Contents type: Numerical, spatial. Period: 2005-present
0 | * |
6 | * |
12 | ** |
17 | ** |
18 | * |
21 | * |
22 | * |
32 | * |
37 | * |
38 | * |
42 | * |
42.2 | * |
45 | * |
48 | * |
48.5 | * |
54 | ** |
56.2 | * |
58 | * |
59 | * |
61 | ** |
62 | * |
63 | *** |
64 | *** |
66.2 | * |
67 | * |
68 | * |
69 | * |
70 | ** |
71 | * |
72 | * |
74 | ** |
79 | * |
80 | * |
82 | * |
83 | * |
85 | * |
87 | * |
89 | ** |
n = 46
0 | * |
12 | ** |
17 | ** |
18 | * |
21 | * |
22 | * |
32 | * |
37 | * |
38 | * |
42 | * |
42.2 | * |
45 | * |
48 | * |
48.5 | * |
54 | ** |
56.2 | * |
58 | * |
59 | * |
61 | ** |
62 | * |
63 | *** |
64 | *** |
66.2 | * |
67 | * |
69 | * |
70 | ** |
71 | * |
72 | * |
74 | * |
79 | * |
80 | * |
82 | * |
83 | * |
85 | * |
87 | * |
89 | ** |
n = 3
6 | * |
68 | * |
74 | * |
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(113) The Piper's Test | 5 | 0.96 |
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 49 | 0.96 |
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 49 | 0.95 |
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man | 16 | 0.93 |
(42) The Marathon Test | 31 | 0.93 |
(107) The Alchemist Test | 8 | 0.92 |
(48) Narcissus' last stand | 9 | 0.90 |
(7) The Final Test | 7 | 0.89 |
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords | 9 | 0.89 |
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 8 | 0.89 |
(114) Dicing with death | 6 | 0.88 |
(1) Cartoons of Shock | 9 | 0.87 |
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.86 |
(36) Reflections In Peroxide | 12 | 0.85 |
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.83 |
(28) The Test To End All Tests | 12 | 0.82 |
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.81 |
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 16 | 0.79 |
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 14 | 0.78 |
(44) Associative LIMIT | 12 | 0.78 |
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 17 | 0.78 |
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 9 | 0.77 |
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 8 | 0.76 |
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 9 | 0.74 |
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 10 | 0.74 |
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 12 | 0.74 |
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 13 | 0.74 |
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 26 | 0.74 |
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment | 14 | 0.74 |
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 15 | 0.73 |
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.73 |
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 14 | 0.72 |
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 9 | 0.72 |
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 13 | 0.72 |
(18) The Nemesis Test | 13 | 0.71 |
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 17 | 0.71 |
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 31 | 0.70 |
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 10 | 0.70 |
(10) Genius Association Test | 12 | 0.70 |
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 20 | 0.68 |
(11) Isis Test | 12 | 0.64 |
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 8 | 0.64 |
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 8 | 0.63 |
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 14 | 0.63 |
(15) Letters | 4 | 0.61 |
(25) The Sargasso Test | 15 | 0.59 |
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words | 4 | 0.59 |
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 6 | 0.56 |
(24) Reason - Revision 2008 | 15 | 0.55 |
(5) Daedalus Test | 12 | 0.44 |
(29) Words | 6 | 0.27 |
(104) The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 7 | 0.27 |
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 5 | 0.25 |
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT | 6 | 0.23 |
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 4 | -0.09 |
(82) Reason | 4 | -0.35 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.751 (N = 716, weighted sum = 537.40)
Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.87
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.
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version | 5 | 0.87 |
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 4 | 0.77 |
(231) Mysterium Entrance Exam | 4 | 0.70 |
(225) Logima Strictica 36 | 7 | 0.54 |
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 | 8 | 0.37 |
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I | 9 | 0.30 |
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 18 | 0.23 |
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II | 4 | -0.50 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.369 (N = 59, weighted sum = 21.75)
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.
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 Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 134 | 0.82 |
Numerical | 69 | 0.93 |
Spatial | 95 | 0.93 |
Logical | 31 | 0.63 |
Heterogeneous | 234 | 0.87 |
N = 563
Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.
Balanced g loading = 0.83
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Japan | 2 | 86.0 |
Spain | 4 | 77.0 |
United_Kingdom | 2 | 71.5 |
Belgium | 2 | 63.0 |
Germany | 3 | 58.0 |
India | 2 | 55.5 |
Finland | 4 | 50.5 |
Korea_South | 3 | 45.0 |
Canada | 2 | 39.5 |
United_States | 10 | 32.1 |
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 of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.71 |
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.67 |
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.65 |
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.47 |
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.43 |
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.41 |
Educational level | 49 | 0.37 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 5 | 0.33 |
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.30 |
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.29 |
Observed behaviour | 9 | 0.08 |
Sex | 49 | 0.06 |
Mother's educational level | 47 | -0.00 |
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.05 |
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.05 |
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.05 |
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.06 |
Father's educational level | 46 | -0.07 |
Year of birth | 49 | -0.13 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 7 | -0.16 |
Disorders (own) | 48 | -0.29 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 48 | -0.31 |
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.31 |
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.40 |
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.52 |
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 | 0.87 (716) | NaN (0) |
20 | 0.76 (534) | 0.73 (108) |
34 | 0.71 (489) | 0.74 (170) |
48 | 0.57 (397) | 0.83 (302) |
62 | 0.62 (282) | 0.83 (379) |
69 | 0.62 (73) | 0.85 (561) |
76 | 0.78 (24) | 0.86 (631) |
This reliability is computed from the two subtest reliabilities using a form of the Spearman-Brown formula, taking into account the weighting of the spatial score.
Further internal statistics are reported on subtest level (respectively the Numerical and the Spatial section of The Marathon Test).