0 | * |
9 | * |
12 | ** |
16 | * |
17 | * |
18 | ** |
19 | * |
20 | ** |
21 | ** |
24 | **** |
28 | * |
30 | **** |
32 | * |
33 | ** |
34 | * |
35 | *** |
37 | * |
38 | *** |
39 | * |
40 | ** |
41 | ** |
42 | ** |
43 | * |
44 | * |
45 | * |
46 | * |
48 | * |
49 | ** |
50 | ** |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
The Gate | 5 | 0.93 |
De Roskam | 4 | 0.91 |
The Marathon Test | 44 | 0.90 |
The Test To End All Tests | 18 | 0.90 |
Divine Psychometry (Matthew Scillitani) | 8 | 0.89 |
Psychometric Qrosswords | 12 | 0.88 |
Narcissus' last stand | 15 | 0.87 |
Cartoons of Shock | 13 | 0.87 |
The Piper's Test | 13 | 0.86 |
Letters | 6 | 0.85 |
A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 13 | 0.85 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 23 | 0.83 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 21 | 0.82 |
The LAW - Letters And Words | 6 | 0.82 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 10 | 0.82 |
Dicing with death | 13 | 0.81 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 10 | 0.81 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 23 | 0.81 |
Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate) | 4 | 0.80 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 12 | 0.79 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 19 | 0.79 |
Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 10 | 0.78 |
The Smell Test | 10 | 0.78 |
Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 4 | 0.78 |
Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 7 | 0.77 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 19 | 0.76 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 10 | 0.75 |
Words | 8 | 0.75 |
The Sargasso Test | 26 | 0.74 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 25 | 0.74 |
Only idiots | 9 | 0.74 |
The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 15 | 0.73 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 21 | 0.73 |
Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 4 | 0.72 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 22 | 0.71 |
Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 28 | 0.68 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 44 | 0.68 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 43 | 0.67 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 18 | 0.67 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 19 | 0.66 |
The Final Test | 9 | 0.66 |
A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 20 | 0.66 |
Associative LIMIT | 23 | 0.66 |
The Nemesis Test | 21 | 0.64 |
Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 5 | 0.64 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 22 | 0.64 |
Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 6 | 0.63 |
Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 7 | 0.63 |
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 19 | 0.63 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 20 | 0.62 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 44 | 0.61 |
Miscellaneous tests | 16 | 0.61 |
The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 7 | 0.61 |
Genius Association Test | 23 | 0.56 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 23 | 0.55 |
Isis Test | 15 | 0.55 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 20 | 0.55 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 31 | 0.55 |
Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 5 | 0.53 |
De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 5 | 0.51 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 5 | 0.50 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 8 | 0.50 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 13 | 0.49 |
Logima Strictica 24 (Robert Lato) | 4 | 0.49 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 26 | 0.49 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 10 | 0.45 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 19 | 0.44 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 23 | 0.43 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 12 | 0.42 |
The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 6 | 0.38 |
Daedalus Test | 14 | 0.38 |
Labyrinthine LIMIT | 13 | 0.34 |
Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 5 | 0.28 |
Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 7 | 0.23 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 5 | 0.23 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 7 | 0.11 |
Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 4 | 0.11 |
Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 7 | 0.10 |
Tests by Xavier Jouve, other than those listed separately (aggregate) | 4 | -0.33 |
De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 5 | -0.35 |
Reason | 4 | -0.44 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam II (Jonathan Wai) | 4 | -0.66 |
916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 4 | -0.73 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 5 | -0.83 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 4 | -0.93 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.630 (N = 1193)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.79
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 Verbal section of The Marathon Test on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 158 | 0.84 |
Numerical | 85 | 0.80 |
Spatial | 120 | 0.76 |
Logical | 41 | 0.57 |
Heterogeneous | 441 | 0.82 |
N = 845
Balanced g loading = 0.76
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Spain | 3 | 45.0 |
Canada | 3 | 30.0 |
United_Kingdom | 3 | 30.0 |
United_States | 8 | 27.0 |
Germany | 5 | 21.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen, later Lynn and Becker:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
Observed behaviour | 10 | 0.90 |
PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.60 |
PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.59 |
PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.54 |
PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.50 |
PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.47 |
PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.45 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 9 | 0.44 |
PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.36 |
PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.35 |
PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.34 |
Educational level | 48 | 0.27 |
PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.22 |
PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.15 |
PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.14 |
Mother's educational level | 45 | 0.06 |
PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 15 | 0.04 |
Sex | 49 | 0.03 |
Father's educational level | 44 | 0.01 |
Year of birth | 49 | -0.09 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 47 | -0.13 |
Disorders (own) | 49 | -0.27 |
PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 15 | -0.27 |
PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 15 | -0.32 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 8 | -0.68 |
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 (raw 21.0) | 0.76 (267) |
---|---|
Below median (raw 33.0) | 0.73 (586) |
Above median (raw 33.0) | 0.59 (595) |
Above 3rd quartile (raw 41.0) | 0.65 (288) |
Age class | n | Median score |
---|---|---|
70 to 74 | 1 | 30.0 |
65 to 69 | 1 | 24.0 |
55 to 59 | 4 | 44.0 |
50 to 54 | 4 | 26.5 |
45 to 49 | 7 | 35.0 |
40 to 44 | 5 | 38.0 |
35 to 39 | 5 | 21.0 |
30 to 34 | 5 | 41.0 |
25 to 29 | 10 | 27.0 |
22 to 24 | 3 | 38.0 |
20 or 21 | 2 | 30.5 |
18 or 19 | 2 | 29.5 |
N = 49
Year taken | n | median score | protonorm |
---|---|---|---|
2005 | 1 | 24.0 | 366 |
2006 | 5 | 37.0 | 414 |
2008 | 1 | 38.0 | 427 |
2009 | 2 | 25.0 | 367 |
2010 | 4 | 22.0 | 358 |
2011 | 1 | 40.0 | 440 |
2012 | 3 | 38.0 | 427 |
2013 | 3 | 18.0 | 330 |
2014 | 2 | 35.5 | 411 |
2015 | 2 | 22.5 | 360 |
2016 | 2 | 23.0 | 362 |
2017 | 1 | 21.0 | 355 |
2018 | 1 | 9.0 | 265 |
2019 | 4 | 45.0 | 502 |
2020 | 3 | 39.0 | 432 |
2021 | 4 | 34.0 | 398 |
2022 | 3 | 48.0 | 512 |
2023 | 4 | 30.0 | 379 |
2024 | 3 | 35.0 | 410 |
ryear taken × median score = 0.17 (N = 49)
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.