Correlations with other high-range tests
November 2017
For a long time I’ve been thinking to calculate correlations between my tests and some of the oldest and most widely tried high range tests; lack of time and data have been keeping me away of this. After collecting some more data recently, I decided to work a bit on this issue. So, correlations with tests by Dr. J. Wai, P. Cooijmans and R. Lato have been calculated and relevant histograms and tables follow. To my point of view, SLSE I is a masterpiece; thorough, smooth, well-constructed. Too bad that this (as many other tests) has been compromised.
1 – Histograms
The first histogram shows scores achieved on my tests (N=103). Of course, submissions taken in mind were the ones coming from common candidates with the other tests.
The second histogram shows scores achieved on tests by P. Cooijmans (N=68).
The third histogram shows scores achieved on tests by Dr. J. Wai (N=34).
The fourth and final histogram shows scores achieved on tests by R. Lato (N=23).
2 – Correlations
a. INSC ’17 (NPRA-F)
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.598 | SLSE I |
0.921 |
| TFG 2004 |
0.831 | SLSE II |
0.979 |
| CIT 2E/3E | 0.588 | Lato*** |
0.953 |
| Wai** | 0.911 | LS36 |
0.887 |
*Scores on 12 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
***Scores on all tests (LS24, 36, 60).
b. IVRC ’17 (VCAA)
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.729 | SLSE I |
0.786 |
| TFG 2004 |
0.625 | SLSE II |
-0.295 |
| CIT 2E/3E | 0.618 | Lato*** |
0.861 |
| Wai** | 0.682 | LS36 |
0.842 |
*Scores on 11 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
***Scores on all tests (LS24, 36, 60).
c. VRA-F
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.495 | SLSE II |
-0.372 |
| CIT 2E/3E |
0.648 | SLSE 48 |
0.221 |
| Wai** |
0.231 | Lato*** |
0.545 |
| SLSE I | 0.938 | LS36 |
0.576 |
*Scores on 19 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
***Scores on all tests (LS24, 36, 60).
d. VGT-F
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.613 | SLSE I |
0.789 |
| TFG 2004 |
0.207 | Lato*** |
0.708 |
| CIT 2E/3E | 0.745 | LS36 |
0.637 |
| Wai** | 0.783 | – |
– |
*Scores on 14 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
***Scores on all tests (LS24, 36, 60).
e. NVRA
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.522 | SLSE I |
0.217 |
| TFG 2004 |
0.946 | SLSE II |
-0.966 |
| Wai** | 0.233 | LS36 |
0.973 |
*Scores on 20 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
f. SRA-F
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.431 | SLSE 48 |
0.778 |
| Wai** |
0.611 | Lato*** |
0.776 |
| SLSE I | 0.470 | LS36 |
0.751 |
| SLSE II | -0.101 | LS24 |
0.834 |
*Scores on 26 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
***Scores on all tests (LS24, 36, 60).
g. NPRA36
| Test | r | Test | r |
| Cooijmans* | 0.756 | Wai** |
0.946 |
| CIT 2E/3E | 0.847 | SLSE I |
0.977 |
*Scores on 11 different tests.
**Scores on all tests (SLSE I, II, 48).
3 – Conclusion
No specific conclusions to be made. High or low, positive or negative, correlation in this case (when comparing high range tests) does not mean anything itself other than presenting an indication of “likeness” between two tests; one has to see the correlations of each one of these tests with standardized, supervised ones. Should more data are available in the future, more thorough and detailed statistics will be presented.
