Previous Article in Journal
Emotional Intelligence and the Big Five as Predictors of Students’ Performance in Collaborative Problem Solving
Previous Article in Special Issue
Toward a Consensus Model of Cognitive–Reading Achievement Relations Using Meta-Structural Equation Modeling
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Effects of Proctoring on Online Intelligence Measurement: A Literature Overview and an Empirical Study

Department of Psychology, Trier University, D-54286 Trier, Germany
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Intell. 2025, 13(9), 110; https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13090110 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 31 July 2025 / Revised: 20 August 2025 / Accepted: 28 August 2025 / Published: 30 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Intelligence Testing and Assessment)

Abstract

Remote intelligence testing has multiple advantages, but cheating is possible without proper supervision. Proctoring aims to address this shortcoming, yet prior research on its effects has primarily investigated reasoning tasks, in which cheating is generally difficult. This study provides an overview of recent research on the effects of proctoring and on studies in intelligence test settings. Moreover, we conducted an empirical study testing the effects of webcam-based proctoring with a multidimensional intelligence test measuring reasoning, short-term memory, processing speed, and divergent thinking. The study was conducted in a low-stakes context, with participants receiving a fixed payment regardless of performance. Participants completed the test under proctored (n = 74, webcam consent), unproctored random (n = 75, webcam consent), or unproctored chosen (n = 77, no webcam consent) conditions. Scalar measurement invariance was observed for reasoning, processing speed, and divergent thinking, but not for memory. Proctoring had no significant main effect on test performance but showed a significant interaction with test type. Proctored participants outperformed the unproctored chosen group significantly in divergent thinking and scored descriptively higher in reasoning and processing speed, but slightly lower in memory. Observable cheating under proctored conditions was rare (4%), mostly involving note-taking or photographing the screen. We conclude that proctoring is crucial for easily cheatable tasks, such as memory tasks, but currently less critical for complex cognitive tasks.
Keywords: proctoring; intelligence; cheating; remote; literature review proctoring; intelligence; cheating; remote; literature review

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Scherrer, V.; Petry, N.; Breit, M.; Urban, J.; Preuß, J.; Preckel, F. Effects of Proctoring on Online Intelligence Measurement: A Literature Overview and an Empirical Study. J. Intell. 2025, 13, 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13090110

AMA Style

Scherrer V, Petry N, Breit M, Urban J, Preuß J, Preckel F. Effects of Proctoring on Online Intelligence Measurement: A Literature Overview and an Empirical Study. Journal of Intelligence. 2025; 13(9):110. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13090110

Chicago/Turabian Style

Scherrer, Vsevolod, Nicolai Petry, Moritz Breit, Julian Urban, Julian Preuß, and Franzis Preckel. 2025. "Effects of Proctoring on Online Intelligence Measurement: A Literature Overview and an Empirical Study" Journal of Intelligence 13, no. 9: 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13090110

APA Style

Scherrer, V., Petry, N., Breit, M., Urban, J., Preuß, J., & Preckel, F. (2025). Effects of Proctoring on Online Intelligence Measurement: A Literature Overview and an Empirical Study. Journal of Intelligence, 13(9), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13090110

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop