Online Test Measures Speed of your Brain 256
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.'"
64-bit owners too smart (Score:3, Funny)
I still can't decide if the absence of 64-bit Flash is a blessing or a curse...
Re:64-bit owners too smart (Score:2)
I too have yet to see many online advertising
Re:64-bit owners too smart (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:64-bit owners too smart (Score:3, Insightful)
Problems (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously though, this title is in a way, kinda bogus science in that it does not measure brain speed per se, but is more a measure of efficiency (a subtle but important difference). Basic central auditory response curves should be identical for most folks unless there is a processing delay like a developmental abnormality in one of the auditory nuclei or unless there is some pathology like Multiple Sclerosis (MS) which could bias the test and not be indicative of cognitive performance. Also, this test could be biased by damage to the cochlear hair cells that reduce ones frequency perception, but this apparent deficiency would have no real bearing on "brain speed" either.
If they are using this test to determine cognitive impairments such as Alzheimer's Disease, they should have some disclaimers present that explicitly point out that even mild hearing loss could compromise the results of this study among other causes.
And yes..... IAANS (I Am A NeuroScientist).
And it also appears that the author of the software is trying to sell it to "help people reduce the effects of aging", to which I say pffffft! Just stay physically and mentally active. Go running/walking/swimming/riding a bike and read books or hell, for your brain and auditory processing, even play video games (just make sure you get the physical exercise too and please continue to read books/newspapers). All of that is lots cheaper than forking out $500 for this software and likely more effective?
Re:Problems (Score:2, Informative)
First, let's clear up any thought this would address Alzheimer's. It has nothing to do with neurofibrillary tangles and plaques that define Alzheimers.
What has been done so far, is to demo
Re:Problems (Score:3, Informative)
I love it. We need more scientists on Slashdot. Seriously.
First, let's clear up any thought this would address Alzheimer's. It has nothing to do with neurofibrillary tangles and plaques
Re:Problems (Score:2)
Its a bit of muddle. Early stage Alzheimer's is not so diagnosable today. You can't see Ab plaques or tangles. However, good diagnostic tests will be available soon, in several forms
Re:Problems (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny, my liver seems to get worse every weekend.
Mouse use speed? (Score:4, Interesting)
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:Mouse use speed? (Score:2)
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:2)
I ween, I ween! :)
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:2)
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:3, Funny)
It's official...
I'm clinically retarded.
On the bright side, I think I qualify for better parking.
I'll probably try it again later... I'm just a bit exhausted right now and I keep making mistakes.
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:2)
The computer I used for this test tends to do a core dump if I download a lot of data at one time (e.g., large photo files, streaming video, switching between too many Web browser windows in too short a time, etc.).
I got 50 milliseconds on the test. That's a bit odd, considering t
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:2)
Re:Mouse use speed? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, first, it's not an intelligence test, but a test of auditory processing speed; and second, it doesn't matter how fast you click the arrows, only whether you click them in the correct order. Did you even read the instructions?
Anyway, I question the seriousness of a test that's clearly there as a marketing aid for some dubious $500 "Brain Fitness" training software. Also, the fact that the best score they have recorded on their graph for ANY age group was 32, and I, a 37 year old Army vet with permanent "artillery ear" tinnitus, got 23.
I am not a neuroscientist (Score:2)
However, that is neither here nor there. This is about how to measure the speed of the brain and improve it.
First off, improving the brain is somewhat of a Black Art. There a
I've got more than mild hearing loss (Score:2)
That's what the volume control is for. Changing the amplitude is not going to change the relative pitch of two sounds played at the same volume.
Re:Problems (Score:5, Informative)
It should also be known that there is negative plasticity as well, such as the type that can be found in epilepsy, retinal degeneration and other neurodegenerative diseases.
There could be some legitimacy behind this program under these principals, couldn't there? If you constantly tax those parts of the brain through these tests, as those who are blind do every day, couldn't you reap the same benefits? Here's a snip of some of the benefits I'm talking about, taken from a clinical study on the subject.
You are absolutely correct, and there is some legitimacy to this. My objection was the lack of disclosure (and being Windows only) as well as pointing out that there are healthier and cheaper ways to accomplish the same results. i.e. One does not have to buy into dumbed down science and fork over $500 to get the same results.
Re:Problems (Score:4, Informative)
True. It is harder however to make informed decisions without training/knowledge and that is what we rely upon our scientists to do for us, inform us as to their opinion based upon their knowledge and their training. I was simply functioning in that role for this community.
Controlled scientific studies show over a decacde-equivalent improvement in age-related decline.
You are absolutely correct. This has been the case in study after study for what...... 40 years or more?
What basis do you have to claim that these effects may be obtained more simply? What have you done, or what are you referring to, that has been studied in a carefully controlled manner?
As I said just above, these studies have been done for years and the literature is very, very rich. You and the author of this software are not incorrect here.
Re:Problems (Score:2)
that or a business partner of some kind
Re:Problems (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Problems (Score:5, Informative)
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. Like BWJones, IAANS - I did my Ph.D. with Mike Merzenich, the co-founder of the company, on temporal processing in cortical sensory systems (and worked with Blakestah when he was a postdoc there - althought a friend of mine, he's irascible enough that I guarantee he's not an astroturfer :-). I'd like to answer a few of BWJones thoughts:
1) brain speed and brain efficiency: BWJones is correct, there's a difference between brain speed and brain efficiency. 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.
2) aging and brain speed: BWJones suggests that there should be no differences in these time order judgment (TOJ) thresholds across generally healthy populations, but only in pathological conditions like MS. 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. 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.
3) ordinary physical and mental activity: it's absolutely the case that staying physically and mentally active is helpful. However, on the basis of our research and that of many others, we think that larger improvements are possible using appropriate tasks and stimuli that are specifically designed to renormalize the accuracy and speed with which the brain processes information using the principles of brain plasticity.
4) negative plasticity: BWJones mentioned negative plasticity. I agree completely - 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.
It's nice to see at least a small group of neuroscientists here on slashdot...
Thanks,
Henry
Re:Problems (Score:3, Interesting)
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 ma
Re:Problems (Score:2)
I smell an astroturfer.
Re:Problems (Score:2)
If it makes you feel any better, this neuroscientist also prefers a Mac.
Re:Problems (Score:2)
No, but it does mean that I study brains
Now, don't get me wrong, you might be smart. But you might not be. I have met a shitload of dumb folk in acadaemia in all disciplines.
Me too, but as there are different kinds of smart, there are different kinds of dumb..... so, what is it that you are tryi
Re:Problems (Score:2)
What he was trying to say was that your status as a neuroscientists is not necessarily proof that you have brains. The original rhetorical question was "What, only windows users have brains?" Remember that part?
Re:Problems (Score:2)
Doesn't the fact that you're not sure say anything?
What a joke (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What a joke (Score:2)
-
I guess (Score:2)
Re:I guess (Score:2, Insightful)
But what if I'm smart enuf to see that it's bogus (Score:5, Funny)
Flash Applications (Score:2, Interesting)
OMG (Score:5, Interesting)
Go here [harvard.edu] to find out what a big racist, jingoist, judgemental biggot you are:
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/ [harvard.edu]
Re:OMG (Score:2)
Brain speed? (Score:5, Funny)
Incompatible... (Score:5, Funny)
DAMNIT! Why can't I get some friggin' SUPPORT here, people?!? It's the same lame excuse every time -- brain tests, operating systems, popular gaming titles, girlfriends: "Sorry...not compatible."
You know what, FINE! Keep your silly brain test... I'm going to go spend some quality time with my Mac, playing Breakout...
-c
Re:Incompatible... (Score:2)
Poor Mac
Re:Incompatible... (Score:2)
Ok, who's going to tell him that he actually has an iPod?
Re:Incompatible... (Score:2)
Spacific? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Spacific? (Score:2)
The fact that you don't know their sciamatific words just proves that they have bigger brains than you.
-
I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:4, Interesting)
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...
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:5, Informative)
Something smells rotten in Denmark...
Latency (Score:2)
Have a USB mouse/keyboard? USB has latency to it, which is why many higher end audio interfaces either shy away from using it, or have 'zero latency' monitoring features (basically analog passthroughs for real time recording). I don't remember the specific amount, but it is more than 10 ms just for data to pass through the USB bus itself IIR. That on top of any latency in your host environment.
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:2)
I was just proud to get half at time of the "top performers". Yay. You would think they would skew the scores the other way to get old people to buy their crap. Or maybe it's skewed this way (I am in the youngest age bracket) to make old people who compare their scores with their kid's (or grandkid's) s
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:2)
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:2)
Oblig. Homer Quote (Score:5, Funny)
Offtopic, but hilarious nonetheless:
Max Power (Homer): Kids, there's three ways to do things. The right way, the wrong way, and the Max Power way!
Bart: Isn't that the wrong way?
Max Power: Yeah, but faster! (Max runs into a cactus)
Re:I got a 27...where's my prize? (Score:3, Informative)
16 milliseconds (Score:2)
"Your score is 16 milliseconds
in auditory processing speed"
Actually, the lowest duration t
Advertising revenue ? (Score:2)
Besides, the speed of my brain is the same speed as my body, my mind, however, is another story.
Time for another cold one
Re:Advertising revenue ? (Score:2)
Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways... (Score:5, Funny)
If anyone was wondering why the average test score seemed a little on the LOW side...
Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Well, Microserf Brain Speed Anyways... (Score:2)
Looks like a scam (Score:3, Interesting)
Article is wrong... (Score:2, Informative)
Score (Score:3, Informative)
old ... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:old ... (Score:2)
It seems to be more a test of one's affinity to the input method than a test of reflexes.
Woohoo 27 (Score:2)
Re:Woohoo 27 (Score:2)
Caution, may be hostile code (Score:2)
I've seen a few sites lately trying to install code via Shockwave. Since everybody with a clue has Active-X turned off, this may be the new attack vector.
Re:Caution, may be hostile code (Score:2)
Obviously a confidence trick. (Score:3)
2.) Give them a test that you invented that proves it.
3.) No question here: you happen to sell the solution!
4.) Profit!
Re:Obviously a confidence trick. (Score:4, Insightful)
Hmm... (Score:5, Funny)
The current version of the Brain Speed Test is only available for Windows based computers. We are working a version that is compatible with Mac's.
Wow! Their brains are so fast they skipped over learning how to pluralize!
It's a contraction for Macintoshes (Score:2)
More correctly, (Score:3, Funny)
speed of my brain? (Score:2)
Re:speed of my brain? (Score:2)
Test will not Work on Macintosh (Score:2)
I guess they figured the only time the speed of your brain is in question is when you've been waiting over 5 years for something like OSX [apple.com] to show up from Microsoft.
Cause and Effect (Score:2)
Ignoring for the moment whether the test is an accurate measurement... let's say it is. I wonder if this age discrepancy is because people slow down as they get older, or is it because people born and raised in a slower paced world are slower their whole lives? In other words, will the 20 year old of today degrade over the next 40 years?
I'm stupider than dirt.... (Score:2)
Bah! (Score:2, Informative)
Besides, be
The test shows that I'm an idiot... (Score:2)
I am an idiot...
i'm 28 and scored 24 (Score:2)
bad interface (Score:2)
Bush Took This Test (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I didnt know people still use shockwave? (Score:3, Insightful)
I thought this was hilarious simply because I'm aware of latency to the soundcard due to buffering for mixing output, etc. and it varies on machines by hundreds of milliseconds.
Re:I didnt know people still use shockwave? (Score:2)
Re:Annoying (Score:2)
... hehe... I guess I am really fast then... (Score:2)
Re:Annoying (Score:2)
Re:Annoying (Score:2)
34ms, age 35, 3 fat tires, 1/2 pack of cigs, 2 bong hits, and Jimi Hendrix turned up to 11.
meh.
Re:Hmm, accurate? (Score:2)
Re:Hmm, accurate? (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure it's not my ears, cause it was fine yesterday before I reinstalled.
Re:Hmm, accurate? (Score:2)
26ms for me... (Score:2)
17ms (Score:2)
I'm 28, BTW. (Score:2)
Re:So of course, lets make it a competition :) (Score:2)
If they were using MP3, then there would be a minimum of 4.3ms resolution for a short block, or 13ms for a long block. It's not clear to me whether an encoder would be smart enough to switch to a short block for these sounds.
As a fiddle player I regularly play ornaments with sequences of grace notes of about 20ms each (a standard Irish 5-note roll or a
Re:Worse than an IQ test (Score:2)
I definitely think musical experience plays a role (Score:2)