These are statistics based on the scores on Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) as reported by test candidates of I.Q. Tests for the High Range.
130 | * |
133 | * |
134 | * |
136 | * |
137 | * |
138 | * |
143 | * |
144 | * |
145 | * |
146 | *** |
148 | * |
150 | *** |
151 | * |
152 | * |
154 | *** |
155 | ** |
156 | *** |
157 | * |
160 | *** |
162 | ** |
165 | ** |
166 | * |
170 | * |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 11 | 0.97 |
Daedalus Test | 4 | 0.95 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 4 | 0.94 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 4 | 0.93 |
The Test To End All Tests | 6 | 0.92 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 4 | 0.91 |
The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 4 | 0.90 |
Tests by Iakovos Koukas (aggregate) | 5 | 0.81 |
Tests by Paul Laurent Miranda (aggregate) | 4 | 0.79 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 9 | 0.78 |
Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate) | 7 | 0.77 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 4 | 0.75 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 6 | 0.74 |
Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 10 | 0.73 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 6 | 0.72 |
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 10 | 0.71 |
Narcissus' last stand | 4 | 0.69 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 8 | 0.67 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.67 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 13 | 0.65 |
Genius Association Test | 12 | 0.64 |
Miscellaneous tests | 21 | 0.63 |
Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 5 | 0.61 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 12 | 0.60 |
Isis Test | 7 | 0.60 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 7 | 0.59 |
Associative LIMIT | 12 | 0.58 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 7 | 0.56 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 4 | 0.55 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 13 | 0.53 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 6 | 0.53 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 13 | 0.49 |
Advanced Intelligence Test (Randy Myers) | 13 | 0.48 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 5 | 0.44 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.43 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 12 | 0.41 |
Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 16 | 0.41 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 5 | 0.38 |
The Nemesis Test | 6 | 0.37 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 15 | 0.37 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.35 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 10 | 0.35 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 13 | 0.34 |
Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 4 | 0.16 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 8 | 0.10 |
Dicing with death | 6 | 0.10 |
The Sargasso Test | 12 | 0.09 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 5 | 0.00 |
A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 7 | -0.02 |
The Marathon Test | 4 | -0.10 |
Cartoons of Shock | 6 | -0.11 |
Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 4 | -0.59 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.515 (N = 420)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.72
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 Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 50 | 0.74 |
Numerical | 25 | 0.68 |
Spatial | 49 | 0.66 |
Logical | 17 | 0.69 |
Heterogeneous | 139 | 0.64 |
N = 280
Balanced g loading = 0.68
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Netherlands | 3 | 157.0 |
Sweden | 3 | 154.0 |
Canada | 3 | 152.0 |
United_States | 6 | 149.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen, later Lynn and Becker:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
Year of birth | 31 | 0.24 |
PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.20 |
Sex | 36 | 0.13 |
Mother's educational level | 25 | 0.08 |
Father's educational level | 24 | 0.07 |
PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 9 | 0.02 |
Disorders (own) | 28 | -0.01 |
PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.03 |
PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.10 |
PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.13 |
PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.23 |
PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.25 |
PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.26 |
PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.26 |
Educational level | 27 | -0.27 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 27 | -0.27 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 5 | -0.29 |
PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.35 |
PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.37 |
PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.54 |
PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.54 |
PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.68 |
PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 9 | -0.69 |
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 | 0.69 (22) |
---|---|
Below median | 0.29 (200) |
Above median | 0.54 (189) |
Above 3rd quartile | 0.69 (124) |