# Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 statistics

## Introduction

This test was created in 2002 to do something completely different for once. I had always seen multiple-choice tests as inferior (and still do) so I made an extreme one. While the apparently "easy", one-sided verbal test was extremely popular, the data gathered by it was of low quality, and the test had low g loading and reliability. Therefore I later combined it with another test of the same type into a larger test and removed or revised bad items. I also added a "pass" option to each question, which guaranteed half a point. The eventual result is the Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5, which is much better than the earlier ones.

## Scores on Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 as of 12 February 2023

Contents type: Verbal.   Period: 2002-2002

• n: 186
• Median: 26.0
• Quartile deviation: 7.0
• Range: 46
• Maximum possible: 60
• Minimum possible: -60
• Male median: 27.0 (n = 132)
• Female median: 22.0 (n = 45)
• Unknown sex median: 18.0 (n = 9)
• Proportion of males among candidates: 0.710
• Hardness: 0.29
• Resolution: 0.54
 3 * 6 ** 7 ** 8 * 9 ** 10 **** 11 *** 12 **** 13 ******** 14 * 15 ******* 16 *** 17 ******* 18 ***** 19 ******* 20 *** 21 **** 22 ******** 23 ******** 24 ***** 25 ******* 26 ************ 27 **** 28 ********* 29 ******* 30 **** 31 ******** 32 **** 33 ****** 34 *** 35 **** 36 ****** 37 **** 38 ** 39 ***** 40 **** 41 ** 43 *** 44.5 * 45 *** 46 * 47 * 48 *

## Scores by males

n = 132

 3 * 6 * 7 ** 8 * 9 * 10 ** 11 ** 12 *** 13 **** 15 **** 16 * 17 **** 18 ** 19 *** 20 * 21 *** 22 ** 23 ***** 24 ***** 25 ***** 26 *********** 27 **** 28 ********* 29 ****** 30 *** 31 ******* 32 *** 33 ****** 34 *** 35 *** 36 **** 37 *** 38 ** 39 **** 40 **** 41 ** 43 ** 45 ** 46 * 47 *

## Scores by females

n = 45

 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 **** 14 * 15 *** 16 * 17 ** 18 ** 19 ** 20 ** 21 * 22 ****** 23 ** 25 ** 26 * 29 * 30 * 32 * 35 * 36 ** 37 * 39 * 43 * 44.5 * 45 * 48 *

## Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 with other mental ability tests

Test name n r
American College Testing program31.00
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin)30.98
Miller Analogies Test (raw; old version)30.94
Advanced Intelligence Test (Randy Myers)30.85
Short Test For Genius40.83
Spatial Insight Test30.80
Test of Shock and Awe50.72
Scholastic Aptitude Test (new)30.65
916 Test (Laurent Dubois)40.61
F.I.T.R. 3 (Xavier Jouve)30.60
Cartoons of Shock30.59
Bonsai Test70.57
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3170.56
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate)110.52
Chimera High Ability Riddle Test (Bill Bultas)40.51
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate)140.48
Evens120.46
Cooijmans On-Line Test70.40
Analogies #1140.39
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius130.37
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw)40.34
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #2260.34
Scholastic Aptitude Test (old)90.31
Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg)60.27
Analogies of Long Test For Genius120.26
Numbers90.24
The Final Test140.21
European I.Q. Test40.13
The Test To End All Tests90.12
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve)50.10
Mega Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin)50.09
Unknown and miscellaneous tests320.06
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales80.03
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #410-0.01
Genius Association Test8-0.03
Qoymans Automatic Test #28-0.04
Tests by Nicolas Elenas (aggregate)10-0.07
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 113-0.09
New York High I.Q. Society tests16-0.10
Long Test For Genius9-0.14
Space, Time, and Hyperspace18-0.16
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.)9-0.17
Odds4-0.19
Encephalist - R (Xavier Jouve)5-0.20
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato)7-0.21
Omega Contemplative Items Pool (Tommy Smith)10-0.21
Qoymans Automatic Test #17-0.24
W-87 (International Society for Philosophical Enquiry)4-0.25
The Nemesis Test3-0.27
Queendom Culture Fair8-0.29
Cito-toets4-0.48
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 20044-0.58
Test For Genius - Revision 20044-0.66
Psychometric Qrosswords3-0.78
Cattell Culture Fair4-0.88
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 20044-0.92
F.N.A. (Xavier Jouve)4-0.95

Weighted average of correlations: 0.133 (N = 460, weighted sum = 61)

Ranking in above table is based on the unrounded correlations. All available data is present in this table, no tests are left out except for those with less than 3 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

## Estimated loadings of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 on particular item types

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.

Typeng loading of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 on that type
Verbal1370.50
Numerical250.53
Spatial28-0.09
Logical70.63
Heterogeneous820.49

N = 279

Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.

## National medians for Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1

Country n median score
Sweden343.0
Italy334.0
United_States1731.0
Netherlands427.0

For reasons of privacy, only countries with 3 or more candidates are included in this table. Ranking is based on the medians, and then alphabetic.

## Correlation with national I.Q.'s of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1

Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen:

• r = 0.06 (n = 40)

## Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 with personal details

Personalia n r
Father's educational level140.46
Educational level160.43
Observed behaviour120.26
Sex1770.15
Mother's educational level140.01
Observed associative horizon7-0.03
Disorders (parents and siblings)15-0.22
Year of birth138-0.29
Disorders (own)17-0.34

## Correlation with personal details of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 - within females

Personalia n r
Year of birth35-0.34

## Correlation with personal details of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 - within males

Personalia n r
Father's educational level130.40
Educational level140.40
Observed associative horizon60.23
Mother's educational level130.22
Observed behaviour110.18
Disorders (own)15-0.24
Year of birth103-0.28
Disorders (parents and siblings)14-0.43

## Estimated g factor loadings for restricted ranges

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 0.34 (26) 0.40 (148) 0.19 (358) 0.46 (218)

## Remark

The below internal statistics are based on a smaller sample because the internal data of this test was not retained for all candidates, which has to do with the circumstance that two different persons were scoring the test in consecutive periods.

## Scores by age

Age class n Median score
75 to 79125.0
45 to 49117.0
40 to 44632.0
35 to 391025.5
30 to 34830.5
25 to 291219.5
22 to 24919.0
20 or 21313.0
18 or 191020.5
17514.0
16126.0
1517.0
14111.0
916.0

N = 69

## Scores by age - within females

Age class n Median raw
75 to 79125.0
40 to 44228.5
35 to 39230.5
30 to 34137.0
25 to 29519.0
22 to 24418.0
20 or 21113.0
18 or 19419.0
17212.0
16126.0

N = 23

## Scores by age - within males

Age class n Median raw
45 to 49117.0
40 to 44432.0
35 to 39825.5
30 to 34728.0
25 to 29724.0
22 to 24524.0
20 or 21222.5
18 or 19621.0
17321.0
1517.0
14111.0
916.0

N = 46

## Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
200210122.0
2004138.0

## Item analysis

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.