Quality criteria and maintenance rules

Assessment Standards

The standards every assessment must meet before publication, and the ongoing rules it must maintain to stay on the platform.

EvidencePeer-reviewed support where scientific claims are made.
ReliabilityReasonable consistency for the intended construct.
ValidityThe test should measure what it claims to measure.
ScopeNo diagnostic or high-stakes claims.

Standards

What must be true before publication

Not every psychological assessment belongs on Intelligences Test. We publish tools only when they can be explained honestly, interpreted responsibly, and used for education or self-reflection without pretending to replace professional assessment.

These standards help users, researchers, educators, and partners understand what we require and where our boundaries are.

Publication criteria

The criteria every assessment must meet

Research-backed construct

The trait, skill, or ability being measured must have a meaningful research basis or be clearly framed as exploratory.

Demonstrated reliability

Where a tool claims measurement strength, we look for consistency evidence such as internal consistency or test-retest reliability.

Construct validity

The assessment should relate to the construct it claims to describe, not merely produce attractive labels.

Fairness review

We review wording, cultural assumptions, accessibility, and known bias concerns.

Transparent scoring

Users should understand how answers become scores, profiles, categories, or interpretation bands.

Clear scope limits

We do not present educational assessments as diagnostic, legal, or high-stakes decision tools.

Boundaries

What we do not publish

We publish

  • Educational self-assessment tools.
  • Research-informed explainers.
  • Transparent result pages.
  • Low-risk reflection and learning tools.

We do not publish

  • Clinical diagnostic tools requiring professional administration.
  • High-stakes employment or forensic instruments.
  • Unsupported health claims.
  • Black-box scoring that cannot be explained.

Maintenance

Published assessments still need review

Standards continue after publication. We monitor feedback, update wording when users report confusion, track new research, and revise content when evidence changes.

If an assessment no longer meets the standards, we update it, reframe it, or remove it from the platform.

1

Monitor feedback

User reports help identify confusion, broken interactions, bias concerns, and unclear results.

2

Track research

New findings can change how a construct should be explained or scored.

3

Revise pages

We update questions, wording, scoring notes, or result context as needed.

4

Retire when needed

A test that no longer meets the bar should not remain unchanged.

FAQ

Assessment standards questions

How do your standards compare to professional testing organizations?

We align with principles from educational and psychological testing standards, adapted for a public, self-directed, non-clinical platform.

Can I request a review of a specific assessment?

Yes. Use the contact page to send the page URL, the concern, and any source or evidence we should review.

Do you include popular tools with mixed validation?

Sometimes, if they have educational value and are clearly framed as exploratory rather than definitive or diagnostic.

Where can I learn more about the process?

The Methodology page explains the review process in more detail.

Standards make the platform trustworthy

Continue to the methodology page to see how these rules are applied in practice.

Read Methodology