Cooijmans tests ranked by popularity

The Test Top 115 of All Times!

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

Number of scores occurring per year (n/yr) by number of item types contained

# 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.

Number of scores occurring per year (n/yr) on homogeneous tests by item type contained

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.

Test hardness (q) by number of item types contained

# 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.

Hardness (q) of homogeneous tests by item type contained

Type	mean q (# tests)
Verbal	0.52 (45)
Numerical	0.41 (7)
Spatial	0.43 (6)
Logical	0.58 (4)

Correlation number of scores occurring per year on test × test hardness

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.11 (over 116 tests with at least 1 score each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.12 (over 78 tests with at least 16 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.14 (over 58 tests with at least 25 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.15 (over 42 tests with at least 36 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.21 (over 31 tests with at least 49 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.22 (over 28 tests with at least 64 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.22 (over 28 tests with at least 81 scores each)

r_{n/yr × q} = -0.30 (over 14 tests with at least 100 scores each)

r_{n/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.

Conclusions summarized

Homogeneous (one-sided) tests are far more popular than heterogeneous (multi-sided, mixed-item) tests;
Easier tests are more popular than harder tests;
Heterogeneous tests are not harder on the whole than homogeneous tests, despite candidates' apparent dislike or fear of them;
Of the homogeneous tests, verbal tests are the most popular, even though in a foreign language for many of the candidates;
Of the homogeneous non-verbal tests, visual-spatial tests are the most popular;
The various types of homogeneous tests do not differ much in hardness, although numerical and spatial tests are easier than logical and verbal tests.