These are statistics based on the scores on the 916 Test by Laurent Dubois as reported by test candidates of I.Q. Tests for the High Range.
128 | ** |
137 | * |
138 | * |
140 | ** |
141 | ** |
142 | *** |
145 | * |
147 | *** |
148 | ** |
149 | * |
150 | *** |
151 | **** |
152.5 | ** |
155 | * |
156 | * |
157 | * |
164.5 | * |
166 | * |
174 | * |
182 | * |
(Test index) Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(237) Sigma Test (Hindemburg) | 4 | 0.96 |
(230) Omega Contemplative Items Pool (Tommy Smith) | 4 | 0.93 |
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 4 | 0.91 |
(236) International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 5 | 0.88 |
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 5 | 0.85 |
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 5 | 0.78 |
(63) Long Test For Genius | 4 | 0.77 |
(79) Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 5 | 0.76 |
(75) Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 5 | 0.75 |
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 4 | 0.74 |
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 4 | 0.74 |
(44) Associative LIMIT | 7 | 0.72 |
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 9 | 0.70 |
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 16 | 0.67 |
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 4 | 0.66 |
(225) Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 11 | 0.62 |
(51) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 4 | 0.61 |
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 13 | 0.61 |
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 9 | 0.59 |
(227) Concep-T (Laurent Dubois) | 10 | 0.57 |
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 8 | 0.57 |
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 8 | 0.56 |
(226) Logima Strictica 24 (Robert Lato) | 6 | 0.51 |
(24) Reason - Revision 2008 | 8 | 0.50 |
(1) Cartoons of Shock | 4 | 0.49 |
(231) Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 10 | 0.43 |
(7) The Final Test | 10 | 0.42 |
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 7 | 0.41 |
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 7 | 0.37 |
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 7 | 0.37 |
(10) Genius Association Test | 9 | 0.36 |
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 10 | 0.31 |
(42) The Marathon Test | 4 | 0.27 |
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 4 | 0.24 |
(57) Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 10 | 0.24 |
(246) Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 4 | -0.09 |
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 6 | -0.31 |
(82) Reason | 4 | -0.73 |
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 4 | -0.74 |
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 4 | -0.76 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.478 (N = 266, weighted sum = 127.22)
Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.69
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 916 Test (Laurent Dubois) on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 61 | 0.66 |
Numerical | 9 | 0.85 |
Spatial | 33 | 0.67 |
Logical | 12 | 0.30 |
Heterogeneous | 16 | 0.74 |
N = 131
Balanced g loading = 0.64
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Italy | 2 | 162.5 |
Belgium | 2 | 150.3 |
Germany | 2 | 150.0 |
Sweden | 2 | 149.0 |
United_Kingdom | 3 | 149.0 |
United_States | 5 | 148.0 |
France | 6 | 146.0 |
Netherlands | 2 | 139.5 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 5 | 0.50 |
Mother's educational level | 20 | 0.38 |
Observed behaviour | 6 | 0.23 |
Year of birth | 32 | 0.08 |
Sex | 34 | -0.02 |
Educational level | 21 | -0.03 |
Father's educational level | 20 | -0.20 |
Disorders (own) | 22 | -0.23 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 21 | -0.41 |
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) |
---|---|---|
128 | 0.69 (266) | NaN (0) |
143 | 0.60 (127) | -0.46 (38) |
148.5 | 0.59 (85) | 0.34 (90) |
151 | 0.67 (33) | 0.59 (199) |
182 | NaN (0) | 0.69 (266) |