) |
| Above 3rd quartile (20.5) | 0.52 (N = 613) |
| Age class | n | Median score |
|---|---|---|
| 70 to 74 | 1 | 14.0 |
| 65 to 69 | 1 | 14.0 |
| 55 to 59 | 2 | 16.5 |
| 50 to 54 | 5 | 15.0 |
| 45 to 49 | 7 | 18.0 |
| 40 to 44 | 17 | 19.0 |
| 35 to 39 | 12 | 18.5 |
| 30 to 34 | 21 | 17.0 |
| 25 to 29 | 29 | 19.0 |
| 22 to 24 | 14 | 19.0 |
| 20 or 21 | 13 | 18.0 |
| 18 or 19 | 5 | 21.0 |
| 17 | 2 | 15.5 |
| 16 | 3 | 13.5 |
N = 132
| Year taken | n | Median score | protonorm |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 11 | 19.0 | 420 |
| 2005 | 7 | 18.0 | 403 |
| 2006 | 11 | 20.0 | 449 |
| 2007 | 9 | 20.0 | 449 |
| 2008 | 7 | 21.0 | 478 |
| 2009 | 2 | 21.5 | 486 |
| 2010 | 4 | 16.3 | 382 |
| 2011 | 7 | 19.0 | 420 |
| 2012 | 2 | 18.0 | 403 |
| 2013 | 2 | 18.0 | 403 |
| 2014 | 4 | 16.5 | 382 |
| 2015 | 7 | 13.0 | 345 |
| 2016 | 2 | 10.5 | 324 |
| 2017 | 4 | 13.5 | 348 |
| 2018 | 9 | 20.0 | 449 |
| 2019 | 7 | 16.0 | 378 |
| 2020 | 9 | 17.0 | 386 |
| 2021 | 9 | 18.0 | 403 |
| 2022 | 5 | 20.0 | 449 |
| 2023 | 1 | 19.0 | 420 |
| 2024 | 8 | 19.5 | 435 |
| 2025 | 3 | 20.0 | 449 |
| 2026 | 2 | 10.5 | 324 |
N = 132
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.