Statistics of Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010

Integrity Must Prevail Above Loathsome Evil

© Paul Cooijmans

Scores on Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 as of 11 October 2019

Contents type: Numerical.   Period: 2010-present

0 *******
1 *****
2 ************
3 *********************
3.5 **
4 ********************
5 ********
6 ****
6.5 *
7 ***
8 *
10 *

Remark: The very low resolution of the test is due to the test's brevity and makes it unsuitable as a standalone test.

Correlation of Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 with other tests by Paul Cooijmans

(Test index) Test name n r
(69) Odds40.92
(42) The Marathon Test110.90
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree90.88
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 200480.87
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism50.86
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man120.86
(107) The Alchemist Test90.84
(18) The Nemesis Test160.79
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test130.79
(36) Reflections In Peroxide140.78
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 2016220.77
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010570.75
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test170.72
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016300.70
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test160.70
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3380.70
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010380.68
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test170.67
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords60.67
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude150.67
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree170.65
(68) Numbers70.64
(48) Narcissus' last stand120.63
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree90.62
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment240.60
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016100.60
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013110.59
(1) Cartoons of Shock180.57
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT100.56
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test330.56
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016320.54
(104) The Final Test - Revision 2013110.53
(80) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #440.51
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016220.51
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004420.50
(28) The Test To End All Tests140.48
(7) The Final Test100.48
(23) Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011230.48
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004570.46
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words60.45
(15) Letters70.45
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4240.45
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version150.44
(44) Associative LIMIT260.41
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5280.38
(5) Daedalus Test130.34
(25) The Sargasso Test160.34
(29) Words70.30
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008290.29
(24) Reason - Revision 2008280.22
(11) Isis Test190.17
(57) Space, Time, and Hyperspace60.17
(10) Genius Association Test280.14
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5100.03
(87) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 24-0.33

Weighted average of correlations: 0.546 (N = 989, weighted sum = 539.67)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.74

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

Correlation of Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 with tests by others

(Test index) Test name n r
(212) Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw)50.88
(226) Logima Strictica 2450.77
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests290.40
(225) Logima Strictica 3670.22
(240) Strict Logic Spatial Exam 4870.18
(211) Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version60.16
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I120.15
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II70.07
(246) Sequentia Numerica Form I60.05
(220) Cattell Culture Fair5-0.45

Weighted average of correlations: 0.267 (N = 89, weighted sum = 23.78)

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 4 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 Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 with other tests by Paul Cooijmans - for females

(Test index) Test name n r
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #521.00
(10) Genius Association Test21.00
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test21.00
(24) Reason - Revision 200821.00
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 200421.00
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 200821.00
(44) Associative LIMIT21.00

Weighted average of correlations: 1.000 (N = 14, weighted sum = 14.00)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading among females: 1.00

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 Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 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 Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 on that type
Verbal1980.67
Numerical280.85
Spatial1450.71
Logical410.51
Heterogeneous2780.75

N = 690

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

Balanced g loading = 0.70

National medians for Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010

Country n median score
India26.0
France25.0
Greece25.0
Poland24.5
Canada34.0
Netherlands34.0
Spain34.0
Japan23.5
Portugal23.5
United_Kingdom33.5
Germany53.0
Italy53.0
Korea_South33.0
Sweden53.0
United_States203.0
China22.5
Austria32.0

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 Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010

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

Correlation of Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 with personal details

Personalia n r
Observed associative horizon60.80
Observed behaviour150.56
Educational level730.27
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes40.18
Sex830.16
Mother's educational level710.15
P.S.I.A. Extreme110.14
P.S.I.A. Antisocial110.07
P.S.I.A. Rational110.07
Father's educational level690.07
P.S.I.A. Orderly110.02
P.S.I.A. Rare11-0.00
Disorders (parents and siblings)72-0.04
P.S.I.A. True11-0.08
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor17-0.08
Year of birth84-0.11
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor17-0.14
Disorders (own)74-0.16
P.S.I.A. Cruel11-0.17
P.S.I.A. Neurotic11-0.23
P.S.I.A. Introverted11-0.28
P.S.I.A. Cold11-0.36
P.S.I.A. Just11-0.38
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid11-0.45
P.S.I.A. System factor17-0.49
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms14-0.65

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)
20.60 (804)0.71 (279)
30.59 (659)0.74 (554)
40.61 (375)0.68 (759)
15NaN (0)0.74 (989)

Reliability

The relatively low reliability results from the brevity of the test, which is used as a subtest of a larger test. Item analysis shows that the items of this test are performing well. No bad items have been found so far, but several are of extreme difficulty. This low reliability, together with the low resolution, makes the test unsuitable as a standalone test.

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
65 to 6922.0
60 to 6412.0
55 to 5944.5
50 to 5442.0
45 to 4994.0
40 to 4484.0
35 to 39133.0
30 to 34103.0
25 to 29143.0
22 to 2454.0
20 or 2132.0
18 or 1982.5
1723.0
1612.0

N = 84

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
2011113.0
201243.5
201343.0
2014114.0
2015173.0
2016103.0
2017104.0
201874.0
2019113.0

ryear taken × median score = 0.23 (N = 85)

Robustness and overall test quality

Item analysis

Item statistics are not published as that would help future candidates. To detect bad items, answers and comments from candidates are studied, as well as, for each problem, the correlation with total score and the proportion of candidates getting it wrong (hardness of the item). Possible bad items are removed or revised, resulting in a revised version of the test.