Contents type: Numerical, spatial. Period: 2010-2016
| 0 | * |
| 8 | * |
| 9 | * |
| 10 | ***** |
| 11.5 | * |
| 12 | ** |
| 12.5 | * |
| 13 | ****** |
| 13.5 | ** |
| 14 | ** |
| 14.5 | * |
| 15 | **** |
| 15.5 | * |
| 16 | ******* |
| 17 | ****** |
| 18 | * |
| 19 | ** |
| 19.5 | * |
| 20 | ** |
| 21 | ** |
| 21.5 | * |
| 22 | * |
| 23 | * |
| 23.5 | ** |
| 24 | * |
| 25 | *** |
| 28 | * |
| Test name | n | r | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Only idiots | 6 | 0.99 | 0.03 |
| Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 4 | 0.95 | 0.10 |
| Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 59 | 0.94 | 0.0000000000008 |
| Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.93 | 0.009 |
| Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 6 | 0.89 | 0.05 |
| The Piper's Test | 6 | 0.89 | 0.05 |
| Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 4 | 0.89 | 0.12 |
| Test of the Beheaded Man | 12 | 0.87 | 0.004 |
| The Marathon Test | 11 | 0.86 | 0.007 |
| Logicaus Strictimanus 24 (Robert Lato) | 5 | 0.85 | 0.09 |
| The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 11 | 0.84 | 0.009 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 39 | 0.84 | 0.0000002 |
| Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 16 | 0.82 | 0.001 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 29 | 0.81 | 0.00002 |
| Dicing with death | 6 | 0.80 | 0.08 |
| Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 9 | 0.79 | 0.03 |
| Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 12 | 0.79 | 0.009 |
| Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 5 | 0.79 | 0.12 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 7 | 0.78 | 0.05 |
| Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 15 | 0.78 | 0.003 |
| Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 8 | 0.78 | 0.04 |
| Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 9 | 0.76 | 0.03 |
| Labyrinthine LIMIT | 8 | 0.76 | 0.04 |
| Reflections In Peroxide | 13 | 0.76 | 0.009 |
| Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 59 | 0.76 | 0.000000006 |
| Reason | 4 | 0.76 | 0.19 |
| Narcissus' last stand | 9 | 0.75 | 0.04 |
| A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 15 | 0.74 | 0.006 |
| Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 18 | 0.74 | 0.002 |
| The Nemesis Test | 14 | 0.73 | 0.009 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 16 | 0.72 | 0.005 |
| Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 25 | 0.71 | 0.0005 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 14 | 0.70 | 0.01 |
| Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 16 | 0.69 | 0.008 |
| Miscellaneous tests | 23 | 0.68 | 0.001 |
| The Test To End All Tests | 12 | 0.68 | 0.02 |
| Associative LIMIT | 19 | 0.67 | 0.005 |
| The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 8 | 0.65 | 0.08 |
| The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 7 | 0.64 | 0.12 |
| The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 12 | 0.63 | 0.04 |
| Tests by Marc-André Nydegger (aggregate) | 5 | 0.63 | 0.20 |
| Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 21 | 0.62 | 0.006 |
| Tests by Xavier Jouve, other than those listed separately (aggregate) | 6 | 0.61 | 0.17 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 11 | 0.60 | 0.06 |
| Psychometric Qrosswords | 6 | 0.59 | 0.18 |
| Daedalus Test | 9 | 0.59 | 0.10 |
| Cartoons of Shock | 16 | 0.58 | 0.03 |
| Genius Association Test | 21 | 0.55 | 0.01 |
| Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 8 | 0.54 | 0.15 |
| Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 5 | 0.54 | 0.28 |
| Strict Logic Sequences Examination I (Jonathan Wai) | 10 | 0.52 | 0.12 |
| Numbers | 7 | 0.50 | 0.22 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 40 | 0.48 | 0.003 |
| A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 5 | 0.43 | 0.38 |
| Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 8 | 0.43 | 0.26 |
| Tests by Paul Laurent Miranda (aggregate) | 6 | 0.43 | 0.34 |
| Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 7 | 0.41 | 0.32 |
| 916 Test (Laurent Dubois) | 4 | 0.40 | 0.48 |
| Isis Test | 14 | 0.40 | 0.15 |
| Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 12 | 0.34 | 0.26 |
| Letters | 7 | 0.34 | 0.40 |
| Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 22 | 0.32 | 0.14 |
| Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 22 | 0.30 | 0.16 |
| The Final Test | 7 | 0.29 | 0.46 |
| The LAW - Letters And Words | 6 | 0.29 | 0.52 |
| Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 10 | 0.27 | 0.42 |
| Cattell Culture Fair | 4 | 0.27 | 0.64 |
| Reason - Revision 2008 | 22 | 0.24 | 0.27 |
| The Sargasso Test | 14 | 0.22 | 0.42 |
| Tests by Theodosis Prousalis (aggregate) | 6 | 0.22 | 0.62 |
| Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 6 | 0.22 | 0.62 |
| Words | 7 | 0.18 | 0.66 |
| Sequentia Numerica Form I (Alexander Herkner) | 5 | -0.15 | 0.76 |
| Strict Logic Spatial Examination 48 (Jonathan Wai) | 4 | -0.17 | 0.76 |
| Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 5 | -0.18 | 0.71 |
| Strict Logic Sequences Examination II (Jonathan Wai) | 5 | -0.23 | 0.64 |
Weighted mean of correlations: 0.631 (N = 953)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.79
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.
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 Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 on that type |
|---|---|---|
| Verbal | 156 | 0.69 |
| Numerical | 102 | 0.80 |
| Spatial | 142 | 0.85 |
| Logical | 35 | 0.62 |
| Heterogeneous | 280 | 0.81 |
N = 715
Compound tests have been left out of this table to avoid overlap.
Balanced g loading = 0.76
| Country | n | median score |
|---|---|---|
| Korea_South | 3 | 17.0 |
| Netherlands | 4 | 16.5 |
| Italy | 3 | 16.0 |
| United_States | 13 | 15.0 |
| Spain | 3 | 14.5 |
| Germany | 5 | 13.5 |
Total number of countries: 29
For reasons of privacy, only countries with 3 or more candidates are included in this table. Ranking is based on the medians, and then alphabetic.
Notice: A correlation is generally considered significant if its p value is 0.05 or less.
| Personalia | n | r | p value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Observed behaviour | 11 | 0.34 | 0.28 |
| PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.32 | 0.34 |
| PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.28 | 0.38 |
| PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.28 | 0.38 |
| PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.26 | 0.42 |
| PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.13 | 0.68 |
| Educational level | 54 | 0.09 | 0.48 |
| Sex | 59 | 0.07 | 0.60 |
| Mother's educational level | 53 | 0.06 | 0.66 |
| Father's educational level | 51 | 0.05 | 0.74 |
| PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.04 | 0.92 |
| PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.04 | 0.92 |
| PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 10 | 0.02 | 0.94 |
| Disorders (parents and siblings) | 53 | -0.00 | 0.97 |
| PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.02 | 0.94 |
| Year of birth | 59 | -0.06 | 0.66 |
| Disorders (own) | 55 | -0.09 | 0.50 |
| PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.16 | 0.64 |
| Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 5 | -0.25 | 0.62 |
| PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.26 | 0.44 |
| PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.30 | 0.37 |
| PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.30 | 0.37 |
| PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.38 | 0.26 |
| PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 10 | -0.46 | 0.17 |
| Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 8 | -0.65 | 0.09 |
The goal of estimated g factor loadings for restricted ranges 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 (13.0) | 0.77 (N = 243) |
|---|---|
| Below median (16.0) | 0.77 (N = 552) |
| Above median (16.0) | 0.67 (N = 474) |
| Above 3rd quartile (19.5) | 0.45 (N = 261) |
These are computed from statistics like subtest reliabilities, subtest variances, and total test variance.
These reliability coefficients are on the low side for a subtest that is also used as a test on its own. Hence, the Revision 2016 was created to improve on this, and the present test withdrawn.
Standard error = 2.0 raw score points
Ideal values for correlations between subtests are around .5, thus being a compromise between the test's ability to yield a "profile" and its ability to provide an indication of general intelligence. With a too high correlation (like .8 or higher) the subtests measure basically the same so there is almost no profile information in them, with a too low correlation (like .2 or lower) the subtests are so different that there is little point in combining them into a measure of general intelligence.
For the correlations of the subtests with total score, see the correlations table above in this report. For statistics per subtest, see the statistical reports of the pertinent subtests, Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 and Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004.