These statistics are based on scores on this test as reported by candidates taking I.Q. tests from I.Q. Tests for the High Range.
6 | * |
8 | * |
9 | * |
10 | *** |
10.5 | * |
11 | *** |
11.5 | **** |
12 | * |
12.5 | **** |
13 | ***** |
13.5 | ** |
14 | **** |
14.5 | ***** |
15 | ******* |
15.5 | ***** |
16 | ********* |
16.5 | * |
17 | **** |
17.5 | *** |
18 | ******* |
18.5 | ** |
19 | * |
19.5 | * |
20 | ** |
20.5 | *** |
21 | * |
21.5 | **** |
22 | * |
22.5 | ** |
23.5 | ** |
24 | * |
25 | * |
27 | ** |
29 | * |
32 | * |
Notice: The (controversial) score of 32 has been left out when computing the norms given above, to prevent it from affecting (depressing) the norms.
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords | 4 | 0.95 |
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 4 | 0.84 |
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man | 7 | 0.81 |
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 4 | 0.72 |
(69) Odds | 6 | 0.69 |
(29) Words | 4 | 0.67 |
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 15 | 0.63 |
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 6 | 0.62 |
(55) Spatial Insight Test | 8 | 0.62 |
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 5 | 0.54 |
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 7 | 0.52 |
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 7 | 0.50 |
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 7 | 0.49 |
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 4 | 0.46 |
(85) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 | 6 | 0.45 |
(84) Bonsai Test | 6 | 0.45 |
(7) The Final Test | 13 | 0.45 |
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 17 | 0.41 |
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 14 | 0.40 |
(54) Test of Shock and Awe | 6 | 0.37 |
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 15 | 0.35 |
(42) The Marathon Test | 6 | 0.34 |
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 10 | 0.30 |
(57) Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 33 | 0.28 |
(63) Long Test For Genius | 10 | 0.28 |
(53) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 | 11 | 0.27 |
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment | 14 | 0.25 |
(18) The Nemesis Test | 8 | 0.25 |
(68) Numbers | 14 | 0.25 |
(24) Reason - Revision 2008 | 10 | 0.24 |
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 10 | 0.23 |
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 7 | 0.22 |
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 23 | 0.22 |
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 7 | 0.18 |
(82) Reason | 9 | 0.15 |
(10) Genius Association Test | 17 | 0.14 |
(25) The Sargasso Test | 10 | 0.13 |
(1) Cartoons of Shock | 9 | 0.11 |
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 8 | 0.10 |
(11) Isis Test | 8 | 0.08 |
(79) Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 10 | 0.07 |
(44) Associative LIMIT | 14 | 0.06 |
(28) The Test To End All Tests | 8 | 0.04 |
(75) Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 11 | -0.08 |
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 17 | -0.12 |
(51) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 7 | -0.21 |
(5) Daedalus Test | 6 | -0.31 |
(52) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #2 | 4 | -0.58 |
(77) Analogies #1 | 4 | -0.62 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.270 (N = 470, weighted sum = 127.03)
Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.52
Remark: These correlations and estimated g loading are uncommonly low for a mental ability test, implying that the test as scored is largely failing to measure intelligence, has insufficient validity.
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 | 13 | 0.93 |
(217) G-test | 4 | 0.89 |
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II | 12 | 0.88 |
(233) Hoeflin Power Test | 4 | 0.85 |
(230) Omega Contemplative Items Pool | 5 | 0.81 |
(226) Logima Strictica 24 | 18 | 0.73 |
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 6 | 0.72 |
(229) Mega Test | 6 | 0.67 |
(238) 916 Test | 10 | 0.60 |
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version | 22 | 0.57 |
(237) Sigma Test | 10 | 0.53 |
(246) Sequentia Numerica Form I | 5 | 0.44 |
(214) Epiq Tests | 6 | 0.43 |
(235) Nonverbal Cognitive Performance Examination | 17 | 0.35 |
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 44 | 0.32 |
(220) Cattell Culture Fair | 10 | 0.29 |
(218) Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 12 | 0.27 |
(224) T.R.I. | 6 | 0.20 |
(236) International High IQ Society Miscellaneous tests | 8 | 0.17 |
(231) Mysterium Entrance Exam | 10 | 0.17 |
(212) Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 8 | 0.15 |
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I | 27 | 0.04 |
(213) Encephalist - R | 4 | -0.27 |
(239) Titan Test | 7 | -0.37 |
(228) Miller Analogies Test (raw; old version) | 4 | -0.83 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.394 (N = 278, weighted sum = 109.46)
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 Logima Strictica 36 on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 141 | 0.38 |
Numerical | 34 | 0.61 |
Spatial | 88 | 0.58 |
Logical | 25 | 0.28 |
Heterogeneous | 94 | 0.63 |
N = 382
Balanced g loading = 0.50
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Israel | 2 | 24.8 |
Norway | 3 | 22.0 |
Croatia | 3 | 21.0 |
Poland | 3 | 20.5 |
Denmark | 3 | 19.0 |
Yugoslavia | 2 | 19.0 |
Argentina | 2 | 18.3 |
Germany | 5 | 18.0 |
Greece | 4 | 16.0 |
Sweden | 10 | 16.0 |
Canada | 2 | 15.3 |
France | 5 | 15.0 |
Spain | 8 | 14.5 |
Netherlands | 2 | 14.3 |
Belgium | 2 | 14.0 |
Italy | 3 | 14.0 |
Australia | 2 | 13.5 |
United_States | 11 | 13.5 |
Finland | 8 | 13.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.78 |
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.62 |
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.57 |
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.57 |
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.53 |
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.39 |
Mother's educational level | 48 | 0.38 |
Father's educational level | 48 | 0.35 |
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.34 |
Year of birth | 92 | 0.32 |
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.24 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 9 | 0.20 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 16 | 0.18 |
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.16 |
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.16 |
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.15 |
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.13 |
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 2007 | 7 | 0.12 |
Sex | 96 | 0.09 |
Disorders (own) | 52 | 0.01 |
Educational level | 50 | -0.15 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 50 | -0.26 |
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007 | 7 | -0.40 |
Observed behaviour | 21 | -0.47 |
Observed associative horizon | 4 | -0.63 |
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 7 | -0.73 |
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 | 0.52 (470) | NaN (0) |
10 | 0.57 (430) | -0.92 (8) |
11 | 0.52 (389) | -0.76 (26) |
12 | 0.49 (331) | -0.41 (54) |
13 | 0.48 (311) | -0.13 (144) |
14 | 0.42 (237) | -0.01 (166) |
16 | 0.57 (151) | 0.39 (286) |
18.5 | 0.57 (52) | 0.25 (359) |
21 | 0.36 (6) | 0.44 (415) |
23 | NaN (0) | 0.47 (439) |
36 | NaN (0) | 0.52 (470) |
Remark: The g loading is negative for raw scores of 14 and lower, implying that lower scores correspond to higher I.Q.'s there.