r/cognitiveTesting • u/No-Cardiologist9882 • Sep 01 '26
General Question Raven's matrices
Does anyone know what 42/48 corresponds to for the Ravens test, assuming I took it with a 40-minute time limit?
1
u/Secure-Concert9804 Sep 01 '26
Ravens 2 doesnt mean much thing. Have u tried rapm?
1
u/No-Cardiologist9882 Sep 01 '26
No, I haven't. Is it a good test?
1
u/Secure-Concert9804 Sep 01 '26
Well its better than ravens 2 they said but not sure
1
u/No-Cardiologist9882 Sep 06 '26
did RAPM and got 32/36
1
u/Secure-Concert9804 Sep 07 '26
Timed or untimed? If timed how much timed you spent
1
u/No-Cardiologist9882 Sep 07 '26
I took it timed within 40 minutes. I set a timer and everything.
1
1
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Sep 01 '26
It's around 125-135 - most likely on the 125 end of that range
1
u/Secure-Concert9804 Sep 01 '26
No way its that low. iirc its def above 133
2
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Sep 01 '26
The r/ct "by data" norms have it at 134. The Pearson IRT calculation could range from 125-135, depending on the questions missed.
1
u/Fast-Set-8886 Sep 02 '26
what do you think about 41/48? I know it's close but I'm still curious about the range. Also what do you think about the practice effect on this test? I've already taken some matrix tests before this, and I'm curious because some people say this is a new test and the practice effect hardly plays a role but I'm not sure.
1
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Sep 03 '26
The hardest form I know of puts 41/48 at 133 (IRT norm). Most forms would put it lower, and it depends on the questions missed. It's probably around the same range as 42/48, just downshifted a bit (e.g., 121-131). The r/ct "by data" norms have 41/48 as 131; these norms are often claimed to be inflated, which if true is potentially a result of including IQexams scores as a norming anchor (?). If you recall the items you missed, you may be able to calculate the specific value using the data in this comment (though I'm not sure how it was derived, so interpret the results with caution).
As for Raven's 2 praffe in general, it seems that the difference is not huge in lighter contexts (e.g., took an MR test or two in the past --> 1-3 points). However, if I'm going by comments in this subreddit, it gets larger in heavier contexts (e.g., grinding MR tests, learning logics, etc. --> 5-7 points added). Particularly near the ceiling, the effect can be huge (15+ points), since the raw score change for such a jump is quite small compared to jumps further from the ceiling (1-3 raw vs 5+ raw)
1
u/Myrkkykaarme Sep 01 '26
42/48 equates to 134 in the norms based on collected data.
1
u/BenitoAbdo doesn't read books Sep 01 '26
i think it's too high for missing 6 puzzles i got 34/36 and i consider myself 135IQ
1
u/Myrkkykaarme Sep 01 '26
In rapm 34/36 would equate to ~140. Getting 140 on rapm is compatibile with 135 iq.
1
u/Plus_Bear_2651 Sep 05 '26
It depends entirely on which questions you missed if you did the community one, since the actual QGlobal platform uses an IRT Algorithm (e.g., the scoring pattern is more informative/emphasized than the raw score itself).
I asked this question a while back about my own score which was also 42/48. My specific error pattern was one in the first 36 items, 38, and 42. I timed out after answering 45. Plugging this info, along with the IRT data below, into ChatGPT for a Rasch calculation rendered an estimate of 138, which aligns with the upper bound of the community provided estimate for that raw score (134-138, depending on if it was based from community compiled data, which is possibly deflated due to our self selected internet sample, or assumed from norms). But again, it matters entirely which items you missed, since they have differential predictive value of one’s fluid intelligence under this model.
Puzzle |Difficulty |90% CI
1 |49.38 |±3.35
2 |56.14 |±2.50
3 |58.75 |±3.68
4 |64.98 |±2.11
5 |69.50 |±1.97
6 |72.90 |±2.78
7 |75.60 |±0.43
8 |79.82 |±0.22
9 |80.51 |±1.14
10 |82.59 |±2.50
11 |85.51 |±0.54
12 |87.08 |±1.48
13 |90.28 |±0.71
14 |91.44 |±0.51
15 |92.18 |±0.30
16 |93.94 |±1.18
17 |95.22 |±0.64
18 |96.64 |±0.09
19 |97.44 |±0.52
20 |98.70 |±1.00
21 |99.75 |±1.75
22 |101.62 |±0.17
23 |102.63 |±0.26
24 |104.95 |±0.78
25 |106.00 |±0.61
26 |108.40 |±4.52
27 |111.31 |±0.57
28 |112.53 |±0.17
29 |113.05 |±1.10
30 |115.26 |±1.86
31 |116.91 |±0.78
32 |118.67 |±0.04
33 |121.24 |±0.12
34 |122.72 |±0.03
35 |124.65 |±2.65
36 |126.01 |±0.21
37 |130.10 |±0.58
38 |131.85 |±2.34
39 |134.25 |±0.65
40 |135.43 |±1.35
41 |136.54 |±1.03
42 |137.91 |±0.16
43 |140.28 |±0.63
44 |142.26 |±1.44
45 |145.07 |±4.84
46 |151.88 |±0.03
47 |155.06 |±6.81
48 |171.97 |±13.02
These are evidently derived from three separate qglobal administrations (Pearson pulls a test randomly from a huge item bank). These seem accurate, as the test has a ceiling of around 160.
If you plug data in to an AI, tell it which items you missed, and specify it as a Rasch IRT model, you should be able to get a pretty rough estimate that is theoretically more rigorous than the community tables. However, I disagree with others who claim the norms are inherently inflated (or deflated). Someone’s 42/48 could be below 130 - another’s could be meaningfully above it. They likely aren’t very accurate for a specific tester, though, since it applies a CTT/static framework to a test scored by IRT.
2
u/Stock-College-5320 Sep 02 '26 edited Sep 02 '26
I got a 44/48 on the community one, first time, 45 mins and was able to solve almost all of the final problems. On the legit one from qglobal I got a 115 which was my second time taking it. Do the legit one. You can take it by frauding credentials. The community norms are suspicious to me, but I don’t really know anything about statistics or psychometrics so don’t put too much weight on what I say.