89%

49%
54%
93%
76%

84%
United
Kingdom
Norms: 2011
GA: David Johnstone
23/08/2013
Private & ConIidential
Peasoning PercepIual
Speed
Number Speed &
Accuracy
Word
Meaning
SpaIial
VisualisaIion
Overall
PercenIile
Panking
49 89 76 93 54 84
Done 45 52 18 36 16
PighI 42 5O 18 36 12
Wrong 3 2 O O 4
AdjusIed 39 49.5 18 36 1O
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 1
Score
THOMAS GA
The overall percentile is a weighted combination oI Perceptual Speed, Number Speed & Accuracy, Reasoning, Word Meaning
and Spatial Visualisation. The overall percentile is an estimate oI the candidate's general intelligence, reIlecting both Iluid and
crystallised intelligence. Its accent is on response to training, mental processing speed, concentration and Iast track potential.
The results Ior David Johnstone are above average, in the top 34 oI the Norm range. This suggests that when there is a need
to pick up new skills and abilities he is likely to be able to do so quickly. He is likely to respond to changing environments
more quickly than most and will Iind it easy to process new inIormation rapidly. The ability to absorb new inIormation is
likely to be good.
REASONING

4-13
Low
16-34
8elow
Average
33-63
Average
66-83
Above
Average
86-96
Plgh
Questions completed: 45 Correct answers: 42
The Reasoning Test assesses the ability to make inIerences, to reason Irom inIormation provided and to draw correct
conclusions. This test assesses the ability oI an individual to hold inIormation in his short-term memory and solve problems
aIter receiving either verbal or written instructions. A high score would suggest Iluent verbal reasoning skills.
The Iollowing describes how David Johnstone perIormed in Reasoning:
Middle oI the Norm range
Standard ability to draw correct conclusions
Can typically hold inIormation in short-term memory, whilst solving problems Irom either written or verbal instructions
Verbal reasoning likely to be average
Likely to reason Irom inIormation provided
PERCEPTUAL SPEED

4-13
Low
16-34
8elow
Average
33-63
Average
66-83
Above
Average
86-96
Plgh
Questions completed: 52 Correct answers: 50
The Perceptual Speed Test assesses the capacity to recognise details in the environment, incorporating the perception oI
inaccuracies in written material, numbers and diagrams, the ability to ignore irrelevant inIormation, to identiIy similarities and
diIIerences in visual conIigurations. This test assesses how quickly and accurately an individual can check and report Ior
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 2
error/accuracy. It is a test oI semantic encoding and perception. A high score would suggest the ability to: mentally match the
Ieatures oI letters and the meaning oI symbols. It would also indicate the ability to detect misIits.
The Iollowing describes how David Johnstone perIormed in Perceptual Speed:
Top 14 oI the Norm range
Likely to be very Iast to identiIy inaccuracies in written material, numbers and diagrams
Error checking could be markedly quicker than the average
IdentiIying similarities and diIIerences in visual conIigurations likely to be extremely good
May Iind it particularly easy to ignore irrelevant inIormation
NUMBER SPEED AND ACCURACY

4-13
Low
16-34
8elow
Average
33-63
Average
66-83
Above
Average
86-96
Plgh
Questions completed: 18 Correct answers: 18
This is a test oI numerical manipulation and a measure oI basic numerical reasoning ability. It measures the degree to which
an individual can work comIortably with quantitative concepts. It assesses the ability to work in environments where basic
numeracy is required and wherever attention and concentration are required regarding numerical applications.
The Iollowing describes how David Johnstone perIormed in Number Speed and Accuracy:
Top 34 oI the Norm range
ConIident in dealing with quantitative concepts
Manipulation oI numbers likely to be Iast
Likely to be good at handling numbers
Attention and concentration when dealing with numbers could be better than is standard
WORD MEANING

4-13
Low
16-34
8elow
Average
33-63
Average
66-83
Above
Average
86-96
Plgh
Questions completed: 36 Correct answers: 36
This is a test oI word knowledge and vocabulary. It assesses the comprehension oI a large number oI words Irom diIIerent
parts oI speech and the ability to identiIy words that have similar or opposite meanings. It assesses the ability to work in
environments where a clear understanding oI written or spoken instructions is required. Individuals who score well on this test
are likely to score well on measures oI general cognitive ability and to assimilate new inIormation quickly.
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 3
The Iollowing describes how David Johnstone perIormed in Word Meaning:
Top 14 oI the Norm range
Has a very good understanding oI the meaning oI words in general use.
Likely to have a broad vocabulary.
Likely to be able to express thoughts and ideas with a high level oI Iluency.
Likely to assimilate new inIormation quickly.
May score well above average on measures oI general intelligence.
SPATIAL VISUALISATION

4-13
Low
16-34
8elow
Average
33-63
Average
66-83
Above
Average
86-96
Plgh
Questions completed: 16 Correct answers: 12
The Spatial Visualisation Test assesses the ability to create and manipulate mental images oI objects. This test correlates well
with tests oI mechanical reasoning and assesses an individual's ability to use mental visualisation skills to compare shapes. It
relates to the ability to work in environments where visualisation skills are prerequisites Ior understanding and executing
tasks. It assesses the suitability oI an individual Ior tasks such as design work, where the individual must visualise how shapes
and patterns Iit together to Iorm a whole.
The Iollowing describes how David Johnstone perIormed in Spatial Visualisation:
Middle oI the Norm range
Likely to be able to do design work and mechanical reasoning
Typically able when interpreting diagrams and shapes
Mental visualisation likely to be average
The Thomas GIA
This test in common with all tests provides a sample oI the person's perIormance at the time it was taken. The comments are a
guide to help you decide whether the candidate would be able to undertake the job or be successIul in any overall or speciIic
training. Results should be considered along with other Iactors which might be important to perIormance, namely: experience,
education, examination results, previous training undertaken and strategies which are employed to cope with any particular or
speciIic problem areas. In all circumstances, the results should be interpreted and conveyed to the person under test by a
Thomas trained analyst.
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 4
NTERVEWER NOTES
The Iollowing notes are given as a speciIic reminder to interviewers oI some oI the principle Iactors relating to GIA testing as
detailed at Thomas GIA training seminars. These points are vital.
1. Chance Levels
Chance levels are indicated by a warning on the screen. It is essential to ask questions to Iind out reasons Ior any poor test
perIormance, especially iI the other test scores are high. II there are doubts about whether the person has had an adequate
understanding oI test instructions, then a complete re-test is a possibility provided that such a decision does not give an unIair
advantage to someone who is initially a low scorer Ior other reasons. Alternatively it may be best to assess the candidate on
evidence other than that provided by the test programme. In all such cases great care is needed in interpreting the overall
percentile.
2. Pronounced Highs and Lows
When the proIile oI test scores shows one or more pronounced highs or lows, then some inconsistency in perIormance is
evident. A skilIully conducted interview should try to Iind out the reason Ior discrepancies, without upsetting the candidate by
inadvertently suggesting that a "low" score is a Iailure. In many cases it is not. Where a low score is probed to Iind out iI it can
be explained satisIactorily, the interview must be tactIully handled to avoid giving the impression that a single test has been
suIIicient to disqualiIy the person Ior a job or impair his development potential. In most instances such should not be the case.
When evaluating pronounced highs and lows, the individual tests should be looked at careIully and employers should decide
whether slow, careIul unsupervised work is preIerable to Iaster more error-laden task completion.
3. General Recommendations on Fair Practice
a) Explain procedures and practices beIore administering the GIA and ensure that the candidate understands. b) Never oIIer
test results as the reason Ior non-acceptance. c) In the event oI any person declaring a cultural/linguistic and/or speciIic
disability disadvantage, use the GIA as a screen without prejudice to the rest oI the process. d) Tests and inventories should
never be used in isolation to justiIy redundancy decisions. Such use could be construed as unIair.
For Iurther inIormation on Iair practices reIer to the Thomas leaIlet Fair Recruitment and Appraisal Methods at Work,
included in all Thomas seminar materials.
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 5
GIA Profile Chart: David Johnstone
GTI: 60
TScore Peasoning
PercepIual
Speed
Number
Speed &
Accuracy
Word
Meaning
SpaIial
VisualisaIion
PercenIile
Panking
GTl
73 99
71 98
69 97 Top 3%
68 96
66 95
-
-
-
63 9O
6O 85 Top 14 %
-
58 8O
57 75
55 7O Top 34 %
54 65
53 6O
51 55
5O 5O
49 45
48 4O
46 35
45 3O 8e|ow Avg.
43 25
42 2O
-
4O 15 |ow
37 1O
-
34 5
33 4
31 3 very Low
3O 2
27 1
Thomas International Limited 1990-2013 http://www.thomasinternational.net 6