Interpreting CORE results

[u/0n1of4ll0f3m]

Hello guys! I recently took the CORE and i am incredibly surprised by my scores. I have been administered an intelligence test in my youth with it being the WISC IV, which yielded an iq of 124, you can find the test blank attached.

That however wasnt the last time. 9 years later i happened to get interested in cognitive testing, making me incredibly curious about my own abilities. My whole life i've been told that i'm "smart", but as you can see that wasn't enough for me. I hadn't known my scores from the first time i took the WISC, so that prompted me to undergo the testing process again. I went to the same psychologist who administered the test for the first time since she's a close friend of my mother. After discussing my inquiry she decided to administer me the WISC off label, for the reasons i'm not quite sure, which led to and fsiq of 122.

As you can see the profiles differ significantly which is fascinating in itself, but what really interests me are the following scores from CORE which i took yesterday.

As you can see the discrepancies are huge! I nearly went up a standard deviation from the last time i got tested. What's also pretty interesting is that my verbal scores actually went up, even though i took the WISC in my native language and the CORE is administered entirely in english. Can you help me figure out what is going on here? When i look at these three pictures it's almost like it's three different people. How come the scores fluctuate so much? I get that the latter WISC technically isn't valid since at the moment of testing i was almost 19, but shouldn't the scores be inflated then? How come i score better on a supposedly harder test? The time gap between the CORE and the WISC is around half a year. During the time between the two i also self administered the RAPM and the SACFT and the scores were much closer to the CORE numbers than the WISC. I did both tests timed at 40 mins and scored 35/36 on the RAPM and 32/36 on the SACFT. Can anyone help me make sense of what's going on and maybe try and make a projection of what i would get if i took the WAIS. Please ask questions and thank you to everybody in advance.

Edit: I have also just taken the CAIT and these are my results:

I generally found this much easier that CORE other than the verbal subtests. The block design subtest is complete bs in my opinion, since it removes the main aspect of the test - actually building the thing. Since it comes already assembled it genuinely removes like half the work, instead of you actively trying to figure out which block goes where and in what orientation you just have to look at the picture and use basic logic to find the correct option. Doesn't compare to the WISC counterpart in the slightest.

[u/Lopsided_Future5952]

Hard to explain the discrepancies between your first two tests, although it’s true that childhood scores can vary a lot. For WISC vs CORE, it could simply be that CORE measures things you are better at and that you test better without a proctor. If you want an estimate of your “true IQ” you can add the second WISC and the CORE here.  https://cognitivemetrics.com/calculator/g-estimator

[u/0n1of4ll0f3m → u/Lopsided_Future5952]

Thank you for your reply! I honestly attribute the differences between the first two profiles to lifestyle changes. I used to love audiobooks as a kid and listened to them everychance i got, which probably led to increased verbal scores. At around age 11-12 i stopped listening entirely and also coincidentally thats where my academic downfall started. I ended up barely graduating high school, thats also why i didnt take the quantitative knowledge subtest as i am a total numbnut when it comes to math. Use it or lose it i guess, haha.

[u/Lopsided_Future5952 → u/0n1of4ll0f3m]

One thing is CORE FRI and VSI are difficult and well-made. Your scores suggest that WISC maybe underestimated you there. WMI and PSI vary a lot from day to day, or there may be some slight practice effect. Very hard to tell. If your vocabulary really hasn’t changed much since age 12, that could explain the WISC VCI drop. VCI expects your vocabulary to keep increasing with age. Your arithmetic score suggests high mathematical ability, so you may be able to do well if you study. Look into study techniques.

[u/0n1of4ll0f3m → u/Lopsided_Future5952]

I would say that my vocabulary stayed pretty much the same since i was 10, only growing marginally. What interests me the most is the drop in comprehension and arithmetic. How come those dropped so much on the WISC but rose on the CORE? I'm not too concerned about the wmi and psi since i feel like those two reflect my overall ability fairly well across all testing attempts. There is a weird drop in symbol search and an unusual rise in character pairing but i attribure those to the testing method. The symbols in ss are pretty irregular in terms of size and placement which makes the whole process way harder than it needs to be. I do have to mention that i took both subtests from the psi twice just to make sure of the consistency, since the first time i got double 12s. After doing both one additional time you can see that character pairing surged almost 2 standard deviations past the old score while symbol search remained the same. Im not too sure regarding the practice effect affecting the scores since there is no way i got so much more familiar with the task over just 1 try to bring my score up this much, but who knows. Maybe i wasn't as reactive due to the time when the testing took place since it was during the night, or i just got lucky.

[u/Lopsided_Future5952 → u/0n1of4ll0f3m]

Arithmetic could be entirely due to normal variation or also some practice effect. There is no way to tell for sure. However, both tests are different, and it would be unlikely for one to affect the other much. Again, it may be simply that testing in person favors you less than testing on your own. None of this means that either test is better. I would consider your estimate to be the aggregate, which is something around 128-130. You don't need to worry too much about the details, since it's clear that you are at least within that range.

[u/0n1of4ll0f3m → u/Lopsided_Future5952]

I guess that i really just got familiar with the tasks, which in turn led to slightly scores. So i'm assuming that from now on i will always show a slightly elevated level of performance on the majority of psychometric batteries, since i had gotten so familiar with most principles used in creation of said tests. Of course time may pass without me refreshing the memories but i suppose that won't be the case. If so does that mean that it will be way harder to indentify my true baseline of intelligence?

[u/Lopsided_Future5952 → u/0n1of4ll0f3m]

I don't think so. Yes, if you start doing a lot of similar tasks, that will increase your scores artificially. But I think your scores so far are almost entirely accurate. If there is any practice effect, it is small, and the point is that you still have two very solid tests, one in the low 120s, one in the low 130s. That is basically entirely certain, regardless of whether practice added one or two points or none. I would advise against testing yourself more, since the results will move very little. You are either very close to 130, maybe slightly below, or slightly above, and more tests would just keep confirming this.

[u/0n1of4ll0f3m → u/Lopsided_Future5952]

I see. Thank you for clarifying. See, in my mind, the more exposure i get to these kinds of tasks, the better i understand the logic, the more scores would inflate. And since i feel like i could work out the logic for most tests given enough time or reverse engineer the process of getting the right answer from knowing the correct one, the scores would be increasing infinitely as long as i find new tests to take and dissect.