Ranked by number of scores per year (n/yr).
Rank | Test | n/yr | n | Type | From | To | q |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Qoymans Multiple-Choice #2 | 826.0 | 413 | Verbal | 2002 | 2002 | 0.35 |
2 | Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 372.0 | 186 | Verbal | 2002 | 2002 | 0.29 |
3 | Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 | 141.0 | 282 | Verbal | 2002 | 2004 | 0.30 |
4 | Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 42.3 | 169 | Verbal | 2004 | 2008 | 0.24 |
5 | Evens | 29.0 | 29 | Numerical | 2002 | 2003 | 0.04 |
6 | Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 19.6 | 157 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2011 | 2019 | 0.23 |
7 | Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 18.2 | 182 | Spatial | 1995 | 2005 | 0.52 |
8 | A-12 - Early experimental oral association test in Netherlandic, 40 items | 18.0 | 18 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.26 |
9 | A-10 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic | 16.0 | 8 | Verbal | 1995 | 1995 | 0.92 |
10 | Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 14.7 | 147 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2009 | 2019 | 0.48 |
11 | KIT Intelligence Test - first attempts | 14.0 | 14 | Adaptive | 2005 | 2006 | 1.00 |
12 | Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 13.3 | 80 | Verbal, spatial | 2004 | 2010 | 0.59 |
13 | Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 13.2 | 66 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2004 | 2009 | 0.44 |
14 | Spatial Insight Test | 13.0 | 26 | Spatial | 2003 | 2005 | 0.35 |
15 | Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 12.1 | 109 | Verbal | 1995 | 2004 | 0.63 |
16 | Qoymans Automatic Test #2 | 12.0 | 36 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2002 | 2005 | 0.19 |
17 | Qoymans Automatic Test #1 | 11.8 | 47 | Verbal, numerical, logical | 2001 | 2005 | 0.26 |
18.5 | Test of Shock and Awe | 11.5 | 23 | Verbal, numerical | 2003 | 2005 | 0.43 |
18.5 | Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test (old version) | 11.5 | 46 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2007 | 2011 | 0.17 |
20 | Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 11.0 | 66 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2013 | 2019 | 0.62 |
21 | Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 10.9 | 98 | Verbal | 1995 | 2004 | 0.68 |
22.5 | Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 10.8 | 130 | Spatial | 2004 | 2016 | 0.48 |
22.5 | Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 | 10.8 | 65 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 1998 | 2004 | 0.30 |
24 | Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 10.7 | 32 | Spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.42 |
25 | Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 10.0 | 30 | Numerical, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.54 |
26 | Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 9.7 | 58 | Numerical, spatial | 2010 | 2016 | 0.60 |
27 | Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 9.4 | 85 | Numerical | 2010 | 2019 | 0.77 |
28 | Long Test For Genius | 9.3 | 84 | Verbal, spatial | 1995 | 2004 | 0.59 |
29 | The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 8.7 | 26 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.39 |
30 | Analogies #1 | 8.3 | 33 | Verbal | 1999 | 2003 | 0.64 |
31 | Short Test For Genius | 8.1 | 73 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 1995 | 2004 | 0.82 |
32.5 | Numbers | 8.0 | 120 | Numerical | 1995 | 2010 | 0.40 |
32.5 | A-17 - Early experimental association test in English, 45 items | 8.0 | 8 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.95 |
34 | Reason | 7.8 | 39 | Logical | 2003 | 2008 | 0.27 |
35 | Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 7.8 | 31 | Verbal, logical | 2004 | 2008 | 0.22 |
37 | Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 7.7 | 115 | Verbal | 2004 | 2019 | 0.71 |
37 | Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 7.7 | 23 | Verbal, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.26 |
37 | Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 7.7 | 23 | Verbal | 2016 | 2019 | 0.76 |
39 | Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 7.5 | 83 | Verbal | 2008 | 2019 | 0.18 |
40 | Reason - Revision 2008 | 7.5 | 82 | Logical | 2008 | 2019 | 0.24 |
41 | The Final Test | 7.4 | 126 | Verbal | 1996 | 2013 | 0.48 |
42 | Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 7.3 | 22 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.67 |
43 | Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 7.3 | 80 | Verbal, logical | 2008 | 2019 | 0.20 |
45 | A-18 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic | 7.0 | 7 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.56 |
45 | Numerical Insight Test | 7.0 | 14 | Numerical | 2003 | 2005 | 0.10 |
45 | Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 7.0 | 21 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.89 |
47 | A-22 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 27 items (maximum score 31) | 6.7 | 20 | Verbal | 1995 | 1998 | 0.27 |
48.5 | Genius Association Test | 6.5 | 104 | Verbal | 2003 | 2019 | 0.45 |
48.5 | Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 6.5 | 39 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2010 | 2016 | 0.67 |
50 | Bonsai Test | 6.3 | 25 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2002 | 2006 | 0.51 |
51 | Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 6.1 | 92 | Spatial | 2004 | 2019 | 0.40 |
52.5 | Association and Analogies (German) | 6.0 | 6 | Verbal | 2004 | 2005 | 0.60 |
52.5 | The Piper's Test | 6.0 | 3 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2019 | 2019 | 0.84 |
54 | Qoymans Automatic Test #3 | 5.5 | 11 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2005 | 2007 | 0.15 |
55 | Cartoons of Shock | 5.4 | 54 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2006 | 2016 | 0.42 |
56.5 | A-16 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 21 items | 5.0 | 5 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.90 |
56.5 | A-19 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 23 items | 5.0 | 5 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.50 |
58 | Cooijmans On-Line Test | 4.3 | 34 | Logical | 2001 | 2009 | 1.00 |
59 | Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 4.2 | 25 | Numerical, spatial | 2013 | 2019 | 0.65 |
60 | Verbal Insight Test | 4.0 | 4 | Verbal | 2003 | 2004 | 0.35 |
61 | Isis Test | 3.9 | 71 | Verbal, numerical | 2001 | 2019 | 0.97 |
62 | The Sargasso Test | 3.8 | 46 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2007 | 2019 | 0.49 |
63 | Associative LIMIT | 3.8 | 61 | Verbal, spatial | 2003 | 2019 | 0.45 |
64 | Odds | 3.6 | 29 | Numerical | 2002 | 2010 | 0.39 |
65 | The Alchemist Test | 3.6 | 18 | Numerical, logical | 2014 | 2019 | 0.70 |
66 | Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 3.1 | 44 | Numerical | 2005 | 2019 | 0.26 |
67 | Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 3.1 | 43 | Spatial | 2005 | 2019 | 0.56 |
72 | Test of the Beheaded Man | 3.0 | 39 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2006 | 2019 | 0.53 |
72 | The Test To End All Tests | 3.0 | 66 | Verbal | 1997 | 2019 | 0.67 |
72 | Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 3.0 | 42 | Numerical, spatial | 2005 | 2019 | 0.40 |
72 | A-11 - Early experimental association test in English, 60 items | 3.0 | 3 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.96 |
72 | A-15 - Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 32 items | 3.0 | 3 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.88 |
72 | A-21 - Early experimental numerical test, 9 items | 3.0 | 3 | Numerical | 1995 | 1996 | 0.85 |
72 | Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 21 items | 3.0 | 3 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.62 |
72 | Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 38 items | 3.0 | 3 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.11 |
72 | The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 3.0 | 18 | Verbal | 2013 | 2019 | 0.76 |
77 | Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 2.9 | 32 | Verbal, numerical, logical | 2008 | 2019 | 1.00 |
78 | The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 2.8 | 17 | Verbal, numerical, logical | 2013 | 2019 | 1.00 |
79.5 | A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 2.5 | 25 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2009 | 2019 | 0.84 |
79.5 | Giga Test | 2.5 | 5 | Verbal, numerical, working memory capacity - Supervised, Netherlandic | 1997 | 1999 | 0.62 |
81.5 | Reflections In Peroxide | 2.2 | 20 | Numerical, spatial | 2010 | 2019 | 0.69 |
81.5 | Association subtest of Long Test For Genius (Netherlandic) | 2.2 | 20 | Verbal | 1996 | 2005 | 0.63 |
83 | The Nemesis Test | 2.2 | 48 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 1997 | 2019 | 0.86 |
84 | Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 2.1 | 30 | Verbal | 2005 | 2019 | 0.43 |
86 | The Marathon Test | 2.0 | 28 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2005 | 2019 | 0.39 |
86 | Early experimental association test in English, 36 items | 2.0 | 2 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | 0.79 |
86 | De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 2.0 | 1 | Verbal, spatial | 2019 | 2019 | ? |
88.5 | Narcissus' last stand | 1.9 | 17 | Verbal, numerical, spatial | 2010 | 2019 | 0.71 |
88.5 | Analogies subtest of Long Test For Genius (Netherlandic) | 1.9 | 17 | Verbal | 1996 | 2005 | 0.72 |
90 | Long Test For Genius (Netherlandic) | 1.8 | 16 | Verbal, spatial | 1996 | 2005 | 0.60 |
91 | Words | 1.8 | 23 | Verbal | 2003 | 2016 | 0.15 |
92 | Letters | 1.7 | 22 | Verbal | 2003 | 2016 | 0.11 |
93 | Daedalus Test | 1.6 | 33 | Logical | 1999 | 2019 | 0.61 |
94 | Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 1.5 | 20 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical | 2006 | 2019 | 0.26 |
95 | Association and Analogies (French) | 1.5 | 12 | Verbal | 1996 | 2004 | 0.66 |
96 | The LAW - Letters And Words | 1.5 | 19 | Verbal | 2003 | 2016 | 0.12 |
97 | Association subtest of Long Test For Genius (French) | 1.4 | 11 | Verbal | 1996 | 2004 | 0.61 |
98 | The Hammer Of Test-Hungry | 1.3 | 4 | Verbal, numerical, logical | 2010 | 2013 | 1.00 |
99 | Long Test For Genius (French) | 1.3 | 10 | Verbal, spatial | 1996 | 2004 | 0.61 |
100 | Analogies subtest of Long Test For Genius (French) | 1.2 | 11 | Verbal | 1996 | 2005 | 0.71 |
101 | Psychometric Qrosswords | 1.1 | 20 | Verbal | 2001 | 2019 | 0.23 |
102.5 | Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 1.0 | 3 | Verbal, spatial | 2016 | 2019 | 0.35 |
102.5 | Early experimental association test in Netherlandic, 40 items | 1.0 | 1 | Verbal | 1995 | 1996 | ? |
104 | Labyrinthine LIMIT | 0.8 | 12 | Spatial, logical | 2004 | 2019 | 0.63 |
105 | Female Intelligence Test | 0.8 | 9 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, speeded mental task, clerical accuracy, dexterity/motoric | 2003 | 2015 | 0.35 |
107 | Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 0.7 | 10 | Verbal, logical | 2004 | 2019 | 0.44 |
107 | Grail Test | 0.7 | 2 | Verbal, numerical, spatial, working memory capacity, speeded mental task, dexterity/motoric, physical (strength, explosiveness, speed, stamina) - Supervised, Netherlandic | 1999 | 2002 | 1.00 |
107 | Dicing with death | 0.7 | 4 | Verbal, spatial | 2013 | 2019 | 0.68 |
109 | Low Countries Aptitude Test | 0.6 | 7 | Numerical, spatial - Supervised | 2004 | 2016 | 0.18 |
110 | Analogies #1 (Netherlandic) | 0.5 | 2 | Verbal | 1999 | 2003 | 0.52 |
111 | Gliaweb Raadselachtig Analogieënproefwerk | 0.4 | 5 | Verbal | 2007 | 2019 | 0.49 |
112 | De Laatste Test | 0.3 | 7 | Verbal | 1996 | 2019 | 0.60 |
113 | De Golfstroomtest | 0.3 | 3 | Verbal | 2007 | 2019 | 0.54 |
114 | De Roskam | 0.2 | 2 | Verbal | 2007 | 2019 | 0.38 |
115 | GliaWeb Raadselachtige Associatie- en Analogieëntest | 0.1 | 1 | Verbal | 2008 | 2019 | ? |
Note: q = hardness
# types | mean n/yr (# tests) |
---|---|
1 | 27.4 (63) |
2 | 4.8 (22) |
3 | 6.4 (18) |
4 | 7.6 (10) |
It could not be more clear: Homogeneous (one-sided) tests are by far the most popular. Candidates, when allowed to follow their own preferences and not guided into more sensible ways, choose to have it easy and take mainly or only tests that fit their strongest side. Test constructors who are only in for the money and fame cater for their candidates' regrettable whims, resulting in score inflation and the tsunami of unbalanced characters claiming the world's highest "I.Q." we all loathe so much.
Type | mean n/yr (# tests) |
---|---|
Verbal | 34.8 (45) |
Numerical | 9.0 (7) |
Spatial | 10.3 (6) |
Logical | 5.3 (4) |
Verbal tests are always by very far the most accessible and attractive to a broad audience, despite popular notions of cultural or linguistic "bias" (which in actuality is quite small to non-existent). Of the non-verbal tests, visual-spatial ones are the most popular. Numerical and logical tests are feared to some extent; this is probably the wide-spread fear of mathematics and (formal, symbolic) logic among the general "alpha" public.
# types | mean q (# tests) |
---|---|
1 | 0.51 (63) |
2 | 0.51 (22) |
3 | 0.63 (18) |
4 | 0.41 (10) |
Contrary to people's dislike for them, heterogeneous tests are not harder on the whole than homogeneous ones.
Type | mean q (# tests) |
---|---|
Verbal | 0.52 (45) |
Numerical | 0.41 (7) |
Spatial | 0.43 (6) |
Logical | 0.58 (4) |
rn/yr × q = -0.11 (over 116 tests with at least 1 score each)
rn/yr × q = -0.12 (over 78 tests with at least 16 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.14 (over 58 tests with at least 25 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.15 (over 42 tests with at least 36 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.21 (over 31 tests with at least 49 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.22 (over 28 tests with at least 64 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.22 (over 28 tests with at least 81 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.30 (over 14 tests with at least 100 scores each)
rn/yr × q = -0.26 (over 10 tests with at least 121 scores each)
Although this appears a slight negative correlation, one expects a somewhat larger negative correlation with the true, population-independent, test hardness. This correlation means that easier tests are more popular than harder tests. The fact that hardness as meant here is computed in relation to the group of candidates having taken the test may attenuate the correlation toward zero, on the understanding that a (truly) harder test will attract a smaller sample with a higher average level, and that therefore the average score of the sample shifts upward with true hardness, thus hiding the correlation.