Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Online Test Measures Speed of your Brain 256

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the new-kind-of-quick-draw dept.
KingSkippus writes "According to CNet, a company named Posit Science has produced an online test using Flash that uses sounds to measure the speed of your brain down to the millisecond. According to the company, the test 'measures auditory processing (listening) speed—one of many measures of brain function...The faster we can take in information accurately, the better we can keep up with, respond to and remember what we hear.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Online Test Measures Speed of your Brain

Comments Filter:
  • Flash Applications (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25, 2006 @04:51PM (#14994990)
    I'd be curious if someone were to download and review the function calls in their little "flash helper" application. Once you agree to that installation the program can do anything on your computer that you can. Highly suspicious.
  • OMG (Score:5, Interesting)

    by irimi_00 (962766) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @04:52PM (#14994994)
    OMG this makes me feel so stupid and incomptetant.

    Go here [harvard.edu] to find out what a big racist, jingoist, judgemental biggot you are:
    https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ [harvard.edu]

  • by stungod (137601) <scott&globalspynetwork,com> on Saturday March 25, 2006 @04:57PM (#14995014) Homepage Journal
    So my score was 27ms. I guess that ain't a bad speed for a 37-year-old.

    So does this mean that I am smart, or that I'm just dumb faster? Really, I think I would rather take a little longer to be more correct. It seems that there's plenty of historical evidence to show that the smart people aren't always the first to come up with an answer to a problem.

    I guess if I was interested in buying whatevr it is that this guy is selling the I could figure it out. But according to the results of his test, I already have a faster brain than just about everybody. All I need is sharks with freakin' laser beams and I could take over the world!

    Then again, maybe I should drink less coffee...
  • Looks like a scam (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jerald_hams (725369) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @05:05PM (#14995040) Journal
    The company claims that their exercises improves...(ugh) your speed of thinking. Gods, that's horrible bunk. They don't actually show that repeatedly taking their tests improves anything but your performance on those specific tests. There's no research behind this, just a scam to take advantage of the elderly with baseless promises of preserving your aging brain's cognitive abilities.
  • Mouse use speed? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by eMartin (210973) on Saturday March 25, 2006 @08:41PM (#14995887)
    Why would this require using a mouse to click on two icons placed next to each other when that takes time itself?

    Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to map the input to two keys on a keyboard?

    I have to wonder about the validity of any kind of intelligence test that lacks common sense like that. Well, that and has the spelling mistakes that others noted.

    Or maybe I'm just upset that I got a 49.
  • Re:Problems (Score:3, Interesting)

    by BWJones (18351) * on Sunday March 26, 2006 @12:26AM (#14996541) Homepage Journal
    I am the Vice President for Research and Outcomes at Posit Science, which means that among other things, I worked with the team that designed the on-line test and collected the relevant normative data.

    Now, this is what on occasion makes Slashdot great and is unfortunately all to rare. To have people answer questions who are the subjects or are involved in articles posted on Slashdot respond to and address issues and concerns raised in this forum is a wonderful thing. Thank you Henry.

    In the interests of making an interesting on-line test, we called this brain speed because the threshold output is a reasonable measure of the minimum amount of time the brain requires to correctly identify and sequence two similar sounds. The task is relevant to the fundamental accuracy of the brain's ability to process auditory information and speech.

    I'll accept that. However, I would like to see disclaimers that address the possibility that "abnormally slow" results may not represent cognitive slowing, but can be the result of other issues, such as cochlear pathologies and hearing loss.

    However, it is the case that many elements of basic brain function, particularly including TOJ thresholds, change significantly over the the normal non-pathological course of aging.

    Auditory evoked potentials were more of what I was addressing when I specifically mentioned nuclei. Cognitive processing is indeed another most relevant abstraction that I agree is what is at issue here.

    We've collected quite a lot of data on this topic over the past year, which is consistent with a large literature on changes in temporal processing (e.g., backward masking, temporal integration) that occur with normal aging.

    Can you direct me to any relevant publications of your data? Disclaimer: I realize that for many commercial endeavors, there may in fact be a delay in publishing scientific data. We are facing the same issue with some of our efforts as well. Unfortunately, criticism tends to fill the space in between commercialization and publication, but hey....we're scientists and it is our job to be critical, right? :-)

    we have suggested (coming out this year in Progress in Brain Research) that normal age-related cognitive decline is contributed to by negative plastic processes in the CNS, and that appropriate designed training programs to reverse that negative plasticity are likely to improve perception, cognition, memory, and action.

    I will look forward to this article.

    It's nice to see at least a small group of neuroscientists here on slashdot...

    You are absolutely right. The nice thing about Slashdot is that there actually *are* lots of scientists around here. Many of us are quiet and we go long periods without commenting or participating here, but we have jobs that have to pay the bills.... Seriously though, there are a number of folks here that have engaged in most stimulating conversations from a variety of disciplines including neuroscience, genetics, astrophysics, bioengineering etc...etc...etc... There is more noise these days, but on occasion, gems appear.

    Thanks for your time is responding here on your effort here on Slashdot Henry,

    Bryan

I have not yet begun to byte!

Working...