<P> In 1982, Carl Dodrill conducted a study in which 57 adults were administered the Wonderlic twice over a five - year period . In the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Dodrill reported that the test - retest reliability for the Wonderlic was . 94 . </P> <P> In 1956, Weaver and Boneau reported in the Journal of Applied Psychology that two of the five forms, A and B, that were published at the time were harder than the others which caused scores on those forms to be significantly lower than scores obtained on forms C--F. Concerning these observed differences, Weaver and Boneau state: "This accords with the history of the development of the test . Forms D, E, and F are made up of items selected from the Otis Higher, while A and B were developed later and include types of items not found in the Otis ." Those findings, seemingly, invalidate the claim that those forms were equivalent or consistent . E.N. Hay made a similar observation as well . Hay found that form F was significantly easier than Form D. Furthermore, Kazmier found Form B to be the most difficult of the five forms and, thus, recommended that it "not be regarded as directly equivalent to any of the forms ." Kazmier also found Forms D and F to be significantly different from each other and recommended that these forms be regarded as inequivalent . In a study of the Wonderlic's test - retest reliability, conducted in 1992, Stuart McKelvie "concluded that conscious repetition of specific responses did not seriously inflate the estimate of test - retest reliability ." To put it simply, one's memory of some of the answers does not significantly affect one's score on the Wonderlic . </P> <P> More recently, according to a 1989 article in Psychological Reports, the Wonderlic scored ar =. 87 on the reliability scale compared along with the Pearson test score of r =. 21 . </P> <P> In an article written in Psychological Reports, T. Matthews and Kerry Lassiter report that the Wonderlic test "was most strongly associated with overall intellectual functioning," which is what it is purported to measure . However, Matthews and Lassiter did not find the Wonderlic to be a successful measure of fluid and crystallized intelligence, and they stated that "the Wonderlic test scores did not clearly show convergent or divergent validity evidence across these two broad domains of cognitive ability ." In academic testing, the Wonderlic test has shown high correlations with aptitude tests such as the General Aptitude Test Battery . </P>

Can you use a calculator on the wonderlic