Raven’s Progressive Matrices are a group or individually administered tests that non-verbally assesses intelligence in children and adults through abstract reasoning.

1. RAVENS PROGRESSIVE
MATRICES
By J Raven, J C Raven and J H Court
Hemangi Narvekar
Clinical Psychologist

2. CONTENTS
 Introduction
 History
 SPM
 APM
 CPM
 Scoring and Interpretation
 Strengths and Weaknesses
 Applications
 Summary
 References

3. INTRODUCTION
 Raven’s Progressive Matrices are a group or individually administered tests that
non-verbally assesses intelligence in children and adults through abstract
reasoning.
 They were constructed to measure the eductive component of g as defined in
Spearman’s theory of cognitive ability.
 They are made up of a series of diagrams or designs with a part missing which the
person has to complete by choosing the correct part from six or eight alternatives.
 Patterns are arranged in order of increasing difficulty.
 SPM, APM and CPM are the three tests that together comprise Raven’s Progressive
Matrices.

4. HISTORY
 The SPM has a extensive history of research, with more than 60 years of
studies that support its usefulness as a measure of general mental ability.
 They were originally developed for use in research into the genetic and
environmental origins of cognitive ability.
 Raven found those difficult to administer and interprete.
 Accordingly, he developed these simple measures of two main components of
Spearman’s g: Eductive ability and Reproductive Ability.
 Raven published his progressive matrices in the UK in 1938.

5. STANDARD PROGRESSIVE MATRICES
 Test Description
It comprises of 5 sets (A to E) of 12 items each.
Total Items: 60
Ages: 8 to 65 years
Colour: Black and White
Time: Untimed and usually takes 15-45 Min

6. Psychometric Properties of SPM
 Standardization
It was first fully standardized by J.C. Raven on 1407 children in Ipswich, England in 1938.
 Reliability
Internal consistency studies using either the split-half method corrected for length or KR20
estimates result in values ranging from 0.60 to 0.98.
Test-retest correlations range from a low of 0.46 for an 11 year interval to a high of 0.97 for a two
day interval.

7. Raven provided test-retest coefficients for several age groups:
 Validity
Concurrent validity coefficients between the SPM and the Stanford-Binet and
Wechsler scales range between 0.54 and 0.88, with the majority in the .70s and
.80s.

8. ADVANCED PROGRESSIVE MATRICES
 Test Description
The APM was originally drafted in 1943 for use by British War Office Selection
Boards, who needed a version of Progressive Matrices which would be more
difficult, and provide better discrimination at the upper levels, than the
standard version of the test.
Designed for ages 11 and above or specifically, for gifted students.
Total Items: 12 Items (Set I) and 36 Items (Set II)
Colour: Black and White
Time: 40 Min

9. Psychometric Properties of APM
 Norms
The standardization of the APM in Jordan was carried out in 1986. The test was given to a sample of 1300
males and 1242 females ranging in age from 11 to 40 years.
 Reliability
Test-Retest Reliability retested after 6 to 8 weeks
Manual reports that APM set II has good internal consistency, with split-half reliability coefficients varying
between 0.83 and 0.87.
 Validity
In a sample of 149 college applicants, APM scores correlated 0.56 with maths scores on the American
College Test (Koenig, Frey & Detterman, 2007).
In a study using 104 university students, Frey and Detterman (2004) reported that scores from the APM
correlated 0.48 with scores on the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT).
Sample Size Sample Age Group Reliability Coefficient
109 10 ½ years 0.76
92 11 ½ years 0.86
243 Adults 0.91

10. COLOURED PROGRESSIVE MATRICES
 Test Description
Constructed by Raven in 1947 as an alternative to SPM
Age Group: 5-11 years
Also designed for elderly and people with moderate or severe learning
difficulties.
Contains sets A and B from the standard matrices, with a further set of 12 items
inserted between the two, as set Ab.
Colour: Most items are presented on coloured background. However few last
items are black and white.

11. Psychometric Properties of CPM
 Norms
CPM was standardized on a sample of 986 from Yemen from the ages 6 to 11 years old.
Younger children performed better than the older children.
 Reliability
Raven determined test-retest reliability of 0.80 at the age of 9.5 and 0.60 at the age
of 6.5.
The CPM was administered to a sample of 259 children in Lithuania and re-
administered 2 years later wherein the test-retest reliability was 0.49.
 Validity
Raven states the correlation of CPM with Terman-Merill L Scale of 0.66 and with
Crichon Vocabulary Test of 0.65 ( at the age of 9 years).

12. PARALLEL AND PLUS VERSIONS
 Parallel: To address the problem of the Raven’s Matrices being too well known
in the general population.
 Plus: More difficult items to discriminate between more abled population.

13. ADMINISTRATION
 Each version of the RPM is
administered by use of a
booklet containing the
version specific matrices.
 The subjects are given
clear instructions on how
to answer the test as well
as practice item is given
for better understanding.
 There are Easy Score
Answersheets on which
the subjects have to write
the answers.
 The test is usually
untimed but time taken
to answer the test is to be
noted down.

14. Scoring
The RPM produces a single raw score using scoring keys.

15. SCORING
 The total score is the total number
of matrices completed correctly.
 The RPM, thus, produces a single
raw score that can be converted to
a percentile based on normative
data collected from various groups.

16. INTERPRETATION
Classification of Person according to the score he obtains:
GRADE PERCENTILES
Grade I or “Intellectually Superior” At or above 95th percentile
Grade II or “ Definitely above the average in Intellectual Capacity” At or above 75th percentile
Grade II + At or above 90th percentile
Grade III or “ Intellectually Average” Between 25th and 75th percentile
Grade III + Greater than median or 50th percentile
Grade III - Lesser than median
Grade IV or “ definitely below average intellectual capacity” At or below 25th percentile
Grade IV- At or below 10th percentile
Grade V or “Intellectually Impaired” At or below 5th percentile

17. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
 RPM is very easy to administer.
 The test authors provide extensive norming, validation, and standardization
data that facilitate inferences drawn about examinees.
 The test includes excellent support documentation such as the technical
manual and the administration and scoring manual.
 Scores are relatively unaffected by linguistic and ethnic background.
 Scholars and clinicians often hold polarized views on suitability of RPM to
determine cognitive abilities in cross-cultural population.
 They doesn’t take into consider one’s verbal ability and emotional
intelligence.

18. APPLICATIONS
 Can be given to hearing and speech impaired children as well as non-English
speakers.
 As a psycho educational tool to obtain a comprehensive assessment of general
cognitive functioning
 To provide reliable and valid data in academic and educational settings
 To identify cognitive strengths and weaknesses in a variety of neurological
conditions
 As part of an assessment battery to identify learning difficulties and giftedness
 To provide valuable information for clinical and neuropsychological evaluation
 To guide treatment planning and placement decisions
 To provide reliable and valid data for research purpose
 Computerized versions of the test are also available expanding the usage of the
test

19. SUMMARY
 Raven’s Progressive Matrices enjoy a long and famous history in the
assessment of general cognitive abilities in persons.
 They usefully provide an assessment of non-verbal abiity, an important
feature for our ethnically diverse population.
 RPM comes in 3 formats:
SPM ( For use with general population)
APM ( Top 20% of the population)
CPM ( For use with children and elderly)

20. REFERENCES
 Frey, M.C., & Detterman, D.K. (2004).Scholastic Assessment or g? The relationship
between the Scholastic Assessment Test and general cognitive ability. Psychological
Science, 15(6), 373-378.
 Koenig, K.A., Frey, M.C., & Detterman, D.K.(2007). ACT and General Cognitive
Ability. Intelligence, 1-8.
 Raven, J., Raven, J.C., & Court, J.H. (2000). Raven’s Manual: Section 3, Standard
Progressive Matrices. USA: Pearson.
 Raven, J.C. (1956). Guide to using the Coloured Progressive Matrices.
 Raven, J.(2000). The Raven’s Progressive Matrices: Change and Stability over
Culture and Time. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 1-48.
 Psychological testing Retrieved on September 26, 2016 from
www.gulfbend.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=doc&id=8221&cn=18

21. THANK YOU