-4.5 | * |
5 | * |
15 | * |
23 | * |
27 | * |
27.5 | * |
31 | * |
34 | * |
35.5 | * |
36 | * |
36.5 | * |
40.5 | * |
42 | * |
42.5 | ** |
43 | * |
45 | ** |
46 | *** |
46.5 | ** |
47 | *** |
48 | * |
48.5 | * |
51 | * |
52.5 | * |
53 | * |
55 | ** |
56 | * |
57 | ** |
57.5 | * |
58.5 | *** |
60 | ** |
61 | ** |
63 | *** |
64.5 | * |
65.5 | *** |
66 | ** |
66.5 | * |
67 | ** |
68 | ******* |
68.5 | ** |
70 | ** |
70.5 | ** |
71 | ****** |
71.5 | * |
72 | ***** |
73 | ****** |
73.5 | ***** |
75 | *** |
76 | * |
76.5 | * |
77 | *** |
77.5 | * |
78 | ***** |
78.5 | * |
80 | ** |
80.5 | ** |
81 | **** |
81.5 | * |
82 | ***** |
82.5 | ** |
83 | * |
83.5 | * |
85 | * |
86 | * |
87 | * |
88 | * |
94 | * |
97 | * |
n = 126
-4.5 | * |
5 | * |
15 | * |
23 | * |
27 | * |
27.5 | * |
34 | * |
35.5 | * |
36 | * |
36.5 | * |
40.5 | * |
42 | * |
42.5 | * |
43 | * |
45 | ** |
46 | *** |
46.5 | * |
47 | *** |
48 | * |
48.5 | * |
51 | * |
52.5 | * |
53 | * |
55 | ** |
56 | * |
57 | ** |
57.5 | * |
58.5 | *** |
60 | ** |
61 | ** |
63 | *** |
64.5 | * |
65.5 | *** |
66 | ** |
66.5 | * |
67 | ** |
68 | ******* |
68.5 | * |
70 | ** |
70.5 | ** |
71 | ****** |
71.5 | * |
72 | **** |
73 | ****** |
73.5 | ***** |
75 | *** |
76 | * |
76.5 | * |
77 | *** |
77.5 | * |
78 | ***** |
78.5 | * |
80 | ** |
80.5 | ** |
81 | **** |
81.5 | * |
82 | ***** |
82.5 | ** |
83 | * |
83.5 | * |
85 | * |
86 | * |
87 | * |
88 | * |
94 | * |
97 | * |
n = 5
31 | * |
42.5 | * |
46.5 | * |
68.5 | * |
72 | * |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 4 | 1.00 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 5 | 0.96 |
De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 6 | 0.94 |
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 8 | 0.93 |
Advanced Intelligence Test (Randy Myers) | 4 | 0.93 |
Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 8 | 0.85 |
Dicing with death | 17 | 0.81 |
Only idiots | 11 | 0.81 |
The Marathon Test | 19 | 0.81 |
Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 23 | 0.81 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 43 | 0.80 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 30 | 0.79 |
The Test To End All Tests | 29 | 0.79 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 124 | 0.78 |
De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 5 | 0.76 |
The Piper's Test | 16 | 0.76 |
Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 6 | 0.76 |
Cartoons of Shock | 22 | 0.76 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 10 | 0.74 |
Narcissus' last stand | 26 | 0.74 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 30 | 0.72 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 42 | 0.72 |
Psychometric Qrosswords | 18 | 0.72 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 18 | 0.71 |
The Smell Test | 10 | 0.71 |
A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 13 | 0.71 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 30 | 0.71 |
Divine Psychometry (Matthew Scillitani) | 12 | 0.70 |
Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 5 | 0.70 |
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 8 | 0.69 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 15 | 0.68 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 12 | 0.66 |
Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 8 | 0.65 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 30 | 0.65 |
Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 15 | 0.65 |
The LAW - Letters And Words | 8 | 0.64 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 10 | 0.63 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 31 | 0.63 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 13 | 0.61 |
The Sargasso Test | 48 | 0.61 |
Words | 8 | 0.59 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 53 | 0.59 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 33 | 0.58 |
The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 26 | 0.57 |
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 36 | 0.57 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 31 | 0.56 |
916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 8 | 0.55 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 33 | 0.55 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 45 | 0.54 |
The Nemesis Test | 32 | 0.54 |
Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 13 | 0.53 |
Logima Strictica 24 (Robert Lato) | 4 | 0.52 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 41 | 0.51 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 27 | 0.51 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 (batch scored by Paul Cooijmans) | 6 | 0.50 |
Associative LIMIT | 41 | 0.49 |
Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 57 | 0.48 |
Test of Shock and Awe | 5 | 0.47 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 38 | 0.47 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 49 | 0.46 |
Daedalus Test | 26 | 0.44 |
Genius Association Test | 45 | 0.44 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 39 | 0.43 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 15 | 0.43 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 11 | 0.42 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 24 | 0.42 |
The Final Test | 18 | 0.41 |
A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 33 | 0.41 |
Labyrinthine LIMIT | 20 | 0.41 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 125 | 0.40 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 6 | 0.40 |
Strict Logic Spatial Exam 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 14 | 0.39 |
Reason | 11 | 0.39 |
Miscellaneous tests | 34 | 0.38 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 42 | 0.36 |
Tests by Xavier Jouve, other than those listed separately (aggregate) | 7 | 0.34 |
Numbers | 8 | 0.33 |
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 6 | 0.29 |
Spatial Insight Test | 6 | 0.29 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 23 | 0.28 |
Letters | 9 | 0.27 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 7 | 0.26 |
Isis Test | 45 | 0.26 |
Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 14 | 0.26 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 12 | 0.24 |
The Hammer Of Test-Hungry | 4 | 0.17 |
The Gate | 5 | 0.12 |
The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 14 | 0.12 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam II (Jonathan Wai) | 9 | 0.11 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 24 | 0.08 |
The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 13 | 0.07 |
Evens | 5 | 0.06 |
Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 9 | -0.04 |
Long Test For Genius | 4 | -0.07 |
Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 8 | -0.11 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 6 | -0.19 |
Tests by Paul Laurent Miranda (aggregate) | 5 | -0.20 |
Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 4 | -0.20 |
Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate) | 8 | -0.20 |
Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 14 | -0.23 |
Tests by Iakovos Koukas (aggregate) | 4 | -0.27 |
Bonsai Test | 6 | -0.29 |
G-test (Nikos Lygeros) | 4 | -0.49 |
Odds | 5 | -0.50 |
Gliaweb Raadselachtig Analogieënproefwerk | 4 | -0.57 |
Kvociento (Bram van Kaathoven) | 4 | -0.72 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version) | 10 | -0.74 |
Test of Inductive Reasoning / J.C.T.I. (Xavier Jouve) | 5 | -0.81 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 4 | -0.88 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.505 (N = 2156)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.71
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 Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 272 | 0.74 |
Numerical | 129 | 0.62 |
Spatial | 189 | 0.71 |
Logical | 167 | 0.61 |
Heterogeneous | 765 | 0.75 |
N = 1522
Balanced g loading = 0.69
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
Italy | 3 | 76.0 |
China | 8 | 74.8 |
Spain | 6 | 74.3 |
Sweden | 3 | 73.5 |
United_Kingdom | 6 | 71.8 |
Germany | 6 | 70.3 |
Finland | 5 | 68.0 |
United_States | 31 | 68.0 |
Romania | 3 | 67.0 |
Korea_South | 8 | 66.8 |
Turkey | 3 | 58.5 |
Canada | 4 | 56.8 |
Greece | 10 | 46.3 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen, later Lynn and Becker:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
Observed associative horizon | 11 | 0.65 |
PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.49 |
PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.43 |
PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.41 |
PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.38 |
PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.33 |
PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.32 |
PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.26 |
Observed behaviour | 29 | 0.19 |
PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.18 |
PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.18 |
PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.17 |
PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.17 |
Sex | 131 | 0.14 |
Educational level | 120 | 0.13 |
PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.12 |
PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 35 | 0.01 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 29 | -0.02 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 120 | -0.03 |
PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 35 | -0.03 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 18 | -0.05 |
Mother's educational level | 118 | -0.05 |
Year of birth | 129 | -0.08 |
PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 35 | -0.11 |
Disorders (own) | 121 | -0.12 |
Father's educational level | 114 | -0.13 |
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 (raw 55.0) | 0.66 (507) |
---|---|
Below median (raw 70.0) | 0.65 (1136) |
Above median (raw 70.0) | 0.52 (1013) |
Above 3rd quartile (raw 77.0) | 0.59 (435) |
Age class | n | Median score |
---|---|---|
70 to 74 | 1 | 78.0 |
60 to 64 | 2 | 58.0 |
55 to 59 | 2 | 73.8 |
50 to 54 | 6 | 56.0 |
45 to 49 | 12 | 69.0 |
40 to 44 | 11 | 71.0 |
35 to 39 | 10 | 79.5 |
30 to 34 | 15 | 68.0 |
25 to 29 | 29 | 68.0 |
22 to 24 | 21 | 66.0 |
20 or 21 | 10 | 74.5 |
18 or 19 | 5 | 61.0 |
17 | 4 | 45.8 |
15 | 1 | 46.0 |
N = 129
Year taken | n | median score | protonorm |
---|---|---|---|
2008 | 7 | 71.0 | 429 |
2009 | 7 | 57.0 | 374 |
2010 | 10 | 72.0 | 440 |
2011 | 6 | 69.8 | 414 |
2012 | 7 | 71.0 | 429 |
2013 | 6 | 75.3 | 466 |
2014 | 5 | 68.0 | 409 |
2015 | 3 | 73.5 | 452 |
2016 | 10 | 50.8 | 367 |
2017 | 9 | 68.0 | 409 |
2018 | 7 | 58.5 | 379 |
2019 | 7 | 57.0 | 374 |
2020 | 10 | 74.3 | 460 |
2021 | 7 | 63.0 | 386 |
2022 | 12 | 72.0 | 440 |
2023 | 9 | 68.0 | 409 |
2024 | 9 | 68.5 | 411 |
ryear taken × median score = -0.07 (N = 131)
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.