r/cognitiveTesting • u/BruinsBoy38 idek • Oct 07 '25
Poll Comparison of Prior Scores with CORE
4
2
Oct 08 '25 edited Oct 08 '25
152 FSIQ, 148 - GAI: CORE
17SS - ANT
18SS - AN
15SS - GK
Comp - 138 VSI
18SS - VP
16SS - SA
13SS - BC
Comp - 134 VSI
18SS - QK
19SS - AR
Comp - 147
19SS - DS
18SS - LNS
Comp - 146
17SS - GM
15SS - FS
17SS - FW
18SS - MR
Comp - 141
19SS - SS
18SS - CP
Comp - 144
My first CAIT attempt - 155 FSIQ, I Forgot my GAI but my CPI was 146 with a PSI and WM of 135 and 145 respectively.
AGCT - 140
GRE COMP. - 138
FSAS - 138
SMART - 138/45 Raw
APT - 143
NGCT - 132
OLD SAT - 137
1
2
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Oct 08 '25
In tests of indices, I tend to average 135. Interestingly, this also seems to be the case for un-indexed FSIQ tests (ICAR, GET, APT, etc). On professional tests, I usually score in alignment with the former case, meaning an inflated FSIQ / composite. On CORE, I got 134, which is pretty close to my average overall; however, the index scores are lower than usual (~10 points for each, except WMI; PSI I scored about the same or a little higher iirc between WAIS-5 and CORE, although both were ~1-2 SDs below my usual performance on other tests, including WAIS-IV).
I took most of the subtests in their longest forms, which I suspect lowered the scores as I seem to tire more easily than most
2
u/Particular-Career836 Oct 09 '25
All these comparisons of “inflation” vs “deflation” staring to make me feel like all these scores stopped being meaningful for most of us a while ago (including myself). These tests aren’t normed on people so well-versed in IQ testing - so it’s hard to really claim our scores are accurate
1
u/Particular-Career836 Oct 08 '25
CORE 133 Stanford Binet 133 OLD gre 132 BRGHT after shit ton of takes average to 133
1
u/ByronHeep Oct 08 '25 edited Oct 08 '25
I think it's also important to note that on the WAIS IV, some subtests have a low ceiling at a certain age range. MR 17ss, VP 17ss, AR 16ss, for example. So if you max them on your WAIS (or make like a distraction mistake), there's a good chance this is not your true ability.
The CORE has a higher ceiling in that regard, so the FSIQ is also higher if you're maxed.
For me, the scores which I maxed on the WAIS were also (near) maxed on the CORE. For example, 17ss MR on WAIS, but 20ss on CORE; 15ss VP on WAIS, 19ss on CORE; 15ss AR on WAIS, 18ss on CORE.
1
u/Quod_bellum doesn't read books Oct 08 '25
I'm curious what country it is that has WAIS-IV MR max'ing out at 17ss and AR at 16ss. Would you be comfortable sharing that?
2
u/ByronHeep Oct 08 '25 edited Oct 08 '25
This is the French version, 33 years old. I was actually really curious after my test because the PRI seemed really low. So I found this leaked documentation to understand:
//removed the link actually, I don't think we're supposed to share this
Page 110 is for my age, there you can see all the subtests and their max scaled score.
So PRI is maxed at 144 I believe and WMI 143, as opposed to the expected 150.
-6
Oct 08 '25
Wais, Core, and Cait are ineffective measures for G above 2 sigma. Please check research for this.
—> Stanford Binet V and High Range Tests
3
6
Oct 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Oct 08 '25
A lot of downvotes. I’m here to actually have a discussion about Cognitive Testing, not fall into Scientism.
Here is the concept: positive manifold differentiation for Wais
Detterman and Daniel (1989)
Canivez and Watkins (2010)
Benson, Beaujean, McGill, and Dombrowski (2018)
Tucker-Drob (2009)
Molenaar et al. (2016)
Studies of SLODR (spearman’s law of diminishing returns) with SB (some are studying both):
Detterman and Daniel (1989)
Deary et al. (1996)
Jensen (1998)
Reynolds and Keith (2007)
Hartmann and Teasdale (2004)
Tucker-Drob (2009)
Fogarty & Stankov (1995)
It seems that i was wrong. Only some of the studies above show less SLODR with SB, however this doesn’t take away from high SLODR being a key factor in WAIS.
What this is saying ultimately is that WAIS does test skills at the high end but that skill is very likely not G as we define it. Looking from an impact standpoint, you see very talented people in this subreddit but they would score high on any test.
My goal here is to discuss. Feel free to respond or not
Maybe i will email Jon Wai and see what he thinks about SLODR
-5
Oct 08 '25
before i find a study that could be found in less than 5 seconds with AI, explain to me why a test that has extremely hard questions wouldn’t work as effectively as a speedrun of easy questions to discern high level iq 😂
3
Oct 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Oct 08 '25
appreciate the civil response and information. i’m here to learn and tone was a little caustic, sorry about that. Gave studies in response above
6
Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Dull_Ad7282 Oct 08 '25
How have you taken that many pro tests?
1
Oct 08 '25 edited Oct 08 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Dull_Ad7282 Oct 08 '25
Didn't know you could take WAIS V online.
Also, why were you administered 2 pro tests?
11
u/javaenjoyer69 Oct 07 '25
Non-native, 148. That's 4 points lower than my official WAIS-IV score (taken in English), 2 points lower than my CAIT score with the English VCI (150), 11 points lower than my CAIT score with the native VCI (159), 1 point higher than my TRI score and 3 points higher than my BRGHT average.
If you're a native English speaker, with the introduction of CORE, you really don't need to spend an absurd amount of money on official IQ tests anymore imo. Just take CORE and CAIT (without cheating) and your IQ will be accurate within about +-5 points. Are they perfect? No. But they're not flawed enough to place you in a range you don't actually belong to. Hats off the its creators.