0 | * |
21 | ** |
24 | * |
40 | * |
42 | * |
43 | * |
46 | * |
52 | * |
56 | * |
62.6 | * |
64 | * |
65 | * |
65.4 | * |
66 | * |
67 | * |
68.5 | * |
73 | * |
74.5 | * |
78 | * |
79 | * |
80 | ** |
81 | * |
88 | * |
89 | * |
90 | * |
91 | * |
92 | * |
95 | * |
97 | * |
100.4 | * |
101 | * |
105 | * |
108 | * |
109 | * |
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(118) Divine Psychometry | 5 | 0.96 |
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords | 8 | 0.95 |
(48) Narcissus' last stand | 12 | 0.95 |
(20) De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 4 | 0.94 |
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 9 | 0.93 |
(107) The Alchemist Test | 8 | 0.93 |
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 9 | 0.93 |
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 13 | 0.93 |
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 35 | 0.93 |
(28) The Test To End All Tests | 15 | 0.92 |
(36) Reflections In Peroxide | 13 | 0.92 |
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 36 | 0.92 |
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man | 15 | 0.91 |
(1) Cartoons of Shock | 10 | 0.91 |
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 36 | 0.91 |
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 11 | 0.89 |
(113) The Piper's Test | 7 | 0.89 |
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 15 | 0.88 |
(7) The Final Test | 8 | 0.88 |
(104) The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 6 | 0.87 |
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 9 | 0.84 |
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 36 | 0.84 |
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 14 | 0.83 |
(44) Associative LIMIT | 15 | 0.83 |
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.83 |
(114) Dicing with death | 8 | 0.83 |
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 15 | 0.83 |
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 14 | 0.83 |
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 14 | 0.82 |
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 7 | 0.81 |
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 9 | 0.80 |
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 17 | 0.80 |
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 11 | 0.79 |
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment | 14 | 0.79 |
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 8 | 0.79 |
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 14 | 0.79 |
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 18 | 0.79 |
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.78 |
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 22 | 0.74 |
(25) The Sargasso Test | 16 | 0.74 |
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 11 | 0.73 |
(18) The Nemesis Test | 14 | 0.72 |
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 11 | 0.72 |
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 12 | 0.71 |
(10) Genius Association Test | 15 | 0.70 |
(11) Isis Test | 11 | 0.68 |
(15) Letters | 5 | 0.67 |
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words | 5 | 0.63 |
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 5 | 0.61 |
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 11 | 0.60 |
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 8 | 0.58 |
(29) Words | 7 | 0.58 |
(24) Reason - Revision 2008 | 14 | 0.56 |
(5) Daedalus Test | 10 | 0.49 |
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT | 5 | 0.44 |
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 5 | -0.24 |
(82) Reason | 4 | -0.40 |
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 4 | -0.88 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.792 (N = 717, weighted sum = 567.86)
Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.89
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version | 4 | 0.97 |
(231) Mysterium Entrance Exam | 4 | 0.89 |
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I | 8 | 0.69 |
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 | 5 | 0.61 |
(225) Logima Strictica 36 | 6 | 0.33 |
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 4 | 0.19 |
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 15 | -0.01 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.402 (N = 46, weighted sum = 18.51)
Please be aware that correlations with these external tests are in most cases affected (depressed, typically) by one or more of the following: (1) Little overlap with the object test because of the much lower ceilings and inherent ceiling effects of the tests used in regular psychology; (2) Candidates reporting scores selectively, for instance only the higher ones while withholding lower ones; (3) Candidates reporting, or having been reported by psychometricians, incorrect scores.
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 The Marathon Test on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 150 | 0.89 |
Numerical | 53 | 0.94 |
Spatial | 80 | 0.90 |
Logical | 28 | 0.63 |
Heterogeneous | 246 | 0.89 |
N = 557
Balanced g loading = 0.85
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Spain | 2 | 102.5 |
India | 2 | 79.5 |
United_Kingdom | 2 | 75.5 |
Germany | 3 | 67.0 |
Canada | 3 | 62.6 |
Finland | 2 | 59.0 |
United_States | 8 | 55.7 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.77 |
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.74 |
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.65 |
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.56 |
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.50 |
Observed behaviour | 6 | 0.47 |
Educational level | 36 | 0.41 |
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.39 |
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.28 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 8 | 0.28 |
Sex | 36 | 0.09 |
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.08 |
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.07 |
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.00 |
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.02 |
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.05 |
Mother's educational level | 35 | -0.05 |
Year of birth | 36 | -0.11 |
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.16 |
Father's educational level | 34 | -0.18 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 35 | -0.21 |
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.30 |
Disorders (own) | 35 | -0.32 |
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.40 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 6 | -0.71 |
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 score | Upward g (N) | Downward g (N) |
---|---|---|
0 | 0.89 (717) | NaN (0) |
38 | 0.82 (575) | 0.83 (32) |
56 | 0.71 (447) | 0.83 (208) |
74 | 0.63 (311) | 0.84 (337) |
83 | 0.67 (171) | 0.88 (460) |
92 | 0.70 (78) | 0.88 (576) |
111 | NaN (0) | 0.89 (717) |
This reliability is computed from the three subtest reliabilities using a form of the Spearman-Brown formula. The sheer length of the test contributes to its very high reliability, which in turn enables the high g loading.
Further internal statistics are reported on subtest level (Numerical, Spatial, and Verbal sections).