Test Suggestion: Inspection Time
Hi argumzio and (cognitivefun),
You can see this in action on mybraintrainer.com. You may need a membership to try the exercise (I'm not sure-I have a membership that I haven't used in a very long time). I mention this because it would serve as a working example of what you are asking for should cognitivefun decide to develop it for our use.
-Brett
You can see this in action on mybraintrainer.com. You may need a membership to try the exercise (I'm not sure-I have a membership that I haven't used in a very long time). I mention this because it would serve as a working example of what you are asking for should cognitivefun decide to develop it for our use.
-Brett
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Nice website. I'm afraid I'm not rich enough for it, however. Or maybe I'm a little jaded by the price of $0. $9.95/3mo sounds reasonable....
Comparing my suggestion and the website's description of it, one would almost think I plagiarized it. This wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened to me.
I suppose I had a profitable idea after all.
Comparing my suggestion and the website's description of it, one would almost think I plagiarized it. This wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened to me.
I suppose I had a profitable idea after all.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Relative to this site, it seems extortionate - relative to other 'pay' sites, it's very reasonable. I think it may be the cheapest. By contrast, the n-back on that site is visual only...not terribly challenging.
Just think, if you didn't mention it, there would be no discussion at this point and others might miss out on an unrealized (potential) future development. I have had similar seemingly plagiaristic insights or inventions which just goes to show that sometimes, when thinking about things both inductively and creatively, with similar abilities applied to a common knowledge base, similar results can easily manifest.
-Brett
Just think, if you didn't mention it, there would be no discussion at this point and others might miss out on an unrealized (potential) future development. I have had similar seemingly plagiaristic insights or inventions which just goes to show that sometimes, when thinking about things both inductively and creatively, with similar abilities applied to a common knowledge base, similar results can easily manifest.
-Brett
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Yes, this has been vindicated by historical precedence. Newton & Leibniz, Darwin & Wallace, Bell & Gray, etc., etc.
I trust freedom will win the day. It is the insurmountable force that drives, nourishes, and shapes the internet. The growth and development of human intelligence should not have to give dues to vain and visionary attempts at appropriation and power-hoarding in order for it to be completely and utterly possible.
I trust freedom will win the day. It is the insurmountable force that drives, nourishes, and shapes the internet. The growth and development of human intelligence should not have to give dues to vain and visionary attempts at appropriation and power-hoarding in order for it to be completely and utterly possible.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Test Suggestion: Inspection Time
Noting that this is one of the few sole information-processing tests that accounts for 20% or greater variance in intelligence test results (based on correlation studies), I think this would be an excellent addition to cognitivefun's arsenal of free cognitive tests.
Suggested format: a variation of the pi figure in which three parallel vertical lines (joined by a horizontal bar at the top) are presented, where one is longer than the other. After a presentation of the stimulus, a figure with thicker lines of equal length will be displayed, masking the stimulus (thus preventing iconic storage information retrieval which has .5 sec duration). Left and right arrow keys may be used to establish determination of which line is longer between the two options; the down key could be used if the middle line is another option in the test. Different inspection-time limits could be used, say, beginner level at 60ms, intermediate at 50ms, advanced at 40ms, and so on.
I hope this suggestion will prove useful.
Suggested format: a variation of the pi figure in which three parallel vertical lines (joined by a horizontal bar at the top) are presented, where one is longer than the other. After a presentation of the stimulus, a figure with thicker lines of equal length will be displayed, masking the stimulus (thus preventing iconic storage information retrieval which has .5 sec duration). Left and right arrow keys may be used to establish determination of which line is longer between the two options; the down key could be used if the middle line is another option in the test. Different inspection-time limits could be used, say, beginner level at 60ms, intermediate at 50ms, advanced at 40ms, and so on.
I hope this suggestion will prove useful.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Yeah, I think it's a good idea to place that kind of exercise in "arsenal" of tests on cognitivefun.net.
In my opinion, it's a better solution to train a mental speed than using the simple reaction time task.
Benefits coming from training with inspection time are in my point of view obvious.
In my opinion, it's a better solution to train a mental speed than using the simple reaction time task.
Benefits coming from training with inspection time are in my point of view obvious.
Burzyn | 3 years ago
Reply
Incidentally, I found a test from Posit Science, their "Brain Speed Test" which focuses on auditory processing: http://bfc.positscience.com/eval/bst.php
There may be synergistic effects with their "Speech in Noise": http://bfc.positscience.com/eval/snr.php
My best scores so far are 34 ms and -6.94 dB, respectively.
There may be synergistic effects with their "Speech in Noise": http://bfc.positscience.com/eval/snr.php
My best scores so far are 34 ms and -6.94 dB, respectively.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Hi again argumzio.
I just played both games on Posit Science twice - initial scores:
Brain Speed Test: 34ms
Speech in Noise: 8.78db
-final scores:
Brain Speed Test: 25ms
Speech in Noise: 13.46db
I have to qualify this by telling you that I was using headphones, high quality Sennheiser headphones (model HD600). I'm not sure what impact this would have vs. 'normal' (read also 'modest') quality headphones and again vs. speakers.
Thanks for the links,
-Brett
PS. For age reference, I am 36.
I just played both games on Posit Science twice - initial scores:
Brain Speed Test: 34ms
Speech in Noise: 8.78db
-final scores:
Brain Speed Test: 25ms
Speech in Noise: 13.46db
I have to qualify this by telling you that I was using headphones, high quality Sennheiser headphones (model HD600). I'm not sure what impact this would have vs. 'normal' (read also 'modest') quality headphones and again vs. speakers.
Thanks for the links,
-Brett
PS. For age reference, I am 36.
? | 3 years ago
Reply
OK, replying to my reply...
I omitted the "-" before the Speech in Noise result...so actual final score: -13.46db..
a little too quick to post, if I don't critique myself..
-Brett
I omitted the "-" before the Speech in Noise result...so actual final score: -13.46db..
a little too quick to post, if I don't critique myself..
-Brett
? | 3 years ago
Reply
Well, either that's phenomenally good or I should try using headphones myself. My latest scores are 31ms and -7.44dB; I have only used the speakers in my monitor (likely not the best choice). Regardless, I do not fancy myself as having elephant ears, so I'm already satisfied with these scores. My speciality leans towards the visual arena. Not that anyone is counting, but my age is 22.
Anyway, thanks for posting. It lends some (minute) weight to the possible correlation between the two tests. Additionally, I noticed that the Speed PASAT became slightly easier after playing with the aforementioned tests.
Anyway, thanks for posting. It lends some (minute) weight to the possible correlation between the two tests. Additionally, I noticed that the Speed PASAT became slightly easier after playing with the aforementioned tests.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Two interesting abstracts on IT (many others exist):
Vision Res. 2008 Feb;48(4):523-37. Epub 2008 Jan 8. Inspection time and visual-perceptual processing. Garaas TW, Pomplun M.
Inspection time (IT) is the most popular simple psychometric measure that is used to account for a large part of the variance in human mental ability, with the estimated corrected correlation between IT and IQ being -0.50. In this study, we investigate the relationship between IT and the performance and oculomotor variables measured during three simple visual tasks. Participants' ITs were first measured using a slight variation of the standard IT task, which was followed by the three simple visual tasks that were designed to test participants' visual-attentional control and visual working memory under varying degrees of difficulty; they included a visual search task, a comparative visual search task, and a visual memorization task. Significant correlations were found between IT and performance variables for each of the visual tasks. The implications of the correlation between IT and performance-related variables are discussed. Oculomotor variables on the other hand only correlated significantly with IT during the retrieval phase of the visual memorization task, which is likely a product of differences in participants' ability to memorize objects during the loading phase of the experiment. This leads us to the conclusion that the oculomotor variables we measured do not correlate with IT in general, but may in the case where a systematic benefit would be realized.
134(1):83-100. Perceptual learning on inspection time and motion perception. Burns NR, Nettelbeck T, McPherson J, Stankov L.
Perceptual learning on simple perceptual tasks is interpreted as plasticity of neuronal populations in the sensory cortex (M. Fahle & T. Poggio, 2002). The authors examined individual differences on perceptual learning for 2 tasks-inspection time (IT) and a motion direction discrimination task that was instantiated as random dot kinematograms. The authors' main questions were whether individual differences in perceptual learning were consistent across the 2 tasks and whether perceptual learning correlated with cognitive abilities test scores. In all, 56 young adults completed 16 threshold estimations on 1 of 2 orthogonal versions of each task. Then, the authors made 2 further threshold estimations for the untrained, orthogonal version. Participants also completed a battery of 6 cognitive abilities tests that measured fluid ability (Gf) and perceptual speed (Gs). Perceptual learning was demonstrated for both tasks, but the degree of learning across tasks was not characteristic of the individual. Learning on IT correlated with Gs (r = .35), but learning on the motion direction discrimination task was unrelated to cognitive ability. Correlations of IT with cognitive measures were stable over the training period. IT was correlated with both the motion direction discrimination task (r = -.39) and an unmasked line length judgment task (r = -.31). The authors concluded that perceptual learning on IT correlates with cognitive abilities test scores, that correlations of IT with cognitive abilities test scores are stable as task performance improves with practice, and that the IT task is psychologically complex.
Vision Res. 2008 Feb;48(4):523-37. Epub 2008 Jan 8. Inspection time and visual-perceptual processing. Garaas TW, Pomplun M.
Inspection time (IT) is the most popular simple psychometric measure that is used to account for a large part of the variance in human mental ability, with the estimated corrected correlation between IT and IQ being -0.50. In this study, we investigate the relationship between IT and the performance and oculomotor variables measured during three simple visual tasks. Participants' ITs were first measured using a slight variation of the standard IT task, which was followed by the three simple visual tasks that were designed to test participants' visual-attentional control and visual working memory under varying degrees of difficulty; they included a visual search task, a comparative visual search task, and a visual memorization task. Significant correlations were found between IT and performance variables for each of the visual tasks. The implications of the correlation between IT and performance-related variables are discussed. Oculomotor variables on the other hand only correlated significantly with IT during the retrieval phase of the visual memorization task, which is likely a product of differences in participants' ability to memorize objects during the loading phase of the experiment. This leads us to the conclusion that the oculomotor variables we measured do not correlate with IT in general, but may in the case where a systematic benefit would be realized.
134(1):83-100. Perceptual learning on inspection time and motion perception. Burns NR, Nettelbeck T, McPherson J, Stankov L.
Perceptual learning on simple perceptual tasks is interpreted as plasticity of neuronal populations in the sensory cortex (M. Fahle & T. Poggio, 2002). The authors examined individual differences on perceptual learning for 2 tasks-inspection time (IT) and a motion direction discrimination task that was instantiated as random dot kinematograms. The authors' main questions were whether individual differences in perceptual learning were consistent across the 2 tasks and whether perceptual learning correlated with cognitive abilities test scores. In all, 56 young adults completed 16 threshold estimations on 1 of 2 orthogonal versions of each task. Then, the authors made 2 further threshold estimations for the untrained, orthogonal version. Participants also completed a battery of 6 cognitive abilities tests that measured fluid ability (Gf) and perceptual speed (Gs). Perceptual learning was demonstrated for both tasks, but the degree of learning across tasks was not characteristic of the individual. Learning on IT correlated with Gs (r = .35), but learning on the motion direction discrimination task was unrelated to cognitive ability. Correlations of IT with cognitive measures were stable over the training period. IT was correlated with both the motion direction discrimination task (r = -.39) and an unmasked line length judgment task (r = -.31). The authors concluded that perceptual learning on IT correlates with cognitive abilities test scores, that correlations of IT with cognitive abilities test scores are stable as task performance improves with practice, and that the IT task is psychologically complex.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
"Inspection time (IT) is the most popular simple psychometric measure that is used to account for a large part of the variance in human mental ability, with the estimated corrected correlation between IT and IQ being -0.50."
This is quite surprising for what looks like a primarily perceptual task, although it also involves an online comparison across n-items (based on your proposed design).
cognitivefun | 3 years ago
Reply
According to "Genetics of Brain Fiber Architecture and Intellectual Performance" published in Journal of Neuroscience (2009; 29 (7): 2212), it would appear that this isn't so surprising. (See http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090317142841.htm detailing its contents.)
It would seem very likely that more efficient perceptual processing capabilities--situated within a sufficiently myelinated network--underly most, if not all, higher-order (e.g., abstract) cognitive functions. Conceptually this makes a great deal of sense. Suppose one had weak perceptual processing (in general), then how would one develop a hierarchically more sophisticated set of neural clusters of which IQ can be assumed as being indicative? The relationships among gS, gF, and gC are all quite interesting in these more empirical terms.
Now if we could find a nootropic to aid in the addition of myelin, this would be as smooth as butter.
It would seem very likely that more efficient perceptual processing capabilities--situated within a sufficiently myelinated network--underly most, if not all, higher-order (e.g., abstract) cognitive functions. Conceptually this makes a great deal of sense. Suppose one had weak perceptual processing (in general), then how would one develop a hierarchically more sophisticated set of neural clusters of which IQ can be assumed as being indicative? The relationships among gS, gF, and gC are all quite interesting in these more empirical terms.
Now if we could find a nootropic to aid in the addition of myelin, this would be as smooth as butter.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Second abstract should be cited as J Gen Psychol. 2007 Jan;134(1):83-100.
I had it in there before, but when I posted it, it seems to have disappeared. Must be some kind of bug.
I had it in there before, but when I posted it, it seems to have disappeared. Must be some kind of bug.
argumzio | 3 years ago
Reply
Sorry about that. You are correct, the text filtering is a bit aggressive as it tries to make the character widths predictable for the quoting function.
cognitivefun | 3 years ago
Reply
