Statistics of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011

© Paul Cooijmans

Scores on Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 as of 2 July 2021

Contents type: Verbal, numerical, spatial, logical.   Period: 2011-present

10 *
11 *
18 *
20 *
21 **
22 ***
23 *
24 ****
25 ***
26 ***
27 **
28 ******
29 ********
30 ********
31 ***********
32 **********************
33 *****************
34 *****************
35 *************************
36 ***********************
37 ***********
38 *************
39 ********
40 *****

Scores by males

n = 179

10 *
11 *
18 *
20 *
21 **
22 ***
23 *
24 **
25 **
26 ***
27 *
28 ******
29 *******
30 *******
31 ***********
32 *******************
33 ***************
34 *****************
35 ***********************
36 **********************
37 ***********
38 ************
39 *******
40 ****

Scores by females

n = 16

24 **
25 *
27 *
29 *
30 *
32 ***
33 *
35 **
36 *
38 *
39 *
40 *

Correlation of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 with other tests by I.Q. Tests for the High Range

(Test index) Test name n r
(21) Psychometric Qrosswords50.93
(113) The Piper's Test70.91
(35) Intelligence Quantifier by assessment130.88
(42) The Marathon Test140.87
(28) The Test To End All Tests140.84
(22) Gliaweb Raadselachtig Analogieënproefwerk50.83
(43) Test For Genius - Revision 2010120.81
(3) Qoymans Multiple-Choice #5320.81
(66) Test For Genius - Revision 200450.81
(45) Numerical and spatial sections of The Marathon Test180.80
(48) Narcissus' last stand130.80
(0) Test of the Beheaded Man140.80
(107) The Alchemist Test120.76
(31) Numerical section of The Marathon Test190.76
(32) Spatial section of The Marathon Test180.74
(30) Verbal section of The Marathon Test180.69
(106) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 4350.69
(27) Spatial section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004200.68
(114) Dicing with death80.68
(39) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2010160.68
(25) The Sargasso Test200.67
(36) Reflections In Peroxide150.67
(18) The Nemesis Test100.63
(111) Test For Genius - Revision 2016160.61
(47) Psychometrically Activated Grids Acerbate Neuroticism50.61
(108) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2016160.58
(7) The Final Test70.58
(40) Reason Behind Multiple-Choice - Revision 2008320.57
(37) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the third degree220.56
(46) Labyrinthine LIMIT50.56
(110) Cooijmans Intelligence Test 5160.55
(2) Cooijmans Intelligence Test - Form 3390.55
(1) Cartoons of Shock120.55
(112) Combined Numerical and Spatial sections of Test For Genius - Revision 2016170.54
(19) Numerical section of Test For Genius - Revision 2010310.52
(109) The Bonsai Test - Revision 2016210.51
(105) Space, Time, and Hyperspace - Revision 2016170.49
(26) Verbal section of Test For Genius - Revision 2004170.46
(4) A Paranoiac's Torture: Intelligence Test Utilizing Diabolic Exactitude140.45
(33) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the first degree100.45
(12) Cooijmans On-Line Test - Two-barrelled version140.42
(41) The LAW - Letters And Words70.40
(24) Reason - Revision 2008320.40
(11) Isis Test140.35
(103) Problems In Gentle Slopes of the second degree130.34
(16) Lieshout International Mesospheric Intelligence Test260.34
(5) Daedalus Test90.30
(29) Words70.27
(104) The Final Test - Revision 201390.23
(117) The Hammer Of Test-Hungry - Revision 201380.20
(44) Associative LIMIT240.18
(10) Genius Association Test270.17
(15) Letters8-0.03

Weighted average of correlations: 0.567 (N = 838, weighted sum = 475.08)

Conservatively estimated minimum g loading: 0.75

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 Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 with tests by others

(Test index) Test name n r
(236) International High IQ Society Miscellaneous tests40.88
(247) Advanced Intelligence Test50.83
(234) Strict Logic Sequences Exam I80.75
(225) Logima Strictica 3640.72
(223) Strict Logic Sequences Exam II40.66
(201) Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales50.53
(220) Cattell Culture Fair40.36
(242) Unknown and miscellaneous tests450.25
(246) Sequentia Numerica Form I50.06

Weighted average of correlations: 0.417 (N = 84, weighted sum = 34.99)

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.

Estimated loadings of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 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 Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 on that type
Verbal1720.73
Numerical500.78
Spatial810.74
Logical410.61
Heterogeneous2960.76

N = 640

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

Balanced g loading = 0.72

National medians for Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011

Country n median score
China337.0
Italy336.0
Australia435.0
Bulgaria335.0
France335.0
Germany2535.0
Romania335.0
Turkey335.0
United_Kingdom935.0
Finland534.0
Sweden934.0
United_States6034.0
Slovakia233.5
Brazil233.0
Canada833.0
El_Salvador233.0
India233.0
Netherlands333.0
Slovenia333.0
Nigeria532.0
Spain532.0
South_Africa330.0
Mexico229.5
Denmark227.0
Korea_South225.0

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 Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011

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

Correlation of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 with personal details

Personalia n r
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007210.46
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007210.45
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007210.42
Educational level1900.26
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007210.22
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes130.15
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007210.15
Mother's educational level1800.13
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 2007210.13
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 2007210.09
Sex1960.05
Father's educational level1820.04
Observed behaviour140.02
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 2007210.01
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 200721-0.07
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 200721-0.07
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 200721-0.08
Disorders (parents and siblings)189-0.09
Year of birth194-0.09
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 200721-0.11
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms15-0.14
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 200721-0.16
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 200721-0.17
Disorders (own)190-0.19
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 200721-0.43

Correlation with personal details of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 - within females

Personalia n r
Disorders (own)160.42
Mother's educational level160.42
Educational level160.23
Year of birth160.18
Disorders (parents and siblings)160.15
Father's educational level160.13

Correlation with personal details of Gliaweb Riddled Intelligence Test - Revision 2011 - within males

Personalia n r
P.S.I.A. True - Revision 2007210.46
P.S.I.A. Orderly - Revision 2007210.45
P.S.I.A. Ethics factor - Revision 2007210.42
Educational level1730.27
P.S.I.A. Rational - Revision 2007210.22
Cooijmans Inventory of Neo-Marxist Attitudes130.15
P.S.I.A. Introverted - Revision 2007210.15
P.S.I.A. System factor - Revision 2007210.13
Mother's educational level1630.13
P.S.I.A. Just - Revision 2007210.09
Father's educational level1650.04
Observed behaviour140.02
P.S.I.A. Neurotic - Revision 2007210.01
P.S.I.A. Cold - Revision 200721-0.07
P.S.I.A. Deviance factor - Revision 200721-0.07
P.S.I.A. Extreme - Revision 200721-0.08
P.S.I.A. Rare - Revision 200721-0.11
Year of birth177-0.11
Disorders (parents and siblings)172-0.12
P.S.I.A. Cruel - Revision 200721-0.16
P.S.I.A. Aspergoid - Revision 200721-0.17
Gifted Adult's Inventory of Aspergerisms13-0.25
Disorders (own)173-0.26
P.S.I.A. Antisocial - Revision 200721-0.43

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)
00.75 (838)NaN (0)
230.68 (739)0.85 (37)
250.71 (711)0.70 (113)
280.61 (646)0.69 (135)
300.58 (592)0.72 (273)
310.65 (520)0.62 (359)
320.52 (434)0.65 (446)
340.61 (307)0.69 (516)
350.62 (282)0.70 (604)
360.57 (183)0.71 (708)
370.14 (57)0.74 (747)
380.74 (21)0.74 (808)
42NaN (0)0.75 (838)

Reliability

Remark: Reliability is a bit low, and this is caused by the easy nature of the test, as a result of which most of the scores are concentrated in a fairly small part of the test's possible range. This is also a cause of the somewhat low g loading. The easiness of the test also lowers overall test quality.

Error

Scores by age

Age class n median score
65 to 69333.0
60 to 64435.0
55 to 59335.0
50 to 54631.5
45 to 49835.0
40 to 441234.5
35 to 391935.0
30 to 342934.0
25 to 293132.0
22 to 242135.0
20 or 211534.0
18 or 192034.0
17833.0
16532.0
15832.5
14135.0
13228.0

N = 195

Scores by age - within females

Age class n median score
50 to 54125.0
40 to 44139.0
35 to 39332.0
30 to 34231.5
25 to 29329.0
22 to 24138.0
20 or 21231.0
18 or 19124.0
17135.0
14135.0

N = 16

Scores by age - within males

Age class n median score
65 to 69333.0
60 to 64435.0
55 to 59335.0
50 to 54532.0
45 to 49835.0
40 to 441134.0
35 to 391636.0
30 to 342734.0
25 to 292832.5
22 to 241935.0
20 or 211335.0
18 or 191934.0
17733.0
16532.0
15832.5
13228.0

N = 178

Scores by year taken

Year taken n median score
2011136.0
2012733.0
20131430.5
20141732.0
20151933.0
20162134.0
20172932.0
20182834.0
20192434.0
20202535.0
20211235.0

ryear taken × median score = 0.31 (N = 197)

As seen above and below under "Robustness…", scores have crept up over the years. This may be caused by answer leakage, which is relatively more likely on a free test as this is. If it continues, measures will be taken such as revision and/or no longer making the test freely available. The problem with rising scores through answer leakage is that the later norms become unfair (too low) for the earlier candidates and for the honest candidates, and that one is rewarding fraud and punishing honesty.

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.