These statistics are from the version of the PSIA that was in use from 2003 to 2007, and was highly similar to the later Revision 2007. The scores are t-scores (mean = 50, σ = 10) normed on an earlier group (partly overlapping this one) so this group may not have an exact mean and σ of 50 and 10. An explanation of the scale can be found through the test's order page.
Explanatory and analytical remarks regarding the interpretation of the statistics are purposely largely avoided, so it is up to the reader to study the report carefully and thus obtain a clear impression of the test's validity — that is, "what it measures". Although the statistics sometimes reveal an almost chilling discriminative power, experience shows that explicitly observing that in a remark tends to evoke negative responses in persons who recognize themselves ("Your remark betrays that your are biased! The test only measures your personal biases!", et cetera).
22 | * |
23 | * |
24 | * |
25 | ** |
27 | ** |
28 | *** |
29 | * |
32 | ** |
33 | ***** |
34 | *** |
35 | ****** |
36 | ******* |
37 | ***** |
38 | ******* |
39 | ********** |
40 | ****** |
41 | ************* |
42 | ******** |
43 | ********** |
44 | ********** |
45 | ********* |
46 | ***************** |
47 | ***** |
48 | ************** |
49 | *************** |
50 | ************ |
51 | ******* |
52 | ******************** |
53 | *************** |
54 | ******* |
55 | ******* |
56 | ***** |
57 | **** |
58 | ******* |
59 | **** |
60 | ******* |
61 | ***** |
62 | *** |
63 | ***** |
64 | *** |
65 | *** |
66 | * |
67 | **** |
68 | **** |
69 | *** |
71 | * |
72 | ** |
84 | ** |
91 | * |
n = 238
22 | * |
23 | * |
25 | * |
27 | ** |
28 | ** |
33 | ***** |
34 | * |
35 | ***** |
36 | ****** |
37 | **** |
38 | ***** |
39 | ***** |
40 | ***** |
41 | *********** |
42 | ******** |
43 | ********* |
44 | ******** |
45 | ********* |
46 | *********** |
47 | **** |
48 | *********** |
49 | ************** |
50 | ********* |
51 | ******* |
52 | ***************** |
53 | *************** |
54 | ******* |
55 | ****** |
56 | ** |
57 | **** |
58 | ***** |
59 | ** |
60 | ******* |
61 | ***** |
62 | * |
63 | ***** |
64 | * |
65 | *** |
67 | ** |
68 | *** |
69 | *** |
71 | * |
72 | ** |
84 | ** |
91 | * |
n = 57
24 | * |
25 | * |
28 | * |
29 | * |
32 | ** |
34 | ** |
35 | * |
36 | * |
37 | * |
38 | ** |
39 | ***** |
40 | * |
41 | ** |
43 | * |
44 | ** |
46 | ****** |
47 | * |
48 | *** |
49 | * |
50 | *** |
52 | *** |
55 | * |
56 | *** |
58 | ** |
59 | ** |
62 | ** |
64 | ** |
66 | * |
67 | ** |
68 | * |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
Short Test For Genius | 4 | 0.95 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test | 6 | 0.94 |
Mega Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 4 | 0.59 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 16 | 0.57 |
916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 5 | 0.56 |
European I.Q. Test | 6 | 0.53 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 4 | 0.53 |
Graduate Record Examination | 5 | 0.50 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 14 | 0.45 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 4 | 0.42 |
Letters | 4 | 0.40 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 6 | 0.38 |
Chimera High Ability Riddle Test (Bill Bultas) | 4 | 0.35 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 12 | 0.33 |
Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg) | 10 | 0.33 |
Qoymans Automatic Test #3 | 5 | 0.26 |
Daedalus Test | 4 | 0.25 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 11 | 0.24 |
Numbers | 16 | 0.23 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 20 | 0.16 |
Scholastic Aptitude Test (old) | 8 | 0.14 |
KIT Intelligence Test - first attempts | 9 | 0.14 |
Reason | 13 | 0.13 |
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 20 | 0.13 |
Odds | 7 | 0.11 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 6 | 0.09 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 22 | 0.09 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 26 | 0.08 |
Evens | 4 | 0.05 |
Numerical Insight Test | 8 | 0.05 |
The Nemesis Test | 8 | 0.04 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 91 | 0.03 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 23 | 0.03 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 9 | 0.03 |
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 8 | 0.02 |
Cito-toets | 5 | 0.02 |
Cartoons of Shock | 8 | 0.02 |
The Final Test | 22 | 0.00 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 4 | -0.01 |
Long Test For Genius | 9 | -0.02 |
Spatial Insight Test | 14 | -0.04 |
Isis Test | 13 | -0.05 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 26 | -0.06 |
Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 13 | -0.07 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 | 25 | -0.07 |
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 14 | -0.07 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 6 | -0.08 |
Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 57 | -0.09 |
Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 4 | -0.09 |
The Sargasso Test | 11 | -0.10 |
American College Testing program | 7 | -0.12 |
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 26 | -0.12 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 17 | -0.13 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 6 | -0.14 |
Bonsai Test | 6 | -0.15 |
Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 12 | -0.16 |
Test of Inductive Reasoning / J.C.T.I. (Xavier Jouve) | 8 | -0.16 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 | 7 | -0.16 |
Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 7 | -0.16 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #2 | 6 | -0.19 |
Test of Shock and Awe | 9 | -0.23 |
Genius Association Test | 29 | -0.24 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 12 | -0.26 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 8 | -0.26 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 7 | -0.28 |
The Test To End All Tests | 16 | -0.29 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 6 | -0.30 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 20 | -0.33 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 6 | -0.39 |
Scholastic Aptitude Test (new) | 4 | -0.44 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 6 | -0.45 |
Tests by Nicolas Elenas (aggregate) | 6 | -0.46 |
Narcissus' last stand | 4 | -0.48 |
Words | 4 | -0.52 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 9 | -0.52 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 5 | -0.57 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 4 | -0.58 |
The Marathon Test | 4 | -0.59 |
Associative LIMIT | 7 | -0.66 |
Qoymans Automatic Test #1 | 4 | -0.70 |
Psychometric Qrosswords | 5 | -0.71 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 5 | -0.78 |
W-87 (International Society for Philosophical Enquiry) | 7 | -0.85 |
Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 4 | -0.86 |
Qoymans Automatic Test #2 | 4 | -0.91 |
Weighted average of correlations: -0.031 (N = 950)
Estimated g factor loading: -0.18
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 11 | -0.09 |
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests | 4 | -0.59 |
Weighted average of correlations: -0.222 (N = 15)
Estimated g factor loading among females: -0.47
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 PSIA Introverted on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 276 | -0.25 |
Numerical | 61 | -0.26 |
Spatial | 90 | -0.27 |
Logical | 37 | 0.42 |
Heterogeneous | 198 | -0.07 |
N = 662
Balanced g loading = -0.09
Country | n | mean score |
---|---|---|
Mexico | 3 | 69.00 |
Italy | 3 | 59.00 |
Poland | 3 | 58.00 |
Norway | 5 | 53.80 |
South_Africa | 4 | 51.25 |
Canada | 9 | 51.11 |
Spain | 6 | 50.50 |
Brazil | 7 | 50.43 |
United_States | 98 | 50.34 |
Sweden | 17 | 48.82 |
United_Kingdom | 13 | 48.54 |
Germany | 12 | 48.08 |
Turkey | 4 | 47.75 |
Korea_South | 3 | 47.67 |
China | 3 | 46.67 |
Netherlands | 34 | 45.53 |
India | 12 | 44.25 |
Belgium | 8 | 43.50 |
Finland | 5 | 42.20 |
Israel | 4 | 41.00 |
Yugoslavia | 5 | 40.80 |
Australia | 6 | 40.50 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
PSIA Deviance factor | 295 | 0.83 |
PSIA Aspergoid | 295 | 0.73 |
Observed associative horizon | 10 | 0.64 |
PSIA Rare | 295 | 0.57 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 18 | 0.56 |
PSIA Neurotic | 295 | 0.51 |
PSIA Cold | 295 | 0.46 |
PSIA System factor | 47 | 0.40 |
Disorders (own) | 292 | 0.24 |
PSIA Extreme | 295 | 0.19 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 291 | 0.19 |
PSIA Antisocial | 295 | 0.18 |
PSIA Just | 295 | 0.17 |
PSIA Rational | 295 | 0.16 |
Year of birth | 292 | 0.12 |
PSIA True | 295 | 0.10 |
Sex | 295 | 0.08 |
Observed behaviour | 19 | 0.06 |
Father's educational level | 277 | 0.05 |
PSIA Ethics factor | 295 | 0.05 |
Mother's educational level | 279 | 0.05 |
PSIA Cruel | 295 | 0.05 |
PSIA Orderly | 295 | -0.13 |
Educational level | 292 | -0.18 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 9 | -0.30 |
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
PSIA Deviance factor | 57 | 0.85 |
PSIA Aspergoid | 57 | 0.77 |
PSIA Rare | 57 | 0.54 |
PSIA Neurotic | 57 | 0.51 |
Disorders (own) | 55 | 0.34 |
PSIA System factor | 10 | 0.34 |
PSIA Cold | 57 | 0.34 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 54 | 0.31 |
Mother's educational level | 47 | 0.17 |
PSIA Extreme | 57 | 0.15 |
Father's educational level | 47 | 0.14 |
PSIA Rational | 57 | 0.14 |
PSIA True | 57 | 0.12 |
PSIA Antisocial | 57 | 0.10 |
PSIA Ethics factor | 57 | 0.02 |
PSIA Cruel | 57 | 0.01 |
PSIA Just | 57 | -0.03 |
PSIA Orderly | 57 | -0.14 |
Educational level | 55 | -0.19 |
Year of birth | 55 | -0.19 |
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
PSIA Deviance factor | 238 | 0.83 |
PSIA Aspergoid | 238 | 0.71 |
Observed associative horizon | 9 | 0.61 |
PSIA Rare | 238 | 0.57 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 15 | 0.53 |
PSIA Neurotic | 238 | 0.53 |
PSIA Cold | 238 | 0.48 |
PSIA System factor | 37 | 0.42 |
PSIA Just | 238 | 0.22 |
Disorders (own) | 237 | 0.22 |
PSIA Extreme | 238 | 0.21 |
PSIA Antisocial | 238 | 0.20 |
Year of birth | 237 | 0.19 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 237 | 0.17 |
PSIA Rational | 238 | 0.15 |
PSIA True | 238 | 0.10 |
Observed behaviour | 18 | 0.08 |
PSIA Ethics factor | 238 | 0.06 |
PSIA Cruel | 238 | 0.04 |
Father's educational level | 230 | 0.03 |
Mother's educational level | 232 | 0.03 |
PSIA Orderly | 238 | -0.12 |
Educational level | 237 | -0.19 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 8 | -0.47 |
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 | 0.54 (143) |
---|---|
Below median | 0.48 (407) |
Above median | -0.27 (530) |
Above 3rd quartile | -0.41 (233) |
Negative on the whole, and this is mainly in the upper half.