Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 Statistics

© Paul Cooijmans

Scores on Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 as of 7 October 2019

Contents type: Verbal.   Period: 2008-present

-4.5 *
5 *
15 *
27 *
31 *
34 *
35.5 *
36.5 *
40.5 *
42 *
42.5 *
43 *
45 *
46 **
46.5 **
47 **
48 *
48.5 *
53 *
55 **
57 **
57.5 *
58.5 *
60 *
63 *
65.5 **
66 **
66.5 *
67 *
68 ****
68.5 *
70 **
70.5 *
71 *****
72 ****
73 ****
73.5 ***
75 ***
76.5 *
77 *
78 *****
78.5 *
80 *
80.5 *
81 **
81.5 *
82 **
82.5 *
83 *
83.5 *
87 *
97 *

Scores by males

n = 78

-4.5 *
5 *
15 *
27 *
34 *
35.5 *
36.5 *
40.5 *
42 *
43 *
45 *
46 **
46.5 *
47 **
48 *
48.5 *
53 *
55 **
57 **
57.5 *
58.5 *
60 *
63 *
65.5 **
66 **
66.5 *
67 *
68 ****
70 **
70.5 *
71 *****
72 ***
73 ****
73.5 ***
75 ***
76.5 *
77 *
78 *****
78.5 *
80 *
80.5 *
81 **
81.5 *
82 **
82.5 *
83 *
83.5 *
87 *
97 *

Scores by females

n = 5

31 *
42.5 *
46.5 *
68.5 *
72 *

Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 with other tests by Paul Cooijmans

(Test index) Test name n r
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 580.96
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011240.91
(28) The Test To End All Tests150.86
(42) The Marathon Test80.86
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4200.85
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment280.85
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man180.84
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords60.84
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008790.83
(48) Narcissus' last stand120.82
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test120.79
(107) The Alchemist Test80.79
(18) The Nemesis Test150.78
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test100.77
(1) Cartoons of Shock210.74
(62) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice100.74
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test120.73
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2100.72
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 2004160.72
(75) Analogies of Long Test For Genius50.70
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4150.68
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004270.64
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree90.64
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words80.64
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3320.64
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004300.62
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test120.61
(25) The Sargasso Test220.60
(36) Reflections In Peroxide140.59
(29) Words80.59
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude150.58
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree120.51
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism50.50
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test280.48
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016140.47
(54) Test of Shock and Awe50.47
(24) Reason - Revision 2008800.45
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 201690.44
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT60.43
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree120.42
(44) Associative LIMIT230.42
(7) The Final Test170.41
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010120.39
(82) Reason110.39
(68) Numbers70.38
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 201690.38
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version170.38
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010280.38
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016110.37
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016120.36
(10) Genius Association Test270.35
(79) Association subtest of Long Test For Genius50.34
(11) Isis Test260.32
(15) Letters90.27
(55) Spatial Insight Test50.27
(57) Space, Time, and Hyperspace70.26
(104) The Final Test - Revision 2013110.25
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010180.25
(5) Daedalus Test100.22
(53) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #370.21
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013110.09
(84) Bonsai Test5-0.16
(116) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version)10-0.74

Weighted average of correlations: 0.561 (N = 998, weighted sum = 559.58)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.75

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 5 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 with tests by others

(Test index) Test name n r
(239) Titan Test70.93
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II50.78
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version50.70
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales50.66
(238) 916 Test70.59
(231) Mysterium Entrance Exam90.49
(235) Nonverbal Cognitive Performance Examination60.49
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 4890.32
(225) Logima Strictica 36100.23
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests330.16
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I180.12
(220) Cattell Culture Fair50.04

Weighted average of correlations: 0.349 (N = 119, weighted sum = 41.51)

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 5 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Please be aware that correlations with these external tests are in most cases affected (depressed, typically) by one or more of the following: (1) Little overlap with the object test because of the much lower ceilings and inherent ceiling effects of the tests used in regular psychology; (2) Candidates reporting scores selectively, for instance only the higher ones while withholding lower ones; (3) Candidates reporting, or having been reported by psychometricians, incorrect scores.

Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 with other tests by Paul Cooijmans - for females

(Test index) Test name n r
(1) Cartoons of Shock21.00
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 321.00
(7) The Final Test21.00
(10) Genius Association Test21.00
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test21.00
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 201021.00
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 200421.00
(44) Associative LIMIT21.00
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 421.00
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 201621.00
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 200850.86
(24) Reason - Revision 200850.59
(18) The Nemesis Test3-0.27

Weighted average of correlations: 0.800 (N = 33, weighted sum = 26.41)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading among females: 0.89

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 2 score pairs. All known pairs are used, including possible floor/ceiling scores or outliers.

Estimated loadings of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 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 #5 on that type
Verbal1790.73
Numerical470.66
Spatial940.72
Logical1010.65
Heterogeneous3170.76

N = 738

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

Balanced g loading = 0.71

National medians for Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5

Country n median score
Spain580.5
Sweden275.8
China475.0
South_Africa274.0
United_Kingdom373.5
Bulgaria270.5
India269.0
Germany568.5
Canada366.5
United_States2065.8
Finland461.5
Portugal249.0
Greece1046.3
Korea_South340.5

For reasons of privacy, only countries with 2 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 #5

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

Correlation of Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 with personal details

Personalia n r
Observed associative horizon100.70
P.S.I.A. Rational210.39
P.S.I.A. Introverted210.33
P.S.I.A. Cold210.31
Observed behaviour230.31
P.S.I.A. True210.30
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor270.27
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor270.26
P.S.I.A. Just210.18
P.S.I.A. Neurotic210.18
P.S.I.A. Extreme210.17
P.S.I.A. System factor240.16
Sex830.15
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid210.12
P.S.I.A. Rare210.07
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms180.05
P.S.I.A. Orderly210.05
Educational level78-0.02
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes10-0.06
Disorders (parents and siblings)78-0.06
Disorders (own)78-0.11
Mother's educational level76-0.13
Father's educational level74-0.16
Year of birth81-0.21
P.S.I.A. Antisocial21-0.25
P.S.I.A. Cruel21-0.30

Estimated g factor loadings upward and downward of particular scores

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 scoreUpward g (n)Downward g (n)
00.74 (989)NaN (0)
56.70.52 (601)0.70 (261)
700.52 (336)0.74 (569)
770.63 (71)0.74 (820)
83.3NaN (0)0.73 (951)
100NaN (0)0.75 (998)

Reliability

Remark: The very high reliability is a logical result of the very high number of items (200), which more than compensates for the depressing effect of the two-option multiple-choice nature of the items.

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
70 to 74178.0
60 to 64173.5
55 to 59273.8
50 to 54244.5
45 to 49869.0
40 to 44869.8
35 to 39878.0
30 to 341168.0
25 to 291868.5
22 to 241366.0
20 or 21568.0
18 or 19353.0
17253.0

N = 82

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
2008771.0
2009757.0
20101072.0
2011669.8
2012871.0
2013675.3
2014568.0
2015373.5
20161050.8
2017968.0
2018758.5
2019666.0

ryear taken × median score = -0.28 (N = 84)

Robustness and overall test quality