0 | ***** |
1 | * |
2 | *** |
4 | * |
5 | ** |
6 | *** |
7 | ** |
8 | ****** |
10 | ********** |
11 | **** |
12 | ***** |
13 | ******** |
14 | ***** |
15 | ***** |
16 | ** |
17 | *** |
18 | ******* |
19 | **** |
20 | ** |
21 | * |
22 | * |
23 | * |
24 | * |
25 | * |
26 | * |
Test name | n | r |
---|---|---|
Graduate Record Examination (prior to October 2001) | 4 | 0.99 |
Narcissus' last stand | 36 | 0.94 |
Tests by Nikolaos Soulios (aggregate) | 6 | 0.92 |
Verbal section of The Marathon Test | 18 | 0.90 |
The Marathon Test | 18 | 0.89 |
Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test | 20 | 0.89 |
The Smell Test | 9 | 0.88 |
Associative LIMIT | 26 | 0.88 |
Only idiots | 9 | 0.87 |
The Gate | 4 | 0.86 |
Divine Psychometry (Matthew Scillitani) | 12 | 0.86 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4 | 22 | 0.85 |
Numerical section of The Marathon Test | 21 | 0.85 |
Spatial section of The Marathon Test | 20 | 0.84 |
Non-Verbal Cognitive Performance Examination (Xavier Jouve) | 9 | 0.83 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 27 | 0.83 |
A Relaxing Test (David Miller) | 13 | 0.82 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 24 | 0.82 |
Random Feickery (Brandon Feick) | 7 | 0.81 |
A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude | 24 | 0.80 |
The Final Test | 36 | 0.79 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5 | 29 | 0.79 |
Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test | 30 | 0.78 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 10 | 0.78 |
Spatial Insight Test | 5 | 0.78 |
Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 | 22 | 0.78 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5 | 20 | 0.78 |
The Sargasso Test | 30 | 0.77 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3 | 29 | 0.77 |
Test of the Beheaded Man | 26 | 0.77 |
Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 21 | 0.77 |
Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 24 | 0.77 |
The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016 | 24 | 0.77 |
The Piper's Test | 15 | 0.76 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008 | 29 | 0.75 |
Reflections In Peroxide | 36 | 0.73 |
Psychometric Qrosswords | 17 | 0.73 |
Cartoons of Shock | 17 | 0.73 |
Dicing with death | 15 | 0.72 |
Reason Behind Multiple-Choice | 7 | 0.72 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016 | 24 | 0.72 |
Genius Association Test | 32 | 0.71 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016 | 25 | 0.70 |
Mega Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 10 | 0.68 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree | 12 | 0.68 |
Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 13 | 0.67 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree | 27 | 0.67 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #3 (batch scored by Paul Cooijmans) | 9 | 0.67 |
Miller Analogies Test (before 2001; raw) | 4 | 0.65 |
Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004 | 28 | 0.65 |
Sigma Test (Melão Hindemburg) | 5 | 0.64 |
Tests by Jason Betts (aggregate) | 5 | 0.63 |
Analogies of Long Test For Genius | 16 | 0.63 |
International High IQ Society tests (aggregate) | 12 | 0.62 |
Culture Fair Numerical Spatial Examination - Final version (Etienne Forsström) | 6 | 0.62 |
The Nemesis Test | 28 | 0.62 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 1 | 8 | 0.61 |
Long Test For Genius | 12 | 0.61 |
De Laatste Test - Herziening 2019 | 6 | 0.60 |
Reason - Revision 2008 | 29 | 0.60 |
Tests by Greg Grove (aggregate) | 7 | 0.60 |
Labyrinthine LIMIT | 13 | 0.58 |
Ultra Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 7 | 0.58 |
Scholastic Aptitude Test (old) | 5 | 0.57 |
Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism | 13 | 0.57 |
Laaglandse Aanlegtest - Herziening 2016 | 4 | 0.57 |
Short Test For Genius | 7 | 0.56 |
Titan Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 11 | 0.56 |
Epiq Tests (aggregate) | 5 | 0.55 |
Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 2 | 13 | 0.55 |
The Final Test - Revision 2013 | 9 | 0.54 |
Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version | 14 | 0.52 |
Space, Time, and Hyperspace | 17 | 0.51 |
Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010 | 31 | 0.50 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #2 | 5 | 0.50 |
Letters | 8 | 0.50 |
Test of Shock and Awe | 10 | 0.48 |
The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 2013 | 8 | 0.47 |
Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree | 16 | 0.46 |
Miscellaneous tests | 28 | 0.45 |
Association subtest of Long Test For Genius | 15 | 0.43 |
Analogies #1 | 10 | 0.43 |
Isis Test | 28 | 0.39 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam I (Jonathan Wai) | 11 | 0.39 |
The Alchemist Test (Anas El Husseini) | 13 | 0.38 |
The LAW - Letters And Words | 7 | 0.33 |
European I.Q. Test | 5 | 0.30 |
Numbers | 13 | 0.30 |
Daedalus Test | 18 | 0.26 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #4 | 16 | 0.26 |
De Golfstroomtest - Herziening 2019 | 5 | 0.24 |
Strict Logic Sequences Exam II (Jonathan Wai) | 5 | 0.23 |
Reason | 10 | 0.22 |
Logima Strictica 36 (Robert Lato) | 10 | 0.19 |
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales | 9 | 0.18 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (I.Q.) | 5 | 0.16 |
Bonsai Test | 9 | 0.16 |
Qoymans Multiple-Choice #1 | 9 | 0.12 |
Tests by Ivan Ivec (aggregate) | 8 | 0.11 |
Words | 8 | -0.06 |
Hoeflin Power Test (Ronald K. Hoeflin) | 4 | -0.13 |
Cattell Culture Fair | 4 | -0.21 |
Tests by James Dorsey (aggregate) | 4 | -0.40 |
Odds | 6 | -0.44 |
Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices (raw) | 6 | -0.49 |
Tests by Mislav Predavec (aggregate) | 5 | -0.51 |
Gliaweb Raadselachtig Analogieënproefwerk | 4 | -0.88 |
Weighted average of correlations: 0.634 (N = 1560)
Estimated g factor loading: 0.80
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 The Test To End All Tests on that type |
---|---|---|
Verbal | 303 | 0.79 |
Numerical | 82 | 0.69 |
Spatial | 125 | 0.84 |
Logical | 57 | 0.65 |
Heterogeneous | 585 | 0.82 |
N = 1152
Balanced g loading = 0.76
Country | n | median score |
---|---|---|
United_Kingdom | 4 | 17.5 |
Germany | 6 | 15.5 |
Sweden | 3 | 14.0 |
United_States | 31 | 13.0 |
Canada | 4 | 11.0 |
Italy | 3 | 11.0 |
Netherlands | 3 | 11.0 |
Finland | 3 | 8.0 |
Correlation of this test with national average I.Q.'s published by Lynn and Vanhanen, later Lynn and Becker:
Personalia | n | r |
---|---|---|
PSIA Rational - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.62 |
PSIA Orderly - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.59 |
PSIA True - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.56 |
PSIA Ethics factor - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.47 |
PSIA System factor - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.43 |
Observed associative horizon | 12 | 0.35 |
PSIA Just - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.29 |
PSIA Introverted - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.28 |
PSIA Extreme - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.26 |
PSIA Deviance factor - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.26 |
PSIA Cold - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.25 |
Sex | 84 | 0.16 |
Observed behaviour | 22 | 0.16 |
Educational level | 65 | 0.15 |
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms | 24 | 0.15 |
PSIA Rare - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.14 |
PSIA Aspergoid - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.11 |
PSIA Neurotic - Revision 2007 | 16 | 0.06 |
Year of birth | 81 | -0.00 |
Mother's educational level | 60 | -0.01 |
Disorders (parents and siblings) | 63 | -0.09 |
Father's educational level | 59 | -0.15 |
Disorders (own) | 66 | -0.16 |
PSIA Cruel - Revision 2007 | 16 | -0.19 |
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes | 9 | -0.40 |
PSIA Antisocial - Revision 2007 | 16 | -0.47 |
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 these values to be lower than the test's full-range g loading.
Below 1st quartile (raw 8.0) | 0.82 (312) |
---|---|
Below median (raw 12.5) | 0.74 (691) |
Above median (raw 12.5) | 0.64 (829) |
Above 3rd quartile (raw 17.0) | 0.67 (517) |
Age class | n | Median score |
---|---|---|
60 to 64 | 1 | 7.0 |
55 to 59 | 1 | 13.0 |
50 to 54 | 4 | 9.0 |
45 to 49 | 9 | 12.0 |
40 to 44 | 11 | 18.0 |
35 to 39 | 11 | 11.0 |
30 to 34 | 9 | 13.0 |
25 to 29 | 16 | 12.5 |
22 to 24 | 13 | 12.0 |
20 or 21 | 4 | 14.5 |
18 or 19 | 1 | 10.0 |
17 | 1 | 10.0 |
16 | 1 | 14.0 |
N = 82
Year taken | n | median score | protonorm |
---|---|---|---|
1997 | 3 | 5.0 | 303 |
1998 | 2 | 7.0 | 330 |
2000 | 2 | 9.0 | 360 |
2001 | 4 | 13.5 | 422 |
2002 | 5 | 13.0 | 413 |
2003 | 5 | 13.0 | 413 |
2004 | 13 | 10.0 | 370 |
2005 | 4 | 15.5 | 443 |
2006 | 3 | 0.0 | 213 |
2007 | 3 | 14.0 | 430 |
2008 | 4 | 20.0 | 559 |
2009 | 1 | 10.0 | 370 |
2010 | 4 | 7.0 | 330 |
2011 | 1 | 13.0 | 413 |
2012 | 1 | 20.0 | 559 |
2013 | 4 | 2.5 | 287 |
2014 | 1 | 10.0 | 370 |
2016 | 1 | 6.0 | 311 |
2017 | 4 | 16.5 | 452 |
2019 | 1 | 19.0 | 520 |
2020 | 5 | 11.0 | 387 |
2021 | 4 | 13.5 | 422 |
2022 | 5 | 21.0 | 583 |
2023 | 2 | 15.0 | 437 |
2024 | 2 | 11.5 | 391 |
ryear taken × median score = 0.34 (N = 84)
Item statistics are not published as that would help candidates. To detect bad items, answers and comments from candidates are studied, as well as, for each problem, the correlation with total score on the remaining problems (item-rest correlation) and the proportion of candidates getting it wrong (hardness of the item). Possible bad items are revised, replaced, or removed, possibly resulting in a revised version of the test.